Team Sport in the Workplace? A RE-AIM Process Evaluation of ‘Changing the Game’

Background The workplace is a priority setting to promote health. Team sports can be an effective way to promote both physical and social health. This study evaluated the potential enablers and barriers for outcomes of a workplace team sports intervention programme ‘Changing the Game’ (CTG). This study was conducted in a FTSE 100 services organisation. This process evaluation was conducted using the RE-AIM framework. Methods A mixed methods approach was used. Data were collected from the participants in the intervention group prior to, during and at the end of the intervention using interviews (n = 12), a focus group (n = 5), and questionnaires (n = 17). Organisational documentation was collected, and a research diary was recorded by the lead author. The evidence collected was triangulated to examine the reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation and maintenance of the programme. Data was assessed through template analysis, and questionnaire data were analysed using multiple regression and a series of univariate ANOVAs. Results CTG improved VO2 Max, interpersonal communication, and physical activity behaviour (efficacy) over 12-weeks. This may be attributed to the supportive approach adopted within the design and delivery of the programme (implementation). Individual and organisational factors challenged the adoption and maintenance of the intervention. The recruitment and communication strategy limited the number of employees the programme could reach. Conclusion The process evaluation suggests addressing the culture within workplaces may better support the reach, adoption and maintenance of workplace team sport programmes. Future research should consider investigating and applying these findings across a range of industries and sectors.


Introduction
Globally, physical activity guidelines are failing to be met [1]. Inactivity predicts non-communicable illnesses and premature mortality [2]. An inactive workplace has a greater prevalence of absenteeism and presenteeism, occupational fatigue, reduced productivity and work-engagement [3,4]. Per-annum $67.5 billion is estimated to be spent on the global direct (i.e., health-care) and indirect (i.e., productivity) cost of inactivity [3].
Due the time employees spend in an organisational setting and the stability of this environment, the workplace presents an ideal setting to promote health through participation in modes of physical activity [4]. Employers are thought to promote participation in physical activity due to social responsibility, improved productivity, reduced sickness absence and a duty of care [4]. However, little is known about how individual modes of physical activity such as sport are adopted by organisations [4,5]. A robust process evaluation understands the factors contributing to uptake, acceptability, feasibility and efficacy of a given mode of workplace physical activity [6].
Workplace team sport is becoming a popular means to promote employee and organisational health [5]. However, evidence investigating workplace team sport is limited by a lack of validated instruments and poor descriptions of team sport [5]. Further, the evidence evaluating workplace team sport is yet to conduct process evaluations in accordance with the guidelines of the Medical Research Council [6]. Omitting information on uptake, adherence and feasibility limits the case for employers considering offering team sport to their employees.
Whilst interventions studies are useful in exerting changes in outcomes measures, they do not provide clarity in how changes in outcomes may have occurred or how outcomes may have been influenced by individual and organisational factors [6,7]. Moreover, without a robust process evaluation, little is known as to whether the intervention is acceptable or feasible, or indeed translatable to a real-world setting [6,7].
One method to evaluate workplace team sport is through the RE-AIM framework [7]. The RE-AIM framework translates evidence into real-world applications, through investigating efficacy, feasibility and acceptability of an intervention [7]. This framework explores the individual, organisational, environmental factors and policies which influence the reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation and maintenance of an intervention study [7]. Reach can be considered the total number of individuals available to take part in a study; and the proportion of, and characteristics of individuals willing to participate [7]. Efficacy is the impact of the study on key outcomes (e.g., health, psychological wellbeing) [7]. In the case of the current study, the efficacy has been previously examined in Brinkley et al. [8]. This non-randomised design tested the effectiveness of providing a programme of multiple team sports within a workplace setting. Adoption refers to the number of individuals who engage in the intervention study either initially and/or across its duration [7]. The implementation of a study seeks to understand if the intervention was conducted in accordance with the planned protocol, and the reasons why this may or may not have been the case [7]. Finally, the maintenance of an intervention study can be considered as the degree to which the intervention has been adopted beyond the end of the study period or the potential to be adopted, within the routine, structure or practices of an organisation [7]. A robust RE-AIM evaluation seeks to comprehensively explore the causality and mechanisms underpinning each outcome [7]. The RE-AIM framework is widely adopted within workplace health promotion [7]. Therefore, a RE-AIM process evaluation was conducted alongside the intervention study. The purpose of the intervention study reported in Brinkley et al. [8], was to explore the efficacy of workplace team sport over time. In contrast, the purpose of this process-evaluation was to explore the acceptability and feasibility of participation, and the perceived efficacy of the programme. This was conducted using a range of quantitative and qualitative methods, as per the recommendations of the MRC [6]. Evaluating health promotion programmes through the triangulation of a range of data sources is considered a robust form of investigation [6,7]. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the acceptability, impact and feasibility of the CTG programme using the RE-AIM framework [7].

