{"id":114694,"date":"2018-02-20T23:50:30","date_gmt":"2018-02-20T23:50:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/writemyessayfree.com\/wellness-programs-in-the-workplace-will-have-a-positive-impact-on-the-health-of-their-employees-when-compared-to-workplaces-without-them"},"modified":"2017-08-03T16:09:49","modified_gmt":"2017-08-03T16:09:49","slug":"wellness-programs-in-the-workplace-will-have-a-positive-impact-on-the-health-of-their-employees-when-compared-to-workplaces-without-them","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wellness-programs-in-the-workplace-will-have-a-positive-impact-on-the-health-of-their-employees-when-compared-to-workplaces-without-them\/","title":{"rendered":"Wellness programs in the workplace will have a positive impact on the health of their employees when compared to workplaces without them."},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"the_content_wrapper\">\n<p>Medical Sciences (Anatomy, Physiology, Pharmacology etc.)<br \/> Topic: Wellness programs in the workplace will have a positive impact on the health of their employees when compared to workplaces without them.<\/p>\n<p>Thesis: Wellness programs in the workplace will have a positive impact on the health of their employees when compared to workplaces without them.<\/p>\n<p>You will submit final paper via hard copy in the final folder as well as via the drop box. This must be done as an attachment to the drop box for \u201cTurnItIn\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>See format below. Make sure you keep it very high level and researched based, this is not a project or recollection of your experience in your internship. Finally, be very careful about proper citations. Plagiarism at any level will not be tolerated.<\/p>\n<p>Double space- 12 font. Minimum 8 to 10 pages of research content. As I said in the syllabus- if you don\u2019t know what APA research style is \u2013 look it up. How many sources do you need? At least 6 is acceptable. You may not use Wikepedia etc\u2026 To receive an A or B+, you need to go beyond what is expected and exceed those expectations.<\/p>\n<p>Other Notes: Senior level research- not descriptive; not based on what you are doing- go above and beyond. You can describe the topic and then review measurable, journal specific research associated with your thesis.<\/p>\n<p>APA Format: Uses in text citations (Hunt, et. al., 2013, p. 37)<\/p>\n<p>Title Page: acts as the first major section of the document<br \/> \u2014 Presents a running head and begins the document\u2019s pagination<br \/> \u2014 Includes the paper\u2019s full title centered in the upper half of the page<br \/> \u2014 Contains the name(s) of the writer(s) and their institutional affiliation<\/p>\n<p>Abstract: acts as the second major section of the document<br \/> \u2014Presents a single-paragraph summary of the paper\u2019s contents<br \/> \u2014Contains approximately 150 to 250 words<br \/> \u2014Includes select keywords for easy access by researchers<\/p>\n<p>Main Body: (8 to 10 Pages)acts as the third major section of the document<br \/> Presents a report of the writer(s)\u2019 research and findings<br \/> \u2014Includes four sections (typically): the introduction, method, results, and discussion<br \/> \u2014Provides the reader with pertinent information about the paper\u2019s topic<br \/> References page: acts as the fourth major section of the document<br \/> Presents a compilation of the sources cited in the paper<br \/> \u2014Provides a comprehensive list of works that appear as in-text citations in the paper, Details the full source information for each entry<\/p>\n<p>Communicating Health at Work: Organizational<br \/> Wellness Programs as Identity Bridges<br \/> Stephanie L. Dailey &amp; Yaguang Zhu<br \/> To cite this article: Stephanie L. Dailey &amp; Yaguang Zhu (2017) Communicating Health at Work:<br \/> Organizational Wellness Programs as Identity Bridges, Health Communication, 32:3, 261-268, DOI:<br \/> 10.1080\/10410236.2015.1120698<br \/> To link to this article: http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1080\/10410236.2015.1120698<br \/> Published online: 24 May 2016.