07.2021

Well-Being InfluencersLiterature Review

Contents03

04

05

05

07

07

08

08

09

10

11

12

12

14

14

15

16

17

Well-Being Influencers

Social Determinants of Health

Influencers Under Lower Control

Socioeconomic status

Underlying health isuues and personality

Influencers Under Higher Control

Physical activity

Mindsets — Experience Activators

Financial literacy and spending behaviors

Social support and relationship

Organizational factors

Well-Being Areas Influence Other Well-Being Areas

What Controls These Influencers?

Implications

Focus on supporting and improving factors under higher control

Work as a powerful catalyst of widespred influence

Conclusion

References

AuthorsReetu Sandhu, Ph.D.

Yuejia (Mandy) Teng, Ph.D.

Jonathan Gallegos, Ph.D.

Laura Hamill, Ph.D.

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 3

Limeade defines well-being as a subjective experience that includes feeling good and living with purpose. Feeling good refers to feeling healthy and happy — and conceptualizes well-being as a primarily affective experience. Living with purpose is about thriving and being intentional about pursuing a fulfilling life. The combination of the two is what contributes to an individual’s overall sense of well-being. Whole-person well-being is an all-encompassing concept that reflects people as the complex and interconnected systems they are, and can be conceptualized through four areas: physical, financial, emotional, and work well-being. Both Limeade research and academic literature has established interdependencies among these areas — they all work together to capture the concept of whole-person well-being. Together, the Limeade model of whole-person well-being considers well-being as subjective, multifaceted, and consistent with academic research in the field.

The purpose of this paper is to review past research and literature on the influencers of whole-person well-being. Due to the interconnected nature of well-being areas, there are many influencers that have widespread impact and cross more than one area of our lives. These influencers also exist on a spectrum of malleability and control, indicating the extent to which they can be directly altered, affected, or molded. For the purposes of this paper, we anchor this spectrum by “higher control” and “lower control.” Factors that are closer to the “higher control” end of the spectrum are those that can be more easily altered through volitional changes in behavior, attitudes, or emotions. Factors that are closer to the “lower control” end of the spectrum are those that are more difficult for a person to change or influence. There is great nuance and complexity in the factors that play a role in our well-being, and although the influencers covered in this review are not exhaustive, the overarching goal of this paper is to shed light on this complexity — and increase understanding and intentionality around whole- person well-being efforts. Through focusing well-being efforts and more fully understanding the variables at play within these efforts, organizations can demonstrate care and create positive employee experiences both individually and collectively.

Well-Being Influencers

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 4

In our review of the literature, there are many influencers of well-being outcomes that are, at their core, intimately connected with what are known as social determinants of health. Social determinants of health (SDH) are defined as the “social, economic, and environmental circumstances in which people are born and live that are influenced by health and economic policies, distribution of power, and resource allocation associated with income, health care, education, and neighborhood” (Abbott & Elliott, 2016, p.2; Bell, Taylor, & Marmot, 2010). The Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion groups SDH into 5 domains: Economic Stability, Education Access and Quality, Health Care Access and Quality, Neighborhood and Built Environment, and Social and Community Context (see figure below).

Social Determinants of Health

Figure 1. Social Determinants of Health. Source: Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 5

Social determinants of health have widespread impacts on facets of individual well-being, extending far beyond physical health. For example, a literature review on the social determinants of mental health found that factors such as lack of social support, low levels of education, low income, and perceived discrimination held a statistically significant relationship with worse mental health, including psychiatric symptoms, mental disorders, and suicide (Silva, Loureiro, Cardoso, 2016). Additionally, due to historical and structural inequalities, marginalized groups have been found to be disproportionality affected by what are known as health disparities associated with these social determinants of health (e.g., women, people of color; Braveman, 2014). These relationships are further amplified for those who belong to multiple marginalized groups (i.e., intersectionality). The US Department of Health and Human Services defines a health disparity as:

“. . . a particular type of health difference that is closely linked with economic, social, or environmental disadvantage. Health disparities adversely affect groups of people who have systematically experienced greater social or economic obstacles to health based on their racial or ethnic group, religion, socioeconomic status, gender, age, or mental health; cognitive, sensory, or physical disability; sexual orientation or gender identity; geographic location; or other characteristics historically linked to discrimination or exclusion.”

The nuanced relationships between social determinants of health, identity, and health disparities make it such that an exhaustive list of well-being influencers is difficult to produce and inappropriate to oversimplify. It is important to recognize the overarching influence of power and privilege in a nation’s history and society when examining well-being influencers for any person or group of people who live and/or work there. Below, we consider the nuances and relationships of power and privilege (specifically in the U.S.) in our discussion of well-being influencers.

Socioeconomic status A primary example of the interrelated nature of contributing factors can be seen through socioeconomic status (SES), which is typically represented by one’s education, income, and occupation. While under relatively low control, people can move through different SES levels throughout their life, and SES is “a consistent and reliable predictor of a vast array of outcomes across the life span, including physical and psychological health” (American Psychological Association, n.d.). People with low SES are found to have increased risk for 18 out of 56 health conditions, such as obesity, diabetes, substance abuse, psychiatric disorders, heart disease, and anemia (Kivimäki et al., 2020). Particularly, income is a significant determinant of physical and mental health outcomes, such that people with low income are less likely to report high levels of physical well-being (Living Wage for Families Campaign, n.d.) and an increase in income

Influencers Under Lower Control

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 6

considerably enhances individuals’ physical and emotional well-being (Ettner, 1996). Additionally, even after taking into account the influence of race/ethnicity, gender, age, and other factors, low SES (poverty and unemployment) remains a significant risk factor for poor mental health outcomes (Mossakowski, 2008). Expectedly, wealth, the economy, and SES also greatly influence an individual’s finances and overall financial well-being (Gutter & Copur, 2011; Grable & Joo, 2006; Joo & Grable, 2004; Loibl & Hira, 2007; Malone, Stewart, Wilson, & Korsching, 2009; Porter & Garman, 1993;).