Study context and 'Changing the Game' overview
A non-randomized study (quasi-experimental design) was conducted to investigate a needs-supportive workplace team sport intervention designed to promote improvements in individual, social group and organisational health outcomes. The intervention, named "Changing the Game" (CTG), was a 12-week team sport programme available to employees of a UK based FTSE 100 services organisation. A detailed overview of its design and findings over T 0 -T 1 (12-weeks) are available in Brinkley et al. [8]. The intervention study tested the effectiveness of participation in workplace team sport on markers of individual health (e.g., VO 2 Max, wellbeing), PA behaviour, work team outcomes (e.g., cohesion, communication) and workplace outcomes (e.g., productivity, sickness, occupational fatigue). The organisation"s workforce consisted of 5080 employees. Two regional worksites were selected to take part in the study of which one served as the intervention group and the other worksite acted as the control group (normal working conditions arms Handball (weeks 6 & 12). The research team selected sports which use transferable skills, and are adaptable. CTG was conducted in an indoor sports hall located 400 metres from the participating organisation. The sessions were led by two female workplace champions.
The intervention components of CTG were underpinned by Self-Determination Theory [9,10], which suggests supporting individual"s innate needs for autonomy (i.e., feeling free and fully volitional to engage in team sport), competence (i.e., feeling capable to complete a skill in team sport) and relatedness (i.e., feeling supported, understood and valued by a social group) promotes wellbeing and autonomous motivation [9,10]. Supporting basic needs can be achieved through creating an autonomy (needs) supportive environment (e.g., encouraging and offering a choice to individuals to decide or adapt the rules of the sport, impart the benefits of team sport, and not impose perceptions and experiences upon them) [9,10]. Supported basic needs are known to improve wellbeing and autonomous motivation [9,10]; and autonomous motivation is associated with maintained participation over time [9,10]. Workplace champions implemented the autonomy supportive environment. Autonomy was promoted when champions reinforced the benefits of participation, offered a choice, and provided ownership and control to participants [9,10]. Competence was supported by providing sports which were novel, adaptable and used transferable skills [9,10].
Relatedness was supported through peer led sessions, the support of colleagues and membership and belonging to a workplace social group. The primary outcome of the intervention was VO 2 Max, and additional measures of individual, social-group and organisational health were taken at T 0 (baseline) and at T 1 (12-weeks) [8]. A brief overview of the programmes outcome measures is presented within the findings under the heading "efficacy", whilst a detailed overview is available in Brinkley et al. [8].

Participants
A small number of participants involved in the main study took part in the process evaluation.
Prior to the implementation of CTG, five participants took part in a focus group. Following the end of the intervention, ten participants from the intervention group took part in semi-structured interviews and five participants from the control group took part in a focus group. The two workplace champions who delivered the intervention were also interviewed at the end of the intervention. Finally, 17 participants from the intervention group completed a short process evaluation questionnaire Employees from a broad range of office based roles, positions of superiority and departments within the organisation were represented [8] An overview of participation in the process evaluation, and the RE-AIM dimension addressed is provided in Table 1. Characteristics of the overall sample is presented in Table 2.   0.064 Significant interactions indicated with * P < 0.05, ** P < 0.01, *** P < 0.001.

2.3.
Qualitative data collection (reach, efficacy, implementation, maintenance) Prior to implementing CTG, a focus group was conducted with five employees (n = 2 females) who were considering participating in CTG consented to participate. Current physical activity experiences, expectations and challenges in taking part in workplace physical activity and team sports were discussed (e.g., 'what physical activity do you currently participate in?', 'how do you feel about participating in workplace team sport?'). During the intervention, the lead author, who attended all the CTG team sports sessions as an observer, kept a paper-based diary to record contextual information relating to the efficacy (e.g., did participants communicate; was there cohesion in the group?) and implementation (e.g., was the programme being implemented as planned by workplace champions; did participants report any barriers) of the programme.
Throughout the duration of the intervention, 31 diary entries were recorded. Entries were recorded following the completion of each intervention session, and reflections were recorded between intervention sessions. Following the completion of CTG, semi-structured interviews were conducted with ten participants (n = 2 females) from the intervention group and the two workplace champions who delivered the intervention. Reach (e.g., 'how did you find out about CTG?'), efficacy (e.g., 'how did participation in CTG benefit you?'), adoption (e.g., 'what prevented you from attending the programme?'), implementation (e.g., "did you like the sports you played and how they were delivered?") and maintenance (e.g., 'are you still participating in team sport now the programme has finished?') of CTG were discussed. In order to explore the organisational factors influencing the reach, adoption, implementation and maintenance of CTG across the workforce, a focus group, with five participants (n = 4 females) from the control group, was conducted following the completion of the intervention (e.g., 'what might stop you attending a team sport programme in your workplace?').
Data collection was conducted by the first author 1 . Interview and focus group schedules are available from the corresponding author.

