THE ROLE OF A SIT-TO-STAND WORKSTATION AND ITS EFFECTS ON WORK PRODUCTIVITY
Matthew C. Green1, Alex J. London1, Jacilyn Olson1, & Larissa Boyd1
1University of Central Oklahoma, Edmond, Oklahoma
The prolonged sedentary nature of office work has been shown to induce high levels of discomfort, leading to decreased worker productivity. Many modalities, including ergonomic-adjustable chairs, treadmill desks, and light-activity promotion have been used as interventions to combat worker distress and productivity. The sit-to-stand (STS) workstation is another tool aimed at improving workers’ focus and productivity. PURPOSE: Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of a STS workstation on work productivity. METHODS: All participants were volunteer faculty and staff of the University of Central Oklahoma randomly assigned to a control (n = 10) or STS workstation intervention (n = 8) group. Both groups filled out the Health and Work Performance Questionnaire at the base-line, 6-month, and 12-month mark of the study to measure productivity. Absolute productivity is a subjective measure of an employee's work output. Relative productivity is a subjective comparison of the employee’s work output to another employee in a similar position. The control group was instructed to continue their day as normal while the intervention group was instructed to stand at least 2 hours per work day, if possible. RESULTS: There was no interaction effect for absolute productivity (F2,15=.91, p=.42) from baseline to 12 months with a moderate effect size (0.68). However, a decrease was seen in the control group from baseline (85 +/- 7.07) to post-test (73.08 +/- 28.07) with a strong effect size (1.69), while the STS workstation group increased from baseline (86.25 +/- .88) to post-test (88.75 +/- 8.35). Relative productivity showed no interaction effect as well (F2,15 = .89, p = .44) from baseline to 12 months. The control group saw a decrease from start (1.09 +/- .17) to finish (1.07 +/- .10) while the intervention group saw an increase from start (1.10 +/- .12) to finish (1.19 +/- .26). CONCLUSION: Overall, the STS workstation did not show a significant improvement in work productivity compared to the control group. However, a positive trend was seen in the intervention group towards perceived greater work production.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: This study was funded by the University of Central Oklahoma, Research and Sponsored Programs office and Areawide Aging Agency
Green, MC; London, AJ; Olson, J; and Boyd, L
"THE ROLE OF A SIT-TO-STAND WORKSTATION AND ITS EFFECTS ON WORK PRODUCTIVITY,"
International Journal of Exercise Science: Conference Proceedings: Vol. 11:
6, Article 32.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/ijesab/vol11/iss6/32