The relationships between SES and well-being outcomes may be explained by the fact that people with lower SES have fewer resources for obtaining stable housing or good living conditions, they face more obstacles to engage in regular physical activities or get adequate medical care (Benzeval et al., 2014; Living Wage for Families Campaign, n.d.), and they have limited access to healthy food and are therefore likely to have worse health outcomes (e.g., type 2 diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular diseases; Food Empowerment Project, n.d.). Moreover, low SES leaves individuals vulnerable to mental health problems and poor emotional well-being, as they are more likely to be exposed to adverse work and living environments and face more work-life conflicts (Kim & Cho, 2020; Steptoe & Zaninotto, 2020). These individuals may also have more barriers to access and utilize mental health services they need and benefit from (Steele, Dewa, & Lee, 2007). As a result, individuals with low SES experience more emotional distress and have lower levels of emotional well-being. People with low SES also have lower financial well-being, as they are less likely to have financial education, have less capacity to save, and less likely to invest in stocks (Anzola & Guzmán, 2016; Kuhnen & Miu, 2017).

These findings underscore the role that income inequality can play as a risk factor for poor self-reported well-being outcomes (Zimmerman & Bell, 2006). The relationship between income and well-being can be attributed in part to the relationship income holds with health-related behaviors, such as level of physical activities, diet, tobacco, alcohol, and substance use (Living Wage for Families Campaign, n.d.). Compounding the problem further, low income makes it more difficult to gain access to health-related goods and services, such as healthy food, workout gear, and gym memberships (Benzeval et al., 2014).

Additionally, reflecting the complexity and varying experiences of SDH, racial/ethnical minorities are more likely to have low SES compared to the majority group and more likely to have poor physical health (American Psychological Association, n.d.; Bahls, 2011). As SES and race are closely related due to historic reasons, racial and ethnic minorities are more likely to experience poverty (Reeves, Rodrigue, & Kneebone, 2016), become unemployed (Rodgers, 2008), and have poor financial well-being (Fidelity Investments, 2020). Specifically, Fidelity Investments found that African Americans had the lowest average financial well-being score (rated based on budgeting, debt, savings, and financial risk/protection four components), compared to their White counterparts and the overall population; their total savings rate was the lowest compared to White and other race/ethnicities. As explained above, these relationships stem from deeply rooted and underlying factors such societal and historical inequities between races, specifically in the United States.

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 7

Underlying health issues and personalityAmong the low control factors, personality traits, such as neuroticism, have been found to have a particularly strong influence on one’s emotional well-being (Kokko et al., 2015; Kobylińska et al., 2020). For example, research has found that higher levels of emotional stability (low neuroticism), extraversion and conscientiousness predicted positive affect/emotion, whereas negative affect/emotion was only predicted by lower levels of emotional stability (higher neuroticism; Kobylińska et al., 2020). The influence of neuroticism on emotional well-being has been found to be present over the typical life span (Ready, Åkerstedt, & Mrcoczek, 2012); even though neuroticism decreases over time (McCrae, 2002), an individual’s baseline neuroticism strongly predicts their emotional well-being 10 years later, especially for older and mid-age adults. That is, those with higher levels of baseline neuroticism (low emotional stability) reported lower levels of emotional well-being 10 years later; this predictive effect is stronger in older and mid-age adults than younger adults.

Emotional and physical well-being are also greatly influenced by the factor that may well fall on the lowest end of the control spectrum — underlying health issues, including physical and mental health issues (with genetic predispositions), as well as previous traumatic experiences (Dwivedi & Harper, 2004; Lefebvre Smith, 2021; Kim & Cho, 2020; Steptoe & Zaninotto, 2020; Steele, Dewa, & Lee, 2007). For example, chronic illnesses and preexisting health conditions (e.g., cancer, autoimmune diseases, obesity, diabetes, heart conditions) have considerable impacts on one’s physical well-being. Viewing emotional and physical well-being through the lens of the employee experience, it is important to recognize that employees may already have these conditions before starting to work at a company, while others may emerge throughout their tenure.

Influencers Under Higher ControlRegarding the mechanism through which higher control factors influence well-being, we may draw on Conservation of Resources theory to shed light on this issue (Hobfoll, Halbesleben, Neveu, & Westman, 2018). Specifically, Conservation of Resources theory states that individuals are motivated to obtain and protect tangible, personal, and social resources that help them survive and thrive from challenges in life. Psychological distress (such as stress, lower levels of subjective well-being) occurs when these key resources are difficult to obtain, threatened, or lost.

Within the Conservation of Resources theoretical framework, “higher control” factors such as physical activities, social support, mindsets, organizational support, and organizational culture may be considered as the resources that help individuals survive and flourish from stressors and challenges, allowing them to have better well-being in their lives. Of note, these “higher control” factors are interconnected and influence each other; the combined effect of this interconnected relationship is that individuals are better equipped to deal with challenges and have less stress, greater sense of well-being, and better overall functioning in life (Hobfoll et al., 2018).

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 8

Physical activityThere are multiple behavioral, affective, and cognitive factors that individuals can control, adjust, and strengthen to have positive well-being outcomes. Behaviorally speaking, some physical activities contribute to many areas of well-being and alleviate negative health outcomes. For example, physical activities are shown to enhance emotional well-being, especially for people at risk for mental health issues (Lubans et al., 2012). Though health-related behaviors may be related to one’s level of income, they are the underlying “higher control” factors that one can actively modify to improve physical well-being. Physical activities and active lifestyle (e.g., exercising, staying active, doing housework), for instance, are associated with better physical functioning (Wright et al., 2015) and improved quality of life related to physical health (Peterson, Lowe, Peterson, & Janz, 2006). These types of behaviors can be changed with some efforts from individuals and supported and encouraged by their organizations.