<br \/> Submit your article to this journal<br \/> Article views: 204<br \/> View related articles<br \/> View Crossmark data<br \/> Citing articles: 1 View citing articles<br \/> Communicating Health at Work: Organizational Wellness Programs as<br \/> Identity Bridges<br \/> Stephanie L. Daileya and Yaguang Zhub<br \/> a<br \/> Department of Communication Studies, Texas State University; b<br \/> Department of Communication Studies, University of Texas at Austin<br \/> ABSTRACT<br \/> With the growth in workplace health promotion (WHP) initiatives, organizations are asking employees to<br \/> enact their personal health identities at work. To understand this prominent yet poorly understood<br \/> phenomenon, we surveyed 204 employees at a company with a WHP program and found that<br \/> participation in the wellness program mediated personal health and organizational identities. Results<br \/> fill a gap in communication literature by demonstrating the effect of individual identity enactment on<br \/> organizational identification and contribute to recent research stressing the relationship between<br \/> identity and health behaviors. In addition, findings illuminate the role of situated activity in identity<br \/> negotiation, suggesting that certain activities in organizations, like wellness programs, serve as identity<br \/> bridges between personal and work-related identity targets.<br \/> Increasingly, community, social, and work organizations are<br \/> taking an active role in disseminating health information to<br \/> their members. More than half of all employers with 50 or<br \/> more employees now offer a wellness program (Mattke et al.,<br \/> 2013), making corporate wellness a multi-billion-dollar<br \/> industry (Burke, 2014). With the growth of workplace health<br \/> promotion (WHP) initiatives, which may include physical<br \/> exercise programs, nutrition training, health information<br \/> screening and education, and occupational health services<br \/> (Farrell &amp; Geist-Martin, 2005; Zoller, 2003), research has<br \/> studied the effects of WHP programs on a variety of outcomes.<br \/> For example, organizational health policies and programs<br \/> enhance physical activity (Proper et al., 2003), reduce<br \/> employee absences (Kuoppala, Lamminp\u00e4\u00e4, &amp; Husman,<br \/> 2008), and increase organizational attraction (Dalsey &amp;<br \/> Park, 2009).<br \/> Despite this growing trend and developing area of research,<br \/> scholars do not fully understand the identity implications of<br \/> integrating employees\u2019 personal selves and well-being into<br \/> organizations. As work and home boundaries are becoming<br \/> physically, temporally, and psychologically blurred (Clark,<br \/> 2000), businesses invite employees to reveal and communicate<br \/> their personal health identities at work. However, research has<br \/> yet to unpack the relationship between WHP, individual, and<br \/> organizational identities.<br \/> The current study fills this gap by investigating how individuals\u2019<br \/> health identities are becoming bound up in work<br \/> organizations through the growing trend of WHP.<br \/> Specifically, we contend that WHP programs serve as a bridge<br \/> between personal health identities and organizational identities,<br \/> since wellness activities allow employees to communicate<br \/> their identification to health and work simultaneously. We<br \/> begin by reviewing the organizational identification literature<br \/> to provide a theoretical framework for the study.<br \/> Literature Review<br \/> A person\u2019s identity is socially constructed from the different<br \/> meanings attached to that individual by him- or herself and<br \/> others (Ashforth &amp; Mael, 1989). Both the social roles that an<br \/> individual assumes and the personal, idiosyncratic characteristics<br \/> of the person make up his or her identity. According to<br \/> social identity theory (Ashforth &amp; Mael, 1989), these categories<br \/> are central components of people\u2019s self-concepts. When<br \/> a person defines him- or herself in terms of a social category,<br \/> the person identifies with that social group, whether the group<br \/> is the person\u2019s gender or employer. Although social identity<br \/> theory is rooted in industrial psychology, communication<br \/> scholars have recognized the relationship between social identity<br \/> theory and the communicative study of identification<br \/> (Scott, 2007).<br \/> Indeed, communication is central to identification, because<br \/> attachments develop through ongoing situated interactions,<br \/> and people express their belongingness to different collectives<br \/> (Scott, Corman, &amp; Cheney, 1998). Research has demonstrated<br \/> that individuals continually negotiate their identities through<br \/> communication, situating organizational identification as<br \/> a dynamic, fluid process (e.g., Kuhn &amp; Nelson, 2002).