J Nutr Health.  2019 Dec;52(6):593-603. 10.4163/jnh.2019.52.6.593.

Understanding how organizational environments affect food intake among employees in South Korea

• Park S
• Sung E
• Gittelsohn J

• KMID: 2466673
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4163/jnh.2019.52.6.593

Abstract

PURPOSE
Previous studies have highlighted that the nutritional behaviors among South Korean workers are far from ideal. This study examined the organizational influences affecting the eating practices of office workers in South Korea.
METHODS
We conducted in-depth interviews with 22 office workers at 12 companies in South Korea. The interviewer inquired about the employees' daily routines on food and beverage intake. The various factors that influence their food choices in their work environments were also explored. The interviews were transcribed and then analyzed using a content analysis.
RESULTS
A framework analysis revealed 7 key recurring themes, and these were grouped under three levels: team-, company-, and corporate group-levels. First, team dinners are core social events for all the workers and they tend to include high-caloric food and alcoholic beverages. The frequency of team meals and the food associated with them depend on various team characteristics such as gender composition, the nature of a team's work and the team leaders' emphasis on group meals. Second, the company's policies and practices regarding budget allocation for team meals and subsidies for cafeteria meals affect the workers' food intake practices. In addition, the physical environment of the worksite cafeterias can influence the choices of foods. Third, various corporate group policies that were not designed to target food intake had additional positive effects on the workers' eating behaviors.
CONCLUSION
This study provides important insights into the broader organizational influences on the food consumption of employees in their workplace. These insights can be used to design and implement more effective intervention strategies for improving the nutritional behaviors of office workers.

Keyword

organizations; food environment; workplace; diet; qualitative research

MeSH Terms

Alcoholic Beverages
Beverages
Budgets
Diet
Eating*
Feeding Behavior
Korea*
Meals
Qualitative Research
Workplace

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Framework for organizational influences on food intake among office workers at one corporate group in South Korea.

Reference

1. Lowe MR, Tappe KA, Butryn ML, Annunziato RA, Coletta MC, Ochner CN, et al. An intervention study targeting energy and nutrient intake in worksite cafeterias. Eat Behav. 2010; 11(3):144–151.

2. Kushida O, Murayama N. Effects of environmental intervention in workplace cafeterias on vegetable consumption by male workers. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2014; 46(5):350–358.

3. Beresford SA, Thompson B, Feng Z, Christianson A, McLerran D, Patrick DL. Seattle 5 a day worksite program to increase fruit and vegetable consumption. Prev Med. 2001; 32(3):230–238.

4. Levin SM, Ferdowsian HR, Hoover VJ, Green AA, Barnard ND. A worksite programme significantly alters nutrient intakes. Public Health Nutr. 2010; 13(10):1629–1635.

5. Vanderlee L, Hammond D. Does nutrition information on menus impact food choice? Comparisons across two hospital cafeterias. Public Health Nutr. 2014; 17(6):1393–1402.

6. Engbers LH, van Poppel MN, Chin A, van Mechelen W. The effects of a controlled worksite environmental intervention on determinants of dietary behavior and self-reported fruit, vegetable and fat intake. BMC Public Health. 2006; 6(1):253.

7. OECD. Average annual hours actually worked per worker [Internet]. Paris: OECD;2019. cited 2015 Mar 9. Available from: http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?DataSetCode=ANHRS.

8. Choi MK, Kim JG, Kim JM. A study on the dietary habit and health of office workers in Seoul. J Korean Soc Food Cult. 2003; 18(1):45–55.

9. Kim HH, Lee YK. Analysis of presumed sodium intake of office workers using 24-hour urine analysis and correlation matrix between variables. Korean J Nutr. 2013; 46(1):26–33.

10. Cha JH. Aspects of individualism and collectivism in Korea. In : Kim U, Triandis HC, Kâğitçibaşi Ç, Choi SC, Yoon G, editors. Individualism and Collectivism: Theory, Method, and Applications. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications;1994. p. 157–174.

11. Kim JG, Kim JM, Choi MK. A study on the stress and dietary life of office workers in Seoul. Korean J Soc Food Cookery Sci. 2003; 19(4):413–422.

12. Furst T, Connors M, Bisogni CA, Sobal J, Falk LW. Food choice: a conceptual model of the process. Appetite. 1996; 26(3):247–265.

13. Sallis JF, Owen N, Fisher EB. Ecological models of health behavior. In : Glanz K, Rimer BK, Viswanath K, editors. Health Behavior and Health Education. San Francisco (CA): John Wiley & Sons;2008. p. 465–486.

14. Kimathi AN, Gregoire MB, Dowling RA, Stone MK. A healthful options food station can improve satisfaction and generate gross profit in a worksite cafeteria. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009; 109(5):914–917.