Mindsets — Experience Activators There are many positive mindsets that have been found to serve as affective and cognitive tools individuals can use to enhance their well-being. These mindsets — what we call Experience Activators (see Limeade Institute Experience Activators study, 2021) — include but are not limited to: resilience through positive coping (Harms et al., 2018; Tugade, Fredrickson, & Barrett, 2004), optimism (Rasmussen, Scheier, & Greenhouse, 2009), mindfulness (Creswell & Lindsay, 2014; O’Loughlin, Fryer, & Zuckerman, 2019; Prazak et al., 2012; Weinstein et al., 2009; Wenzel et al., 2015), sense of purpose (Ho, Cheung, & Cheung, 2010), hope/optimism (Ciarrochi et al., 2015), and emotional intelligence (Spence et al., 2004). For instance, having a strong sense of purpose has been found to significantly predict emotional well-being — an effect that is partially mediated by optimism, meaning that individuals with greater sense of purpose may have higher levels of optimism, which partially contributes to increased sense of well-being (Ho et al., 2010). In addition, mindsets such as mindfulness can serve as a stress buffer, helping people reduce stress-induced negative responses, which in turn predicts better physical health outcomes (Creswell & Lindsay, 2014) and emotional well-being. (Weinstein et al., 2009). Mindsets also significantly link to work well-being, including job satisfaction, engagement, and work-related stress. In fact, a Limeade Institute research study based on responses from half a million employees from various industries and locations found that these factors were significantly associated with factors such as decreased stress and increased employee engagement, even after taking the influence of demographics into account (Experience Activators; Limeade Institute, 2021).

Additionally, emotion regulation and coping styles play a key role in shaping emotional well-being: individuals who manage to have positive emotions tend to broaden their mental capacity and resort to adaptive coping skills when navigating through challenges, which creates “upward spirals” to better emotional well-being (Fredrickson & Joiner, 2002). Critically, effective emotion regulation strategies serve as a vehicle through which individuals with varying personality traits

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 9

influence how and when they experience and expression their emotions, which subsequently influence their emotional well-being outcomes (Kobylińska et al., 2020). For instance, it has been shown that use of adaptive emotion regulation strategies such as cognitive reappraisal predicts more positive well-being outcomes (positive/negative emotion/affect, life satisfaction, and depressed mood) even after accounting for the influence of personality variables (extraversion and emotional stability), whereas use of maladaptive strategies such as suppression predicts more negative outcomes (Haga et al., 2009). Kobylińska et al. (2020) examined two types of emotion regulation: reappraisal (constructing the situation in an adaptive way to change its emotional impact) and suppression (inhibit/avoid the expression of experienced emotion), and found that greater reappraisal and less emotional suppression predicted higher levels of life satisfaction and positive affect (emotion).

Furthermore, training programs for these mindsets have demonstrated efficacy in the workplace and increased work well-being (Burton, Burgess, Dean, & Koutsopoulou, 2017; Robertson, Cooper, Sarkar, & Curran, 2015). For instance, mindfulness-based programs are shown to be effective at reducing work stress (Aikens et al., 2014; Burton et al., 2017) and improving mindfulness, which links to better mood, job and life satisfaction, as well as more sleep during the work week (Crain, Schonert-Reichl, & Roeser, 2017). Individuals who undergo these programs have also shown improvement in their overall quality of life and sleep quality (Carlson, Speca, Patel, & Goodey, 2003) — illustrating the interconnected nature of the well-being areas.

Financial literacy and spending behaviorsAlthough personal finances have many external and societal forces at play, there are several “higher control” influencers such as finance-related characteristics (e.g., financial literacy and education) and behaviors (e.g., planning, investing) that relate to financial well-being. Specifically, individuals’ financial literacy, financial education, and financial behaviors have been found to relate to increased financial well-being. Behaviors such as long-term planning, budgeting, saving, compulsive buying, etc., are shown to significantly relate to their perceived financial well-being, even after factoring in financial background, financial literacy and behavior, demographics, and traits such as future orientation and risk tolerance (Gutter & Copur, 2011). Additionally, financial well-being in general has been found to significantly relate to overall emotional well-being (Espinosa & Rudenstine. 2020; Iannello, Sorgente, Lanz, & Antonietti, 2021) as well as physical well-being (Zimmerman & Bell, 2006); and these relationships may be explained by stress, such that feeling better about one’s finances reduces overall stress and its negative spillover effects into all parts of life. Overall, these efforts to increase one’s financial well-being may also over time, help shift an individual’s SES — which, as discussed above, is a predominant social determinant of health.

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 10

Social support and relationshipsIndividuals have “a need to form and maintain at least a minimum quantity of interpersonal relationships […and this need is] innately prepared (and hence nearly universal) among human beings” (Baumeister & Leary, 1995, p.499). Due to its role as an inherent human need, social support and relationships are theorized to provide underlying resources in the form of positive emotions such as trust, connection, and a sense of belonging (Pearce & Davey Smith, 2003). These positive gains that emerge from social relationships have been referred to as social capital (Hunter, Neiger, & West, 2011). Research shows that feeling a sense of cohesion and belonging with your community predicts overall feelings of well-being (Cramm & Nieboer, 2015). Feelings of belonging engendered even through virtual relations (e.g., through Facebook) have been found to increase users’ well-being (Burke & Kraut, 2016).

While positive relationships have been found to relate to greater social acceptance, emotional comfort, sense of belonging, and greater self-reported health — lower social capital from relationships in life has been found to relate to mortality, cardiovascular disease, and suicide; and consistent research support for these links have been found both inside and outside the United States (Hunter et al., 2011). Furthermore, these relationships have been found to be compounded and influenced by income inequality, such that lower income was related to greater mistrust in one’s community, which was related to greater health disparities (Hunter et al., 2011). In a study of 45 countries, however, Mansyur and colleages (2008) found that even after controlling for income, levels of trust and social participation had a significant positive effect on self-reported health. These findings, although once again illustrate the complexity of well-being influencers stemming from SDH, highlight the power of relationships in our lives.

Decreases in inclusion or social belonging, on the other hand, have the potential to have severe negative impacts on well-being. Unfortunately, these experiences have also been found to occur more for racial minorities due to historical and systemic racism, particularly in the United States. A review of 138 empirical quantitative studies, for example, found that self-reported experiences of racism predicted negative health outcomes for racial minorities, such as increased depression, anxiety, stress, negative emotions, and drug use (cigarettes and alcohol; Paradies, 2006). Additionally, women who reported feeling stereotyped because of their sex at their job, compared to those who did not, reported feeling more stress and psychological burnout at work characterized by emotional exhaustion, feelings of depersonalization, and feelings of inefficacy (Bedyńska, & Żołnierczyk-Zreda, 2015).