<br \/> Perceptions of organizational identification also influence<br \/> communicative behaviors, including decision making<br \/> (Cheney &amp; Tompkins, 1987), cooperation and work-related<br \/> efforts (Bartel, 2001), and continued membership (Scott et al.,<br \/> 1999). Because we assess and communicate our belongingness<br \/> to organizations through communication, identification varies<br \/> CONTACT Stephanie L. Dailey, PhD, Assistant Professor Dailey@txstate.edu Department of Communication Studies, Texas State University, 601 University<br \/> Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666.<br \/> HEALTH COMMUNICATION<br \/> 2017, VOL. 32, NO. 3, 261\u2013268<br \/> http:\/\/dx.doi.org\/10.1080\/10410236.2015.1120698<br \/> \u00a9 2016 Taylor &amp; Francis<br \/> across social contexts. To understand the complexity of organizational<br \/> attachments in different situations, much of the<br \/> identification literature has focused on multiple, or nested,<br \/> organizational identities.<br \/> Multiple Organizational Identities<br \/> In their structurational model of identification, Scott et al.<br \/> (1998) conceptualized identities as structures that are \u201cregionalized.\u201d<br \/> Specifically, the authors suggested four relevant<br \/> identities or \u201ctargets\u201d of attachment: individual, workgroup,<br \/> organizational, and occupational\/professional (Scott et al.,<br \/> 1998). In different contexts, identifications may overlap, or<br \/> there may be tension between identity targets. Thus, multiple<br \/> identities vary in the degree to which they are compatible or<br \/> in conflict.<br \/> In addition to the Scott et al. (1998) notion of identification<br \/> targets, Ashforth and Johnson (2001, p. 32) also theorized<br \/> about the varying \u201cidentity salience\u201d of multiple identities,<br \/> positing that different levels and types identities are nested<br \/> within others. For example, the authors noted that lower<br \/> order identities, such as one\u2019s job, workgroup, and department,<br \/> are embedded in higher order identities, like an<br \/> employee\u2019s division and organization. Ashforth and Johnson<br \/> (2001) described how people rank the subjective importance<br \/> of nested identities, which helps individuals situate themselves<br \/> and others within the multiplicity of social identities.<br \/> Drawing on Scott and colleagues\u2019 (1998) and Ashforth and<br \/> Johnson\u2019s (2001) theoretical work, many empirical studies<br \/> have investigated the relationship between multiple or nested<br \/> identifications. Early work exploring multiple forms of identification<br \/> compared targets across geographically dispersed<br \/> employees, organizational levels, and tenure (e.g., Barker &amp;<br \/> Tompkins, 1994). In addition to looking at the different<br \/> effects of various identifications, other research has examined<br \/> multiple identities during times of change. Kuhn and Nelson<br \/> (2002), for example, assessed the multiplicity and duality of<br \/> identity structures during a planned policy implementation.<br \/> Beyond looking at nested identities during transitions, studies<br \/> have also compared contract workers\u2019 identification with their<br \/> employing organization and client organization (e.g., Gossett,<br \/> 2002).<br \/> Most of these studies center on how team\/group identifications<br \/> align with or contradict employees\u2019 perceptions of organizational<br \/> or professional identification. Less research has<br \/> considered how employees bring their personal identities to<br \/> work. A handful of communication scholarship has investigated<br \/> the intersection of home and work identities, like working<br \/> mothers (e.g., Turner &amp; Norwood, 2013) and female<br \/> breadwinners (Meisenbach, 2010). Furthermore, Meisenbach<br \/> and Kramer (2014) studied volunteers\u2019 multiple identifications<br \/> with a church choir, demonstrating that participants<br \/> expressed a personal identification with music that was<br \/> embedded within their family identity. The authors showed<br \/> how people\u2019s music identities were enacted through singing;<br \/> in other words, singing was a situated activity that shaped<br \/> identification. Also of note, Silva and Sias (2010) demonstrated<br \/> how participation in adult Sabbath School Classes<br \/> linked individuals\u2019 identity to the Seventh Day Adventist<br \/> church. Although scant, these studies indicate the value of<br \/> researching the relationship between individual and organizational<br \/> identities, which play an important role in connecting<br \/> (or separating) people and organizations.