"Are we working (too) comfortably?": a focus group study to understand sedentary behaviour when working at home and identify intervention strategies.

BACKGROUND

The Covid-19 pandemic initiated an enduring shift in working patterns, with many employees now working at home (w@h). This shift has exacerbated existing high levels of occupational sedentary behaviour (SB) in office workers, which is a recognised risk to health and well-being. This study aimed to use the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model to better understand both employees' SB, and line managers behaviour to assist employees to reduce SB when w@h, and identify how employees can best be supported to reduce SB.

METHODS

Three online focus groups with employees aged 18-40 working in desk-based roles (e.g. administrative / sales / customer services) (n = 21), and three with line managers (n = 21) were conducted. The focus groups facilitated discussion regarding participants' current behaviour, what impacts it, and what could be done to reduce employee SB when w@h. The focus group data were thematically analysed guided by the COM-B framework to understand influences on behaviour, and to identify promising intervention strategies.

RESULTS

Most participants recognised that w@h had elevated employee occupational SB, and line managers reported the importance of supporting employees to manage their workload, and encouraging and modelling taking breaks. There were multiple influences on both employee and line manager behaviour with capability, opportunity and motivation all perceived as influential, although not equally. For example, a major theme related to the reduced physical opportunities for employees to reduce their SB when w@h, including blurred work-life boundaries. Changes in physical opportunities also made supporting employees challenging for line managers. Additionally, the w@h environment included unique social opportunities that negatively impacted the behaviour of both groups, including an expectation to always be present online, and social norms. A range of strategies for reducing SB when w@h at both individual and organisational level were suggested.

CONCLUSIONS

It was evident that SB when w@h is influenced by a range of factors, and therefore multi-component intervention strategies are likely to be most effective in reducing SB. Future intervention research is a priority to evaluate and refine strategies, and inform w@h guidance to protect both the short-term and long-term health consequences of elevated SB for those who continue to w@h.