It is important to highlight the nuance, however, that the factors that impact well-being do not stem from membership to certain groups alone, but rather from the differences in experience that these groups are more likely to have. Therefore, organizations and individuals alike can and ought to take steps to help reduce instances of prejudice and reductions in well-being in marginalized identities that occur from experiences of prejudice (e.g., sexism, racism) and to support and foster positive relationships and social support for all.

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 11

Organizational factorsOther organizational factors that influence well-being include, but are not limited to, work characteristics (e.g., job control, job complexity, autonomy, task variety), job demands and stressors, overall organizational support, organizational culture, work-life balance, and leadership behaviors (Cameron et. al., 2011; Eisenberger & Stinglhamber, 2011; Gonzalez-Mulé & Cockburn, 2021; Guimont et al., 2006; Haar et al., 2017; Judge et al., 2000; Kuper & Marmot, 2003; Panaccio, & Vandenberghe, 2009; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002; Robertson & Barling, 2014; Robertson & Flint Taylor, 2008; Warrick, 2017). A Limeade Institute study demonstrated that organizational support and culture significantly linked to better employee engagement, reduced stress, and greater sense of overall well-being, even after factoring in the influence of individual demographics and mindsets including emotion regulation, resilience, mindfulness, purpose, and optimism (Limeade Institute, 2021). Specifically, in organizations with higher levels of organizational support and a caring organizational culture, employees were more likely to report positive work well-being outcomes, including greater sense of belongingness and inclusion at work, higher likelihood of recommending their organization others, and higher levels of commitment to their organizations, employee engagement, organizational commitment, and extra-role behaviors (i.e., organizational citizenship behaviors; Limeade Institute, 2020).

Most notably, the workplace has been found to hold the potential to influence all other areas of well-being: emotional well-being, physical well-being, and financial well-being. For instance, work characteristics and workplace safety are vital to one’s physical and mental health (Gonzalez-Mulé & Cockburn; 2021; Guimont, et al., 2006; Kuper, & Marmot, 2003). Through a 20-year longitudinal study, Gonzalez-Mulé and Cockburn (2021) demonstrated that high job demands predicted poor physical and mental health as well as mortality 20 years later. Additionally, creating a work environment that gave workers more control over their jobs served as a buffer reducing the negative impacts of job demands on mental well-being, which in turn predicted lower likelihood of death. Job control also affected the extent to which job demands impacted physical well-being, such that when workers experienced higher levels of job control, job demands predicted better physical health, which predicted lower probability of mortality 20 years later. Given the influential and wide-spanning role that work plays in the overall lives of individuals, improving factors that impact work well-being may have a positive “trickle-down” effect on emotional, physical, and financial well-being.

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 12

Well-Being Areas Influence Other Well-Being Areas Research also shows that there is great overlap, interconnection, and multi-directional influence between the four areas of well-being themselves, underscoring the importance of viewing well-being from a holistic perspective. For example, meta-analyses show that physical health influences emotional well-being, quality of life, as well as life satisfaction (Mccloughen et al., 2012) and that conversely, emotional well-being influences physical health and well-being (Lamers et al., 2012; Mccloughen et al., 2012). In the same vein, financial well-being has been found to significantly contribute to emotional well-being (Espinosa & Rudenstine. 2020; Iannello, Sorgente, Lanz, & Antonietti, 2021) as well as physical well-being (Zimmerman & Bell, 2006). In summary, although the influencers reviewed above play an important role in well-being, they cannot and should not be viewed in a silo — our experiences in life are interconnected and our well-being experiences are no exception. Instead, the well-being areas in our lives act as dynamic and human-centric well-being influencers, themselves (see Figure 2 below).

What Controls These Influencers? As defined earlier, influencers that are closer to the “higher control” end of the spectrum are those that can be more easily altered through volitional changes in behavior, attitudes, or emotions. When considering who, or what, controls or alters these influencers, it is important to outline the multifaceted and intersecting levels at play. Firstly, we must acknowledge the power and control of one’s community, larger society, and surrounding history. For example, the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB; Ajzen, 1985, 1991) argues that the most important determinant of behavior is behavioral intention, which is directly fueled by (1) one’s own

Figure 2. Well-being is complex and interconnected.

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 13

attitudes towards the behavior, (2) external subjective norms associated with the behavior and (3) overall perceived control over the behavior. Additionally, Social Cognitive Theory (SCT; Bandura, 1991, 2001) focuses on the dynamic interaction of the person, environment and behavior (i.e., reciprocal determinism). It focuses very heavily on the impact one’s environment and surroundings have on individual behavior and self-efficacy. Although one’s larger society will have an influence on these determinants, organizations play a large role, and hold a responsibility, for the environment in which employee behavior takes place. Given this, organizations hold much power and control over the extent to which individuals may even focus on the influencers discussed in this paper. For example, the likelihood of an employee taking advantage of a day off (e.g., paid time off, PTO) for physical well-being fuel, activity, and/or recovery is heavily dependent on whether the organization supports and expects their employees to do this, or instead tends to view this behavior as ‘slacking.’ Often, these norms are influenced and determined by the extent to which trust and care are prioritized and present within an organization.

Organizations and leaders play a critical role in establishing this type of culture and (whether intentionally or not) practice social modeling by partaking in the behavior themselves. They also enable the behavior change through words of encouragement (which also normalize the behavior) and recognition of the behavior. Illustrating the effect organizations can have on well-being influencers, a Limeade Institute study found statistically significant relationships between multiple experience activators (e.g., self-efficacy, optimism, resilience, mindfulness, purpose, and emotion regulation) and one’s organizational culture and levels of organizational support — supporting the intertwined relationship between individuals and the organizations in which they work.