<br \/> Understanding personal identities at work is increasingly<br \/> important as work organizations take on more family and<br \/> social roles (Kirby, 2006). As Clark (2000) explains in her<br \/> explanation of work\/family border theory, home and work<br \/> have become more integrated, as physical, temporal, and<br \/> psychological borders have blended. Employers have taken<br \/> on familial roles by offering flexible work arrangements<br \/> (Cowan &amp; Hoffman, 2007), family-leave policies and dependent-care<br \/> benefits (Kirby &amp; Krone, 2002), and health programs<br \/> and linking spirituality and work (Kirby, 2006).<br \/> Despite the dissolution of clear boundaries between individuals<br \/> and organizations (Kirby, Golden, Medved, Jorgenson,<br \/> &amp; Buzzanell, 2003), identification scholars have just begun to<br \/> understand how this home\u2013work integration affects identities<br \/> at work. Pratt (2000, p. 485) suggested that \u201cas more facets of<br \/> one\u2019s identity (e.g., business, family, and religion) become<br \/> bound up in an organization, one\u2019s identification becomes<br \/> deeper.\u201d Specifically, scholars lack an understanding of how<br \/> personal health identities affect organizational identifications.<br \/> Thus, we explore how individuals\u2019 health identities are<br \/> becoming bound up in work organizations through the growing<br \/> trend of workplace health promotion.<br \/> Connecting Individual and Organizational Identities<br \/> Through Workplace Health Promotion<br \/> Workplace health promotion (WHP) describes organizational<br \/> efforts to encourage mental and physical well-being<br \/> (Farrell &amp; Geist-Martin, 2005; Kirby, 2006; Zoller, 2003).<br \/> WHP initiatives often include physical exercise programs,<br \/> nutrition training, health information screening and education,<br \/> and occupational health services (Farrell &amp; GeistMartin,<br \/> 2005; Zoller, 2003). Research investigating the<br \/> effects of employee WHP participation has demonstrated<br \/> several individual and organizational outcomes. For<br \/> employees, taking part in WHP programs has been shown<br \/> to boost physical activity (Conn, Hafdahl, Cooper, Brown,<br \/> &amp; Lusk, 2009; Proper et al., 2003) and positively influence<br \/> employees\u2019 dietary behavior (Maes et al., 2012). Employers<br \/> benefit from WHP initiatives because health programs<br \/> increase work productivity (Kuoppala et al., 2008), reduce<br \/> employee absences (Conn et al., 2009; Kuoppala et al.,<br \/> 2008), and decrease turnover (DeJoy &amp; Wilson, 2003).<br \/> In addition to these individual and organizational benefits,<br \/> we contend that WHP also serves as a bridge between personal<br \/> health identities and organizational identities. For the<br \/> purpose of this project, we conceptualize \u201cpersonal health<br \/> identity\u201d as a specific type of individual identity assumed by<br \/> people who define themselves in terms of their health. People<br \/> who perceive themselves as having a strong personal health<br \/> identity feel connected to their health and take pride in their<br \/> well-being as a unique personal concern. For example, a<br \/> woman may consider herself a \u201crunner\u201d (Posts, 2015) or a<br \/> man might define himself a \u201cvegetarian\u201d (Shapiro, 2014).<br \/> Following Ashforth and Johnson\u2019s (2001, p. 32) theory<br \/> 262 S. L. DAILEY AND Y. ZHU<br \/> regarding the \u201cidentity salience\u201d of different identities, we<br \/> suggest that a person\u2019s health salience is an important personal<br \/> identity worth exploring.<br \/> Before the growth of WHP, employees kept their personal<br \/> health identities at home because, for the most part,<br \/> companies did not offer the opportunity for workers to<br \/> communicate or express their health identities at work.<br \/> WHP programs, however, ask employees to bring their<br \/> \u201crunner,\u201d \u201cvegetarian,\u201d and other health identities to the<br \/> office. For example, Otter Products, ZocDoc, and ZOZI, a<br \/> small San Francisco startup, arrange running clubs for<br \/> employees, and Chandler Chicco provides nutritional cooking<br \/> classes to its workers (Greatist, 2014). Through interaction<br \/> with others in wellness activities, WHP programs invite<br \/> employees to reveal and communicate their personal health<br \/> identities. As Harwood and Sparks (2003, p. 151) explained,<br \/> \u201cIdentifying as a runner, a healthy eater, or a gym rat and<br \/> seeing those as important elements of self-concept are likely<br \/> to lead to maintenance of those behaviors.