CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 69Corporate Social Responsibility ReportingWorkplace Health and Well-beingOccupational Health and Safety in Workplaces

The Stock Performance of C. Everett Koop Award Winners Compared With the Standard & Poor's 500 Index

Open access
Goetzel, Ron Z., Fabius, Raymond, Fabius, Dan, Roemer, Enid C., Thornton, Nicole, Kelly, Rebecca K., Pelletier, Kenneth R.·2016·Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine
DOI 10.1097/jom.0000000000000632PMC PMC4697959
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To explore the link between companies investing in the health and well-being programs of their employees and stock market performance. METHODS: Stock performance of C. Everett Koop National Health Award winners (n = 26) was measured over time and compared with the average performance of companies comprising the Standard and Poor's (S&P) 500 Index. RESULTS: The Koop Award portfolio outperformed the S&P 500 Index. In the 14-year period tracked (2000-2014), Koop Award winners' stock values appreciated by 325% compared with the market average appreciation of 105%. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports prior and ongoing research demonstrating a higher market valuation--an affirmation of business success by Wall Street investors--of socially responsible companies that invest in the health and well-being of their workers when compared with other publicly traded firms.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/jom.0000000000000632

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Organizations that support the needs of all employees, regardless of disability status, may fare better.

    “Instead, organizations that support the needs of all employees, regardless of disability status, may fare better (Goetzel et al., 2016; Travis, 2008; see also Schur et al., 2014).”

    From The Participation of People with Disabilities in the Workplace Across the Employment Cycle: Employer Concerns and Research Evidence (2020) · cites this paper as Goetzel et al., 2016

    The Job Satisfaction as a Component of Corporate Social Responsibility section (page unavailable) says investment in workers, including health promotion programs, may improve financial performance. The paper does not address whether supporting employees regardless of disability status has that benefit. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. [2]Goetzel RZ Henke RM Tabrizi M Do workplace health promotion (wellness) programs work? J Occup Environ Med 2014; 56: 927– 934. 25153303
  2. [3]Fabius R Thayer RD Konicki DL The link between workforce health and safety and the health of the bottom line: tracking market performance of companies that Nurture a ‘culture of health’. J Occup Environ Med 2013; 55: 993– 1000. 24013656
  3. [6]Isaac F Leaders of a new frontier. Am J Health Promot 2001; 15: 365– 367. 11502022
  4. [7]Blair SN Piserchia PV Wilbur CS Crowder JH A public health intervention model for work-site health promotion: impact on exercise and physical fitness in a health promotion plan after 24 months. JAMA 1986; 255: 921– 926. 3944998
  5. [8]Blair SN Smith M Collingwood TR Reynolds R Prentice MC Sterling CL Health promotion for educators: impact on absenteeism. Prev Med (Baltim) 1986; 15: 166– 175. 3714669
  6. [9]Breslow L Fielding J Herrman AA Wilbur CS Worksite health promotion: its evolution and the Johnson & Johnson experience. Prev Med (Baltim) 1990; 19: 13– 21. 2320555
  7. [10]Holzbach RL Piserchia PV McFadden DW Hartwell TD Herrman AA Fielding JE Effect of a comprehensive health promotion program on employee attitudes. J Occup Environ Med 1990; 32: 973– 978. 2262827
  8. [11]Jones RC Bly JL Richardson JE A study of work site health promotion program and absenteeism. J Occup Environ Med 1990; 32: 95– 99. 2303925
  9. [12]Shipley RH Orleans CT Wilbur CS Piserchia PV McFadden DW Effect of the Johnson & Johnson Live for Life program on employee smoking. Prev Med (Baltim) 1988; 17: 25– 34. 3362800
  10. [14]Henke RM Goetzel RZ McHugh J Isaac F Recent experience in health promotion at Johnson & Johnson: lower health spending, strong return on investment. Health Aff (Millwood) 2011; 30: 490– 499. 21383368
  11. [18]Fan D Lo CKY A tough pill to swallow? J Fash Mark Manag 2012; 16: 128– 140.
  12. [19]Nelling E Webb E Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: the ‘virtuous circle’ revisited. Rev Quant Financ Account 2009; 32: 197– 209.
  13. [20]Gregory A Whittaker J Exploring the valuation of corporate social responsibility—a comparison of research methods. J Bus Ethics 2013; 116: 1– 20.
  14. [21]Gregory A Tharyan R Whittaker J Corporate social responsibility and firm value: disaggregating the effects on cash flow, risk and growth. J Bus Ethics 2013; 124: 633– 657.
  15. [22]Kim Y Li H Li S Corporate social responsibility and stock price crash risk. J Bank Financ 2014; 43: 1– 13.
  16. [23]Schnietz KE Epstein MJ Exploring the financial value of a reputation for corporate social responsibility during a crisis. Corp Reput Rev 2005; 7: 327– 345.
  17. [24]Edmans A The link between job satisfaction and firm value. Acad Manag Perspect 2012; 26: 1– 19.
  18. [25]Faragher EB Cass M Cooper CL The relationship between job satisfaction and health: a meta-analysis. Occup Environ Med 2005; 62: 105– 112. 15657192 PMC1740950
  19. [26]Bowling NA Eschleman KJ Wang Q A meta-analytic examination of the relationship between job satisfaction and subjective well-being. J Occup Organ Psychol 2010; 83: 915– 934.
  20. [28]Huselid MA The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Acad Manag J 1995; 38: 635– 672.
  21. [29]Konrad AM Mangel R The impact of work-life programs on firm productivity. Strateg Manag J 2000; 21: 1225– 1237.
  22. [30]Mitchell TR Holtom BC Lee TW Why people stay: using job embeddedness to predict voluntary turnover. Acad Manag J 2001; 44: 1102– 1121.
  23. [31]Organ DW A reappraisal and reinterpretation of the satisfaction-causes-performance hypothesis. Acad Manag Rev 1977; 2: 46– 53.
  24. [33]Fama EF Efficient capital markets: a review of theory and empirical work. J Financ 1970; 25: 383– 417.
  25. [34]Moskowitz M Choosing socially responsible stocks. Bus Soc Rev 1972; 1: 71– 75.
  26. [36]Cheng B Ioannou I Serafeim G Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Strateg Manag J 2014; 35: 1– 23.
  27. [37]Soler RE Leeks KD Razi S A systematic review of selected interventions for worksite health promotion: the assessment of health risks with feedback. Am J Prev Med 2010; 38: S237– S262. 20117610
  28. [38]Chapman L Meta-evaluation of worksite health promotion economic return studies: 2012 update. Am J Health Promot 2012; 26: TAH1-12. 22375583
  29. [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: 111– 130. 17293753
  30. [40]Baicker K Cutler D Song Z Workplace wellness programs can generate savings. Health Aff 2010; 29: 304– 311. 20075081

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goetzel, R. Z., Fabius, R., Fabius, D., Roemer, E. C., Thornton, N., Kelly, R. K., & Pelletier, K. R.
Affiliations
University of Arizona (US)
Corresponding author
Goetzel, Ron Z.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Occupational & Environmental Medicine
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Published
2016-01
Volume
58
Issue
1
Pages
9-15
ISSN
1076-2752 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1097/jom.0000000000000632
PMC
PMC4697959
OpenAlex
W2389167693
Cited by
69
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1
FWCI
19.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Safety in Workplaces
Keywords
corporate social responsibility, socially responsible companies, S&P 500, market valuation
MeSH terms
Awards and Prizes, Economic Competition, Health Promotion, Humans, Industry, Investments, Social Responsibility, Organizational Culture, Occupational Health

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review