For these reasons, it is important for organizations to surround their employees with care that encourages support, empowerment and a positive focus on well-being influencers under higher control. Companies can demonstrate and achieve perceptions of care by providing “organizational support” that embodies this care. Organizational support is a multifaceted and culturally pervasive effort that operates at many levels in a company. This includes local support (from managers, teams, peers, networks and one’s physical environment) and organization-wide support (from leaders, strategic alignment, tools and resources and culture). When companies intentionally surround their employees with care through each of these components, employees are better enabled and motivated to reciprocate this care — both for themselves and the company. This system of care is stratified, such that support can be expressed between peers, engendered by managers, and guided by upper leadership within an organization — culminating in multiple levels of control and reinforcement and positive control over several well-being influencers.

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 14

Focus on supporting and improving factors under higher controlIt is worth highlighting a few key takeaways based on the literature discussed so far. First, there are many “low control” factors, such as preexisting medical conditions, as well as nuanced factors such as personality traits, or demographics (e.g., SES) that have a significant influence on physical and emotional well-being. It is important for employees and organizations alike to understand the complexity of these factors and their resistance to change. Overemphasizing or solely targeting these characteristics will make it very difficult to see improvements in things like physical and emotional well-being. On the other hand, factors such as mindsets, organizational support or culture are factors under greater control that can help to improve well-being across many domains. Organizations have the capacity to influence, encourage, and support many of these factors to help employees have improved well-being, not only at work, but in other areas of their life (e.g., financial literacy, encouraging movement). Additionally, factors that influence work well-being (such as mindsets) also have direct impacts on employees’ physical and emotional well-being. As such, organizations are encouraged to implement programs and initiatives to improve these factors so employees will have better well-being.

Implications

Figure 3. Organizational support.

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 15

Work as a powerful catalyst of widespread influenceGiven the overlaps in factors affecting the different well-being areas (e.g., physical, emotional, and work well-being), organizations have an opportunity to positively influence those areas through a focus on a powerful area that they also have the most control over — work well-being. Organizations may foster a caring culture by supporting employees’ whole person well-being, both inside and outside of work. For example, they can show support for work-life balance, encourage employees to engage in more physical activities, foster positive relationships and trust between peers — and even provide activities or workshops that help develop their financial literacy, emotion regulation skills, or boost their resilience, mindfulness, and optimism. As the literature indicates, these efforts would not only contribute to a greater sense of work well-being, but would also support physical, emotional, and financial well-being. Supporting this notion, a recent Limeade Institute study found that better work experience was indeed linked to overall employee well-being. We asked 4,553 full time employees from around the work to indicate to what extent they agreed with the statement “my experiences at work have a positive impact on my well-being”. Nearly 63% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that this was their experience (Limeade Institute, 2021). This finding provides preliminary evidence for the importance and powerful potential of work on whole-person well-being.

It is important to note that providing workshops, tools or services or creating well-being programs to focus on these higher control factors is only part of the equation to improve employee work well-being — truly showing care by authentically investing in, committing to, and supporting their employees at all levels of the organization will also help employees have higher job satisfaction, life satisfaction, well-being, and feelings of inclusion (Limeade Institute, 2020). This in turn will create a positive feedback loop of mutual commitment — employees will likely show more engagement at work, have greater sense of purpose and commitment to the organization, become more productive, and have less turnover intention — all of which help to generate better business results (Limeade Institute, 2018).

In short, organizations and employees alike have control over factors that influence all areas of whole-person well-being. We encourage organizations and employees to put more emphasis on improving these factors to improve all aspects of well-being. Additionally, we recommend that organizations and employees focus more efforts on factors impacting work specifically, since not only do organizations have a more direct influence over these factors and are better equipped to improve them in work settings, but by creating a supportive work environment, organizations can also help to positively shape all areas of well-being.

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 16

Grounded in our primary and secondary research studies, this paper suggests that organizations will benefit from providing care and support to help employees strengthen well-being influencers, specifically those that are under higher control. Additionally, since the factors influencing well-being have varying degrees of overlap, an improved employee experience rooted in care and support will likely have a trickle-down influence on other parts of an individual’s life, which will in turn create a positive feedback loop that promotes better work well-being. When organizations demonstrate care to employees and create a supportive environment in which individuals can thrive and have great employee experiences (with whole-person well-being at its core), it will in turn lead to better people and business results.

Conclusion

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 17

Abbott, L, S., & Elliott, L. T. (2016). Eliminating health disparities through action on the social determinants of health: A systematic review of home visiting in the United States, 2005-2015. Public Health Nursing, 34, 2-30.

American Psychological Association. (n.d.). Ethnic and Racial Minorities & Socioeconomic Status. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/pi/ses/resources/publications/minorities

Aikens, K.A., Astin, J., Pelletier, K.R., et al. (2014). Mindfulness goes to work: impact of an online workplace intervention. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 56, 721–31.

Alessandri, G., Consiglio, C., Luthans, F., & Borgogni, L. (2018). Testing a dynamic model of the impact of psychological capital on work engagement and job performance. Career Development International, 23, 33-47.

Anzola, D.M.M., & Guzmán, G.R. (2016). Socio-Economic Determinants of Financial Education. Evidence for Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru. Retrieved from https://www.cemla.org/PDF/webinars/2016-06-07-DianaMejia.pdf

Bahls, C. (2011, October 6). Health policy brief: Achieving equity in health. Health Affairs, 1-6. Retrieved from http://healthaffairs.org/healthpolicybriefs/brief_pdfs/healthpolicybrief_53.pdf

Bakker, A. B., Hetland, J., Olsen, O. K., & Espevik, R. (2019). Daily strengths use and employee well-being: The moderating role of personality. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 92(1), 144–168.

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (2017). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Interpersonal development, 57-89.

Bell, R., Taylor, S., & Marmot, M. (2010). Global health governance: Commission on social determinants of health and the imperative for change. Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics, 38(3), 470-485.

Benzeval, M., Bond, L., Campbell, M., Egan, M., Lorenc, T., Petticrew, M., & Popham, F. (2014). How does money influence health? https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/how-does-money-influence-health

Bouckenooghe, D., Zafar, A., & Raja, U. (2015). How Ethical Leadership Shapes Employees’ Job Performance: The Mediating Roles of Goal Congruence and Psychological Capital. Journal of Business Ethics, 129(2), 251–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2162-3

Braveman, P. A. (2014). What are health disparities and health equity? We need to be clear. Public Health Reports, 129(2), 5-8.