\u201d WHP programs<br \/> allow people with healthy self-concepts to enact their personal<br \/> identities at work.<br \/> Recent health communication research has demonstrated<br \/> the role of identity in predicting health beliefs and behavioral<br \/> intentions. In their experiment of antismoking advertisements,<br \/> Moran and Sussman (2014) found that when participants<br \/> read ads from groups with which they identified,<br \/> antismoking beliefs were more strongly endorsed.<br \/> Furthermore, the Stephens, Goins, and Dailey (2014) study<br \/> demonstrated that people\u2019s identification with a message<br \/> source mediated the effect of social media on people\u2019s health<br \/> knowledge, and Stephens et al. (2015) similarly discovered<br \/> that employees\u2019 identification predicted health behavioral<br \/> intentions. However, these studies do not show the effect of<br \/> personal health identities on organizational identification.<br \/> Employees who express and communicate their personal<br \/> health identities by participating in WHP programs may<br \/> experience greater organizational identification, since identification<br \/> exists when individuals perceive a strong overlap<br \/> between how they define themselves and how they define<br \/> the organization (Dutton, Dukerich, &amp; Harquail, 1994).<br \/> Similarly, person\u2013organization fit research has shown that<br \/> identification occurs when an employee\u2019s personal values fit<br \/> or align with an organization\u2019s culture (Cable &amp; DeRue,<br \/> 2002). In the context of WHP, employees who define themselves<br \/> as healthy may be more identified to organizations that<br \/> also value employees\u2019 health.<br \/> Beyond this psychological connection, however, we predict<br \/> that WHP activities may influence employees\u2019 organizational<br \/> attachment because WHP participation enables the<br \/> social interaction requisite for identification. Organizational<br \/> identification is more than just a psychological process;<br \/> identification is a social process that is created and maintained<br \/> through communication (Scott et al., 1998).<br \/> Specifically, the Scott et al. (1998, p. 321) situated-action<br \/> view of identification highlights \u201cthe importance of social<br \/> contexts for identity formation \u2026 situations may be defined<br \/> largely by activities\u2014and it is those activities that can then<br \/> be related to the attachment process.\u201d Through this lens,<br \/> WHP participation may be a situated activity that boosts<br \/> identification because wellness program participation allows<br \/> workers to enact both their personal health identity and<br \/> their organizational identity as employees. Therefore, we<br \/> present the following hypothesis:<br \/> H1: WHP program participation mediates the relationship<br \/> between employees\u2019 personal health identities and employees\u2019<br \/> organizational identification.<br \/> Method<br \/> Participants and Procedure<br \/> Participants in this study were employees from a pharmaceutical<br \/> and chemical corporation in a large northern city in<br \/> China. The company offered a free on-site fitness center for<br \/> midday workouts, and employees could participate in the<br \/> health program on a voluntary basis. Similar to the health<br \/> program at the first author\u2019s United States-based institution,<br \/> workers in the study could choose to work for 30 minutes or<br \/> use their daily \u201cwellness leave\u201d to attend a health program<br \/> activity for 30 minutes. As an incentive for their participation<br \/> in the wellness program, the company offered employees the<br \/> opportunity to win a Fitbit activity and sleep tracking device.<br \/> To elicit employees\u2019 participation, the researchers drafted<br \/> an e-mail to participants with details about the study and a<br \/> link to the online survey. A human resources representative<br \/> forwarded this email to 641 employees working at the<br \/> research center of the corporation\u2019s main campus. Out of<br \/> these employees, 207 completed the online survey, a 32.2%<br \/> response rate. After dropping three responses due to nonrandom<br \/> missing data, the study resulted in a sample of 204<br \/> responses.