Development and Implementation of ‘Just Right’ Physical Behavior in Industrial Work Based on the Goldilocks Work Principle—A Feasibility Study

Anders Fritz Lerche, Svend Erik Mathiassen, Charlotte Lund Rasmussen, Leon Straker, Karen Søgaard and Andreas Holtermann
Additional contact information
Anders Fritz Lerche: The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
Svend Erik Mathiassen: Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Department of Occupational and Public Health Sciences, University of Gävle, 801 76 Gävle, Sweden
Charlotte Lund Rasmussen: The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark
Leon Straker: School of Allied Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6845, Australia
Karen Søgaard: Department of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, 5230 Odense M, Denmark
Andreas Holtermann: The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark

IJERPH, 2021, vol. 18, issue 9, 1-22

Abstract: The Goldilocks Work Principle expresses that productive work should be redesigned to comprise physical behaviors of different intensities in a composition promoting workers’ health and fitness. This study is the first to assess the feasibility of redesigning work in an industrial setting according to the Goldilocks Work Principle. We recruited workers ( n = 20) from a brewery in Denmark, and we conducted a participatory 16-week intervention including a workshop and two consultations. The workshop aimed to support the workers in modifying their work, while the consultations assisted the eventual implementation. Feasibility was evaluated as per three aspects: (1) developing modifications of work, (2) implementing these modifications, and (3) changing physical behavior and self-reported fatigue, pain and energy. The three aspects were addressed through records completed by the workers, measurements of workers’ physical behavior and intensity during ‘control’ workdays (i.e., usual work) and ‘intervention’ workdays (i.e., modified work), and self-reported fatigue, pain and energy level following both types of workday. Five modifications to work were developed, and three of these five modifications were implemented. To some extent, physical behavior and intensity changed as intended during ‘intervention’ workdays compared to ‘control’ workdays. Workers were also less fatigued, had less pain, and had more energy after ‘intervention’ workdays. These results suggest that it is feasible to develop and implement modified work based on the Goldilocks Work Principle among industrial workers. However, we also identified several barriers to the implementation of such modifications.

Keywords: physical behavior; health; workplace; intervention; Goldilocks Work Principle (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/9/4707/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/9/4707/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:9:p:4707-:d:545420

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().