Braveman, P., & Gottlieb, L. (2014). The social determinants of health: It’s time to consider the causes of the causes. Public Health Reports, 129, 19-31.

REFERENCES

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 18

Bedyńska, S., & Żołnierczyk-Zreda, D. (2015). Stereotype threat as a determinant of burnout or work engagement. Mediating role of positive and negative emotions. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 21(1), 1-8.

Burton, A., Burgess, C., Dean, S., Koutsopoulou, G. Z., & Hugh-Jones, S. (2017). How Effective are Mindfulness-Based Interventions for Reducing Stress Among Healthcare Professionals? A Systematic Review and Meta- Analysis. Stress and health : journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress, 33(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2673

Cameron, S. A., Lozier, J. D., Strange, J. P., Koch, J. B., Cordes, N., Solter, L. F., & Griswold, T. L.. (2011). Patterns of widespread decline in North American bumble bees. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(2), 662–667. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1014743108

Carlson, L. E., Speca, M., Patel, K. D., & Goodey, E. (2003). Mindfulness-based stress reduction in relation to quality of life, mood, symptoms of stress, and immune parameters in breast and prostate cancer outpatients. Psychosomatic medicine, 65(4), 571–581. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.psy.0000074003.35911.41

Cheung, R. Y. M., Bhowmik, M. K., & Hue, M.-T. (2020). Why does acculturative stress elevate depressive symptoms? A longitudinal study with emotion regulation as a mediator. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 67(5), 645–652. https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000412

Ciarrochi, J., Atkins, P. W. B., Hayes, L. L., Sahdra, B. K., & Parker, P.. (2016). Contextual Positive Psychology: Policy Recommendations for Implementing Positive Psychology into Schools. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01561

Crain, T. L., Schonert-Reichl, K. A., & Roeser, R. W. (2017). Cultivating teacher mindfulness: Effects of a randomized controlled trial on work, home, and sleep outcomes. Journal of occupational health psychology, 22(2), 138–152. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000043

Creswell, J. D., & Lindsay, E. K. (2014). How does mindfulness training affect health? A mindfulness stress buffering account. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(6), 401–407

Dwivedi, K. N., & Harper, P. B. (2004). Promoting the Emotional Well Being of Children and Adolescents and Preventing Their Mental Ill Health : A Handbook. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Eisenberger, R., & Stinglhamber, F. (2011). Perceived organizational support: Fostering enthusiastic and productive employees. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12318-000

Eisenberger, R., Cummings, J., Armeli, S., & Lynch, P. (1997). Perceived organizational support, discretionary treatment, and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(5), 812–820. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.5.812

Espinosa, A., & Rudenstine, S. (2020). The contribution of financial well-being, social support, and trait emotional intelligence on psychological distress. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 59(2), 224-240.

Evans, R. G., & Stoddart, G. L.. (1990). Producing health, consuming health care. Social Science & Medicine, 31(12), 1347–1363. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(90)90074-3

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 19

Ettner, S. L. (1996). New evidence on the relationship between income and health. Journal of health economics, 15(1), 67-85.

Fidelity Investments (2020). Racial inequality in financial wellness. Retrieved from: https://sponsor.fidelity.com/bin-public/06_PSW_Website/documents/Charticle-Racial_inequalities_and_ FW.pdf

Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. The handbook of social psychology, 2(4), 357-411

Food Empowerment Project. (n.d.). Food deserts. Retrieved from: https://foodispower.org/access-health/food-deserts/

Fredrickson, B. L., & Joiner, T. (2002). Positive emotions trigger upward spirals toward emotional well-being. Psychological science, 13(2), 172–175. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00431

Gonzalez-Mulé, E., & Cockburn, B. S. (2021). This job is (literally) killing me: A moderated-mediated model linking work characteristics to mortality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(1), 140–151

Grable, J. E., & Joo, S. (2006). Student racial differences in credit card debt and financial behaviors and stress. College Student Journal, 40, 400–408

Guimont, C., Brisson, C., Dagenais, G. R., Milot, A., Vézina, M., Mâsse, B., … Blanchette, C. (2006). Effects of job strain on blood pressure: A prospective study of male and female white collar workers. American Journal of Public Health, 96, 1436-1443. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2004.057679

Gustafsson, H., & Skoog, T. (2012). The mediational role of perceived stress in the relation between optimism and burnout in competitive athletes. Anxiety, stress, and coping, 25(2), 183–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/10615806.2011.594045

Gutter, M., & Copur, Z. (2011). Financial behaviors and financial well-being of college students: Evidence from a national survey. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 32(4), 699–714.

Haar, J. M., Russo, M., Suñe, A., & Ollier-Malaterre, A.. (2014). Outcomes of work–life balance on job satisfaction, life satisfaction and mental health: A study across seven cultures. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 85(3), 361–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.08.010

Haga, S. M., Kraft, P., & Corby, E.-K. (2009). Emotion regulation: Antecedents and well-being outcomes of cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression in cross-cultural samples. Journal of Happiness Studies: An Interdisciplinary Forum on Subjective Well-Being, 10(3), 271–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-007-9080-3

Harms, P. D., Brady, L., Wood, D., & Silard, A. (2018). Resilience and well-being. In E. Diener, S. Oishi, & L. Tay (Eds.), Handbook of well-being. Salt Lake City, UT: DEF Publishers. https://www.nobascholar.com/chapters/4/download.pdf

Hira, T. K., & Loibl, C. (2008). Gender differences in investment behavior. In J. J. Xiao (Ed.), Handbook of consumer finance research (p. 253–270). Springer Science + Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75734-6_15

Ho, M. Y., Cheung, F. M., & Cheung, S. F. (2010). The role of meaning in life and optimism in promoting well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(5), 658–663. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.01.008

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 20

Hobfoll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J. P., & Westman, M. (2018). Conservation of resources in the organizational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 103-128.

Hunter, B.D., Neiger, B., & West, J. (2011). The importance of addressing social determinants of health at the local level: the case for social capital. Health and Social Care in the Community, 19(5), 522-530.