<br \/> The sample was 51.7% male (n = 107) and ranged in age<br \/> from 24 to 46 years (M = 33.35, SD = 5.42). All participants<br \/> were Chinese citizens who read and spoke English. Among<br \/> respondents, 58.9% (n = 122) had bachelor\u2019s degrees, 24.5%<br \/> (n = 50) had taken some college courses, 18.3% (n = 19) held a<br \/> master\u2019s degree or had taken graduate courses, and 12.5%<br \/> (n = 13) had completed a PhD\/MD.<br \/> Measures<br \/> All questionnaires were in English and measured variables on<br \/> Likert-type scales ranging from strongly disagree (1) to<br \/> strongly agree (7).<br \/> Personal Health Identity<br \/> Personal health identity was assessed through five items that<br \/> measured the salience of participants\u2019 health concerns<br \/> (Blalock &amp; DeVellis, 1998). These items represented the individual\u2019s<br \/> connection to his or her health and included the<br \/> following items: \u201cKeeping healthy is very important to me,\u201d<br \/> \u201cI don\u2019t cut corners when my health is concerned,\u201d \u201cI try to<br \/> take care of my health,\u201d \u201cI am very health conscious,\u201d and<br \/> \u201cI care more about my health than most people care about<br \/> their health.\u201d These five items had a M = 5.57, SD = 0.90, and<br \/> a Cronbach\u2019s a = .81.<br \/> HEALTH COMMUNICATION 263<br \/> Organizational Identification<br \/> Organizational identification was operationalized using a sixitem<br \/> measure adapted from Mael and Ashforth\u2019s (1992) organizational<br \/> identification scale, which has been used in prior<br \/> identification research (e.g., Kreiner &amp; Ashforth, 2004). An<br \/> example item read, \u201cWhen someone criticizes my organization,<br \/> it feels like a personal insult.\u201d These items had a<br \/> M = 5.85, SD = 1.14, and a Cronbach\u2019s a = .95.<br \/> Workplace Health Promotion Program Participation<br \/> To measure employees\u2019 participation in the company\u2019s WHP<br \/> program, the researchers created a three-item measure. Two<br \/> items asked participants how much they agreed with the<br \/> following statements: \u201cI tend to participate in every workplace<br \/> health promotion program offered by the organization\u201d and \u201cI<br \/> hope to participate in workplace health promotion programs<br \/> offered by the organization.\u201d Participants were also asked how<br \/> much they agreed with the statement \u201cI participate in health<br \/> activities not offered by the organization\u201d in order to capture<br \/> health participation outside of the organization (such as working<br \/> out at a local gym) instead of at work, and this item was<br \/> reverse coded.<br \/> We conducted exploratory factor analysis on the three items<br \/> using principal components analysis with Varimax rotation,<br \/> and the outcome showed that all items loaded onto one,<br \/> three-item factor. A following confirmatory factor analysis<br \/> illustrated that the model including the three items was a<br \/> good fit to the data: ?2 = 91.31, p &lt; .001, CFI = .54,<br \/> TLI = .98, RMSEA = .28, AGFI = .66, and SRMR = .09). The<br \/> three items had M = 5.93, SD = 1.04, and Cronbach\u2019s a = .89.<br \/> Control Variables<br \/> We controlled for age, gender, organizational tenure, and<br \/> educational level, but none was significantly related, directly<br \/> or indirectly, with organizational identification, so we<br \/> excluded them from the structural model tests.<br \/> Results<br \/> Data Analysis Plan and Preliminary Analysis<br \/> Path analysis using structural equation modeling with maximum-likelihood<br \/> estimation was used to analyze the direct<br \/> and indirect influences of personal health identity and<br \/> employees\u2019 participation in a workplace health promotion<br \/> program on their organizational identification. Prior to analysis,<br \/> descriptive and frequency analyses were performed to<br \/> ensure that the data were normal, which included inspecting<br \/> kurtosis, skewness, and histograms. The zero-order correlations<br \/> are presented in Table 1. Missing data were present in 12<br \/> of the 204 cases, and the variable means were imputed using<br \/> mean substation to retain all cases.<br \/> Testing for Mediation<br \/> Based on the recommendations of Hayes (2009), mediation<br \/> analyses were conducted using structural equation modeling<br \/> (SEM) and bootstrapping methods. According to Preacher<br \/> and Hayes (2008), this method applies resampling techniques<br \/> to estimate confidence intervals around the degree of the<br \/> indirect effects of the predictor variables on the outcomes.