15. Liebert ML, Patsch AJ, Smith JH, Behrens TK, Charles T, Bailey TR. Planning and development of the Better Bites program: a pricing manipulation strategy to improve healthy eating in a hospital cafeteria. Health Promot Pract. 2013; 14(4):552–562.

16. Perlmutter CA, Canter DD, Gregoire MB. Profitability and acceptability of fat- and sodium-modified hot entrees in a worksite cafeteria. J Am Diet Assoc. 1997; 97(4):391–395.

17. Levin S. Pilot study of a cafeteria program relying primarily on symbols to promote healthy choices. J Nutr Educ. 1996; 28(5):282–285.

18. Stokols D, Pelletier KR, Fielding JE. The ecology of work and health: research and policy directions for the promotion of employee health. Health Educ Q. 1996; 23(2):137–158.

19. Park S, Sung E, Choi Y, Ryu S, Chang Y, Gittelsohn J. Sociocultural factors influencing eating practices among office workers in urban South Korea. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2017; 49(6):466–474.e1.

20. Golden SD, Earp JA. Social ecological approaches to individuals and their contexts: twenty years of health education & behavior health promotion interventions. Health Educ Behav. 2012; 39(3):364–372.

21. Patton MQ. Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications;2014.

22. Pope C, Ziebland S, Mays N. Qualitative research in health care. Analysing qualitative data. BMJ. 2000; 320(7227):114–116.

23. Saldaña J. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications;2012.

24. Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013; 13(1):117–124.

25. Creswell JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage Publications;2012.

26. Clemens LH, Slawson DL, Klesges RC. The effect of eating out on quality of diet in premenopausal women. J Am Diet Assoc. 1999; 99(4):442–444.

27. Guthrie JF, Lin BH, Frazao E. Role of food prepared away from home in the American diet, 1977-78 versus 1994-96: changes and consequences. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2002; 34(3):140–150.

28. Bezerra IN, Curioni C, Sichieri R. Association between eating out of home and body weight. Nutr Rev. 2012; 70(2):65–79.

29. Wandel M, Roos G. Work, food and physical activity. A qualitative study of coping strategies among men in three occupations. Appetite. 2005; 44(1):93–102.

30. Hellerstedt WL, Jeffery RW. The association of job strain and health behaviours in men and women. Int J Epidemiol. 1997; 26(3):575–583.

31. Herman CP. The social facilitation of eating. A review. Appetite. 2015; 86:61–73.

32. Bell R, Pliner PL. Time to eat: the relationship between the number of people eating and meal duration in three lunch settings. Appetite. 2003; 41(2):215–218.

33. Pliner P, Bell R, Hirsch ES, Kinchla M. Meal duration mediates the effect of “social facilitation” on eating in humans. Appetite. 2006; 46(2):189–198.

34. Kaisari P, Higgs S. Social modelling of food intake. The role of familiarity of the dining partners and food type. Appetite. 2015; 86(C):19–24.

35. Dejoy DM, Wilson MG, Goetzel RZ, Ozminkowski RJ, Wang S, Baker KM, et al. Development of the Environmental Assessment Tool (EAT) to measure organizational physical and social support for worksite obesity prevention programs. J Occup Environ Med. 2008; 50(2):126–137.

36. Escoffery C, Kegler MC, Alcantara I, Wilson M, Glanz K. A qualitative examination of the role of small, rural worksites in obesity prevention. Prev Chronic Dis. 2011; 8(4):A75.

37. Tabak RG, Hipp JA, Marx CM, Brownson RC. Workplace social and organizational environments and healthy-weight behaviors. PLoS One. 2015; 10(4):e0125424.

38. Jia Y, Fu H, Gao J, Dai J, Zheng P. The roles of health culture and physical environment in workplace health promotion: a two-year prospective intervention study in China. BMC Public Health. 2018; 18(1):457.

39. Goetzel RZ, Shechter D, Ozminkowski RJ, Marmet PF, Tabrizi MJ, Roemer EC. Promising practices in employer health and productivity management efforts: findings from a benchmarking study. J Occup Environ Med. 2007; 49(2):111–130.

40. Almeida FA, Wall SS, You W, Harden SM, Hill JL, Krippendorf BE, et al. The association between worksite physical environment and employee nutrition, and physical activity behavior and weight status. J Occup Environ Med. 2014; 56(7):779–784.

41. Anderson LM, Quinn TA, Glanz K, Ramirez G, Kahwati LC, Johnson DB, et al. The effectiveness of worksite nutrition and physical activity interventions for controlling employee overweight and obesity: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2009; 37(4):340–357.

42. Kramer RF, Coutinho AJ, Vaeth E, Christiansen K, Suratkar S, Gittelsohn J. Healthier home food preparation methods and youth and caregiver psychosocial factors are associated with lower BMI in African American youth. J Nutr. 2012; 142(5):948–954.

43. McLeroy KR, Bibeau D, Steckler A, Glanz K. An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Educ Q. 1988; 15(4):351–377.