Iannello, P., Sorgente, A., Lanz, M., & Antonietti, A.. (2021). Financial Well-Being and Its Relationship with Subjective and Psychological Well-Being Among Emerging Adults: Testing the Moderating Effect of Individual Differences. Journal of Happiness Studies, 22(3), 1385–1411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-020-00277-x

Inceoglu, I., & Warr, P.. (2011). Personality and Job Engagement. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10(4), 177–181. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000045

Joo, S.-H., & Grable, J. E.. (2004). An Exploratory Framework of the Determinants of Financial Satisfaction. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 25(1), 25–50. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:jeei.0000016722.37994.9fr

Judge, T. A., Bono, J. E., & Locke, E. A. (2000). Personality and job satisfaction: The mediating role of job characteristics. Journal of applied psychology, 85(2), 237.

Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and job satisfaction: a meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 87(3), 530.

Keyes, C. L., Myers, J. M., & Kendler, K. S. (2010). The structure of the genetic and environmental influences on mental well-being. American journal of public health, 100(12), 2379–2384. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2010.193615

Kim, Y., & Cho, S.. (2020). Socioeconomic status, work-life conflict, and mental health. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 63(8), 703–712. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23118

Kivimäki, M., Batty, G. D., Pentti, J., Shipley, M. J., Sipilä, P. N., Nyberg, S. T., ... & Vahtera, J. (2020). Association between socioeconomic status and the development of mental and physical health conditions in adulthood: a multi-cohort study. The Lancet Public Health, 5(3), e140-e149.

Kobylińska, D., Zajenkowski, M., Lewczuk, K., Jankowski, K. S., & Marchlewska, M. (2020). The mediational role of emotion regulation in the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues.doi:10.1007/s12144-020- 00861-7

Kokko, K., Rantanen, J., & Pulkkinen, L. (2015). Associations between Mental Well-being and Personality from a Life Span Perspective. In M. Blatný (Ed.), Personality and Well-being Across the Life-Span (pp. 134-159). Palgrave Macmillan.

Kuhnen, C. M., & Miu, A. C. (2017). Socioeconomic status and learning from financial information. Journal of Financial Economics, 124(2), 349–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2017.03.002

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 21

Kuper, H., & Marmot, M. (2003). Job strain, job demands, decision latitude, and risk of coronary heart disease within the Whitehall II study. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 57, 147-153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech.57.2.147

Lefebvre Smith, E. J. (2021). Adverse childhood experiences and emotional well-being: Evaluating proactive coping as a protective moderator [ProQuest Information & Learning]. In Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering (Vol. 82, Issue 2–B).

Limeade Institute. (2018). Engagement POV.

Limeade Institute. (2020). Organizational Culture POV.

Limeade Institute. (2021). Experience Activators Research Study.

Living Wage for Families Campaign (n.d.). Living Wages are good for your health. Retrieved from: http://livingwagecanada.ca/files/2913/8443/7004/Health-Fact-Sheet1.pdf

Loibl, C., & Hira, T. K. (2007). New Insights into Advising Female Clients on Investment Decisions. Journal of Financial Planning, 20(3).

Lubans, D. R., Plotnikoff, R. C., & Lubans, N. J. (2012). A systematic review of the impact of physical activity programmes on social and emotional well-being in at-risk youth. Child and adolescent mental health, 17(1), 2-13.

Mäkikangas, A., & Kinnunen, U. (2003). Psychosocial work stressors and well-being: Self-esteem and optimism as moderators in a one-year longitudinal sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(3), 537–557. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00217-9

Malinowski, P., & Lim, H. J.. (2015). Mindfulness at Work: Positive Affect, Hope, and Optimism Mediate the Relationship Between Dispositional Mindfulness, Work Engagement, and Well-Being. Mindfulness, 6(6), 1250–1262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-015-0388-5

Malone, K., Stewart, S. D., Wilson, J., & Korsching, P. F. (2009). Perceptions of financial well-being among American women in diverse families. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 31, 63–81.

Mansyur, C., Amick, B. C., Harrist, R. B., & Franzini, L., (2008). Social capital, income inequity, and self-rated health in 45 countries. Social Science and Medicine, 66, 43-56.

McCloughen, A., Foster, K., Huws-Thomas, M., & Delgado, C. (2012). Physical health and wellbeing of emerging and young adults with mental illness: An integrative review of international literature. International journal of mental health nursing, 21(3), 274-288.

McCrae, R. R. (2002). The maturation of personality psychology: Adult personality development and psychological well-being. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(4), 307–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00011-9

Mossakowski, K. N. (2008). Is the duration of poverty and unemployment a risk factor for heavy drinking? Social Science & Medicine, 67, 947-955. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.05.019

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 22

O’Loughlin, R. E., Fryer, J. W., & Zuckerman, M. (2019). Mindfulness and stress appraisals mediate the effect of neuroticism on physical health. Personality and Individual Differences, 142, 122–131.

Panaccio, A., & Vandenberghe, C. (2009). Perceived organizational support, organizational commitment and psychological well-being: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75(2), 224-236.

Paradies, Y. (2006). A systematic review of empirical research on self-reported racism and health. International journal of epidemiology, 35(4), 888-901.

Pearce, N., & Davey Smith, G. (2003). Is social capital the key to inequalities in health? American Journal of Public Health, 93, 122-129.

Peterson, J. J., Lowe, J. B., Peterson, N. A., & Janz, K. F.. (2006). The relationship between active living and health- related quality of life: income as a moderator. Health Education Research, 21(1), 146–156. https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyh050

Peterson, J. J., Lowe, J. B., Peterson, N. A., & Janz, K. F. (2006). The relationship between active living and health- related quality of life: income as a moderator. Health Education Research, 21(1), 146-156.

Porter, N. M., & Garman, E. T. (1993). Testing conceptual model of financial well-being. Financial Counseling and Planning, 4, 135–164.