<br \/> Compared to the traditional causal steps approach and Sobel\u2019s<br \/> test, bootstrapping methods are more powerful and valid<br \/> (Hayes, 2009; Preacher &amp; Hayes, 2008).<br \/> Following the recommendations of good fit by Hu and<br \/> Bentler (1999), model fit was evaluated using the maximumlikelihood<br \/> chi-squared statistic, comparative fit index (CFI),<br \/> Tucker\u2013Lewis index (TLI), root mean square error of approximation<br \/> (RMSEA), adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI), and<br \/> standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). According<br \/> to the joint-criteria approach, a good structural testing model<br \/> approaches CFI = .96 and SRMR = .10, or RMSEA = .06 and<br \/> SRMR = .10 (Hu &amp; Bentler, 1999).<br \/> To validate the factor structure of the model in this data<br \/> set, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was first conducted<br \/> (Hunter, 1980). Results (eigenvalues &gt; 1.0, varimax rotation)<br \/> produced three clean factors (primary loadings = .59-.96;<br \/> highest cross-loading = .33; variance explained = 69%).<br \/> Furthermore, we tested common method variance by loading<br \/> all three variables as one single factor. If common method was<br \/> present, the one-factor model would fit the data well<br \/> (Harman, 1976). Results indicated that the one-factor model<br \/> did not fit the data well, and had ?2<br \/> (5) = 91.31, p &lt; .001,<br \/> CFI = .54, TLI = .98, RMSEA = .28, AGFI = .66, and<br \/> SRMR = .09. Therefore, common method variance was not<br \/> considered a threat.<br \/> Following CFA, results revealed that the structural model<br \/> was a good fit to the data: ?2<br \/> (3) = 38.70, p = .74, CFI = 1.00,<br \/> TLI = .98, RMSEA = .02, AGFI = .92, and SRMR = .05. The<br \/> complete model, shown in Figure 1, shows support for H1. A<br \/> positive and significant effect was found between personal<br \/> health identity and WHP participation (\u00df = .62, p &lt; .001),<br \/> WHP participation and organizational identification (\u00df = .61,<br \/> p &lt; .001), and personal health identity and organizational<br \/> identification (\u00df = .23, p &lt; .01).<br \/> Discussion<br \/> The current study investigated the intersection of individual<br \/> and organizational identities at work, filling a gap in the<br \/> literature by demonstrating the effect of personal health<br \/> identities on organizational identification. This analysis<br \/> revealed that employees\u2019 participation in a WHP program<br \/> mediates personal health and organizational identities. Other<br \/> health identification research had investigated how group<br \/> and organizational identifications influence health behaviors,<br \/> whereas this study showed how personal health identities<br \/> influence organizational attachments through the situated<br \/> activity of WHP participation. People who define themselves<br \/> Table 1. Means, standard deviations, and correlations<br \/> Variable M SD 1 23<br \/> 1. Personal health identity 5.57 0.56<br \/> 2. Organizational identification 5.85 1.06 0.32*<br \/> 3. WHP program participation 5.93 1.31 0.27** 0.77**<br \/> Note. N = 204.<br \/> *p = .05, **p = .01.<br \/> 264 S. L. DAILEY AND Y. ZHU<br \/> in terms of their health are more likely to participate in<br \/> WHP programs, which, in turn, increases their organizational<br \/> identification. This research makes several contributions<br \/> to theory and practice.<br \/> Theoretical Contributions<br \/> First, the current study contributes to the WHP literature, as<br \/> participation rates in WHP programs are often relatively low,<br \/> and scholars have called for theory-driven research to increase<br \/> employees\u2019 participation (Linnan, Sorensen, Colditz, Klar, &amp;<br \/> Emmons, 2001). This research provides a theoretical explanation<br \/> for employees\u2019 involvement in WHP programs by showing<br \/> the positive relationship between personal health identities<br \/> and wellness program participation. Specifically, this study<br \/> contributes to the growing work that shows the role of identity<br \/> in predicting health behaviors (Moran &amp; Sussman, 2014;<br \/> Stephens et al., 2014, 2015), and demonstrates the effect that<br \/> personal health identities and participation in workplace wellness<br \/> programs have on identification.