Is More Always Better in Designing Workplace Wellness Programs?

A Comparison of Wellness Program Components Versus Outcomes

Published in: Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Volume 58, Number 10, October 2016, pages 987-993. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000848

Posted on on April 28, 2017

by Benjamin Saul Batorsky, Christian Van Stolk, Harry H. Liu

Read More

Access further information on this document at Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.


Assess whether adding more components to a workplace wellness program is associated with better outcomes by measuring the relationship of program components to one another and to employee participation and perceptions of program effectiveness.


Data came from a 2014 survey of 24,393 employees of 81 employers about services offered, leadership, incentives, and promotion. Logistic regressions were used to model the relationship between program characteristics and outcomes.


Components individually are related to better outcomes, but this relationship is weaker in the presence of other components and non-significant for incentives. Within components, a moderate level of services and work time participation opportunities are associated with higher participation and effectiveness.


The "more of everything" approach does not appear to be advisable for all programs. Programs should focus on providing ample opportunities for employees to participate and initiatives like results-based incentives.

Research conducted by

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.