Prazak, M., Critelli, J., Martin, L., Miranda, V., Purdum, M., & Powers, C. (2012). Mindfulness and its role in physical and psychological health. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 4(1), 91–105

Rasmussen, H. N., Scheier, M. F., & Greenhouse, J. B.. (2009). Optimism and Physical Health: A Meta-analytic Review. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 37(3), 239–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-009-9111-x

Ready, R. E., Åkerstedt, A. M., & Mroczek, D. K. (2012). Emotional complexity and emotional well-being in older adults: Risks of high neuroticism. Aging & Mental Health, 16(1), 17–26

Reeves, R., Rodrigue, E., & Kneebone, E. (2016). Five evils: Multidimensional poverty and race in America. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/ReevesKneeboneRodrigue_ MultidimensionalPoverty_FullPaper.pdf

Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 698–714. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.698

Robertson, J., & Barling, J. (2014). Lead well, be well: Leadership behaviors influence employee wellbeing. In P. Y. Chen & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Wellbeing: A complete reference guide. Work and wellbeing (p. 235–251). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118539415.wbwell028

Robertson, I. T., & Flint Taylor, J. (2008). Leadership, Psychological Well-Being, and Organizational Outcomes. The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Well Being. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199211913.003.0008

Robertson, J., & Barling, J. (2014). Lead well, be well: Leadership behaviors influence employee wellbeing. Wellbeing: A Complete Reference Guide, 1-17. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781118539415.wbwell028

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 23

Robertson, I. T., Cooper, C. L., Sarkar, M., & Curran, T. (2015). Resilience training in the workplace from 2003 to 2014: A systematic review. Journal of occupational and organizational psychology, 88(3), 533-562.

Rodgers, W. M. (2008, September 19). Understanding the Black and White earnings gap: Why do African Americans continue to earn less despite dramatic gains in education? Retrieved from http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=understanding_the_black_white_earnings_gap

Salter, N. P., Sawyer, K., & Gebhardt, S. T. (2020). How Does Intersectionality Impact Work Attitudes? The Effect of layered Group Member-ships in a Field Sample. Journal of Business and Psychology, 1-18.

San Francisco Department of Public Health (2003). San Francisco Department of Public Health annual report 2002-2003. Retrieved from https://www.sfdph.org/dph/files/reports/PolicyProcOfc/2002-03AnnlRpt/2002-03AnnlRptChapt03.pdf

Silva, M., Loureiro, A., & Cardoso, G. (2016). Social determinants of mental health: a review of the evidence. The European Journal of Psychiatry, 30(4), 259-292.

Smith, T. B., & Sylva, L. (2011). Ethnic identity and personal well-being of people of color: A meta-analysis. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 58, 42-6.

Spence, G., Oades, L. G., & Caputi, P.. (2004). Trait emotional intelligence and goal self-integration: important predictors of emotional well-being?. Personality and Individual Differences, 37(3), 449–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2003.09.001

Steele, L., Dewa, C., & Lee, K. (2007). Socioeconomic status and self-reported barriers to mental health service use. Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, 52(3), 201–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370705200312

Steptoe, A., & Zaninotto, P.. (2020). Lower socioeconomic status and the acceleration of aging: An outcome- wide analysis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(26), 14911–14917. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1915741117

Stock, W.A., Okun, M.A., Haring, M.J., & Witter R.A. (1985). Race and subjective well-being in adulthood: A black- white research synthesis. Human Development, 28, 192-197.

Tugade, M. M., Fredrickson, B. L., & Barrett, L. F. (2004). Psychological resilience and positive emotional granularity: Examining the benefits of positive emotions on coping and health. Journal of Personality, 72(6), 1161–1190. https://doi-org.ezproxy.lib.usf.edu/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00294.x

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Secretary’s Advisory Committee on National Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Objectives for 2020. Phase I report: Recommendations for the framework and format of Healthy People 2020. Retrieved from: https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/about/foundation-health-measures/Disparities#6

Van Tongeren, D. R., Hill, P. C., Krause, N., Ironson, G. H., & Pargament, K. I.. (2017). The Mediating Role of Meaning in the Association between Stress and Health. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 51(5), 775–781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-017-9899-8

Well-Being Influencers: Literature Review 24

Vilardaga, R., Luoma, J. B., Hayes, S. C., Pistorello, J., Levin, M. E., Hildebrandt, M. J., Kohlenberg, B., Roget, N. A., & Bond, F. (2011). Burnout among the addiction counseling workforce: the differential roles of mindfulness and values-based processes and work-site factors. Journal of substance abuse treatment, 40(4), 323–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2010.11.015

Warrick, D. D. (2017). What leaders need to know about organizational culture. Business Horizons, 60, 395-404.

Weinstein, N., Brown, K. W., & Ryan, R. M.. (2009). A multi-method examination of the effects of mindfulness on stress attribution, coping, and emotional well-being. Journal of Research in Personality, 43(3), 374–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2008.12.008

Wenzel, M., von Versen, C., Hirschmüller, S., & Kubiak, T. (2015). Curb your neuroticism—Mindfulness mediates the link between neuroticism and subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 80, 68–75

Wright, K. D., Pepper, G. A., Caserta, M., Wong, B., Brunker, C. P., Morris, D. L., Burant, C. J., Hazelett, S., Kropp, D., & Allen, K. R. (2015). Factors that influence physical function and emotional well-being among Medicare- Medicaid enrollees. Geriatric nursing (New York, N.Y.), 36(2 Suppl), S16–S20.

Zimmerman, F. J., & Bell, J. F. (2006). Income inequality and physical and mental health: testing associations consistent with proposed causal pathways. Journal of epidemiology and community health, 60(6), 513–521. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.2005.040154

Limeade is an employee experience software company on a mission to transform work into a source of positivity, energy, humanity and purpose. Founded in 2006, Limeade is a pioneer in the HR technology industry and is consistently recognized for its own award-winning culture. Today, Limeade solutions are used in approximately 100 countries around the globe. We help every employee know their company cares — and deliver people and business results that matter.

Limeade partners with its customers to transform the overall employee experience by helping to improve employee well-being, engagement and sense of inclusion — in addition to reducing the risk of unwanted turnover and burnout.

To learn more, visit www.limeade.com. (ASX listing: LME)