<br \/> Furthermore, in addition to understanding organizational<br \/> benefits of productivity (Kuoppala et al., 2008), employee<br \/> absences (Conn et al., 2009; Kuoppala et al., 2008), and turnover<br \/> (DeJoy &amp; Wilson, 2003), this research points to an<br \/> additional outcome of WHP participation: employees\u2019<br \/> increased sense of belongingness. Although some scholarship,<br \/> particularly in the field of organizational communication, has<br \/> critiqued WHP (Farrell &amp; Geist-Martin, 2005; Zoller, 2003),<br \/> the current project shows an additional way that WHP can<br \/> benefit employees and organizations. Rather than viewing<br \/> WHP as an organizational mandate to conform employees,<br \/> this study offers a bottom-up approach to WHP participation<br \/> by showing that some people already have healthy identities<br \/> which they bring to work. Scholars should recognize that<br \/> WHP programs may acknowledge and meet the needs of<br \/> employees\u2019 preexisting healthy identities, which in turn help<br \/> employees feel more attached to work.<br \/> For example, consider the growing trend of wearable fitness<br \/> devices, such as Fitbit bands, which track a person\u2019s<br \/> steps, calories burned, sleep, and more. Since people wear<br \/> these devices 24\/7, they naturally bring wearable technologies<br \/> to work. Many businesses are now incorporating these devices<br \/> into their corporate wellness programs, but that effort has<br \/> been more of a \u201cgrass-roots\u201d movement, according to James<br \/> Park, the CEO of Fitbit. He explained, \u201cSimilar to how<br \/> employees brought iPhones into the workplace to replace<br \/> BlackBerry, employees who really love Fitbit are bringing<br \/> [the devices] to their HR [human resources person] and<br \/> saying, \u2018Let\u2019s use this as part of our corporate wellness program\u2019\u201d<br \/> (Thompson, 2014, para. 6). This example demonstrates<br \/> that WHP programs are not always introduced in a<br \/> top-down manner, and scholars should recognize how WHP<br \/> participation can be organically cultivated through employees<br \/> who value health.<br \/> A second theoretical contribution of this project is the<br \/> attention it draws to the role of activities in the negotiation<br \/> of identities. Although Scott et al. (1998) encouraged scholars<br \/> to pursue how identification processes are situated within<br \/> activities, only recently have scholars empirically considered<br \/> the role of organizational activities in fostering identification<br \/> (Meisenbach &amp; Kramer, 2014; Stephens &amp; Dailey, 2012).<br \/> Filling authors\u2019 calls for more research in this area, this<br \/> study shows how employees\u2019 involvement in a workplace<br \/> wellness program mediates the relationship between individuals\u2019<br \/> health identities and their organizational identification.<br \/> We contend that organizational activities, like WHP programs,<br \/> serve as identity bridges because they allow employees<br \/> to express both personal and work identity targets.<br \/> As home and work life become more intertwined, health<br \/> communication research must shift to look at the various<br \/> activities, beyond health and wellness programs, that companies<br \/> offer to bridge employees\u2019 personal and work lives. Other<br \/> work\u2013life initiatives, such as company-paid sabbaticals or<br \/> volunteer days, are additional activities that may act as identity<br \/> bridges. For example, workers who have a strong connection<br \/> to animals, gardening, or education may benefit from<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Medical Sciences (Anatomy, Physiology, Pharmacology etc.) Topic: Wellness programs in the workplace will have a positive impact on the health of their employees when compared to workplaces without them. Thesis: Wellness programs in the workplace will have a positive impact <a href=\"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wellness-programs-in-the-workplace-will-have-a-positive-impact-on-the-health-of-their-employees-when-compared-to-workplaces-without-them\/\" class=\"read-more\">Read More &#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-114694","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/114694","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=114694"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/114694\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=114694"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=114694"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=114694"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}