Strength training in the workplace

Is strength training in the workplace cost effective for enhancing health and productivity?

Many companies are investing in workplace health programs for their employees. Whilst these programs have been shown to have value in many areas, they can be quite varied, becoming complex with multiple offerings to employees and may be expensive for some well-intending companies. Furthermore, the return on investment for many of these programs has also been questioned.

Some companies have opted to simplify a workplace wellness program. These companies offer their employees workplace training facilities. These training facilities allow employees to strength and cardio train at work. But do these types of programs actually work, and are they cost effective?

A recent study summarised 15 research studies conducted in Denmark on workplace exercise (Sjøgaard et al., 2016). It included approximately 3,500 participants across numerous occupations, including office and computer workers, dentists, industrial technicians, cleaning personnel, health care workers, construction workers, and fighter/helicopter pilots.

The results showed a significant health improvement across all jobs, and workplace productivity increased with improved muscle strength and decreased body mass index (BMI). It was further shown that “cost-effectiveness estimates indicate acceptable cost relative to savings on health expenses and lost productivity.”

The authors point out that the type of program and having supervision, at least initially, were key factors to the success of these outcomes. They state that exercise programs should be tailored to the individual to meet their ability level, daily stress levels and needs. The exercise programs should also include a variety of lifts to address all body parts and fitness components.

Reference

Sjøgaard, G., Christensen, J. R., Justesen, J. B., Murray, M., Dalager, T., Fredslund, G. H., & Søgaard, K. (2016). Exercise is more than medicine: The working age population's well-being and productivity. Journal of sport and health science, 5(2), 159–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2016.04.004