Process Evaluation Questionnaire (reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation, maintenance)
A process evaluation questionnaire was designed to explore the reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation and maintenance of the intervention, and examine the impact of the intervention and its components of the theoretical underpinnings of CTG. Seven open-ended items explored the intervention participants" experiences (efficacy) and perceptions of the CTG intervention programme (e.g., 'what motivated or enabled you to take part in the programme?') (implementation). Two validated questionnaires were used to examine the impact of CTG on the three psychological aspects 1 The first author AB is white British male aged 27 with experiences managing within a retail organisation. AB presented himself as a researcher willing to learn from the experiences of participants. AB is a competitive sportsman outside of academia (cycling). AB had no conflict of interest or investment in the participating organisation.
outlined by the Self-Determination Theory (implementation). These are the innate needs for (a) autonomy, (b) competence and (c) relatedness that may influence team sport participation and adherence. A modified version of the Sport Climate Questionnaire short-form [11]

Documentation (reach, adoption, implementation, maintenance)
Reach was determined by the number of employees employed at the intervention and control worksite who expressed an interest in participating in the study during the recruitment phase of CTG.
Adoption of the intervention programme was assessed by an attendance register recorded at each intervention session. Publicly available, annual reports (2013-2016) and governance documents from the participating organisation were collected to clarify the information provided by participants.

Data analysis
2.6.1. Quantitative data Data were assessed with IBM SPSS Statistics version 23, and P < 0.05 was considered statistical significant. Missing data were treated with within-person mean substitutions of the missing value. Self-reported measures were standardized to a 0-100 score (0 is considered unfavourable).
Descriptive statistics were computed for all variables. Week by week sports session attendance was examined using a series of one-way ANOVAs. Standard linear multiple regressions examined if participation in an autonomy supportive team sport programme predicted changes in participants" basic needs and subjective wellbeing. Bivariate Pearson correlations were conducted on autonomy support and basic needs scores to examine if an autonomy supportive team sport programmes predicts autonomy, competence and relatedness. The assumptions associated with multiple regression were met for autonomy support and basic needs variables (no influencing multivariate outliers or leverage points, data met the assumptions for normality, homoscedasticity, linearity, multicollinearity). The data representing wellbeing did not have independence of observations and was removed from multivariate analysis.

Qualitative data
Interviews and focus groups were transcribed verbatim. A template analysis [14], collectively incorporating data collected interviews, focus groups, questionnaire and diary data were undertaken using QSR International NVivo version 11. Template analysis is a form of thematic analysis which uses priori-themes to guide analysis towards a given research question, whilst allowing new themes to be identified and incorporated into the analysis [14]. Previous research has demonstrated template analysis to be a trustworthy and reflexive tool [14,15]. Priori themes (e.g., reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation, maintenance, facilitators and obstacles to attendance, supporting basic needs and autonomy support) were based on previous research [5,15,16]. Familiarisation in the data created a series of codes. Codes were attached to priori themes where appropriate. Failure to attach a code, led to a new theme being developed. Once completed, a template was produced (available on request from first author). The template grouped data into first-(e.g., adoption), second-(e.g., obstacles to attendance) and third-level themes (interpersonal obstacles to participation). The template was revised, until it reflected the complete data set. All members of the research team gave their consensus on the data by reviewing the identified themes.

Ethical Approval
Ethical approval for this study was granted by Loughborough University"s Human Participants Sub-Committee in April 2016 (see R16-P069). The study"s outcome data has been published [8]. All participants provided written informed consent.

RE-AIM dimensional rating
RE-AIM dimensions (reach, efficacy, adoption, implementation, maintenance) were evaluated through triangulating the quantitative and qualitative data collected. Each dimension was rated on its applicability (i.e., the extent to which the collected data could accurately assess the dimension) and outcome (i.e., positive or negative outcome based on the data collected) (1 = limited success, 2 = moderate success, 3 = highly successful) [16]. A dimensional rating was determined by adding the applicability and outcome scores and then dividing by two. A schematic overview of the findings is provided in Figure 1.

Reach (limited success)
The study was advertised to the workforce through emails, social media notifications (i.e., Yammer, internal intranet system), presentations to staff groups, and posters in locations with a high footfall (e.g., meeting spaces, social areas, cafes, toilets, lifts) for one month prior to the study commencing (May-June 2016). CTG reached 448 participants of the estimated 1500 employees working at the intervention and control worksites (29.86%). However, it appeared the programme had not been effectively communicated by the organisation or management teams to either the intervention or control worksites prior to the programme commencing:

Efficacy (highly successful)
Intention-to-treat analysis using mixed-ANOVAs found CTG to significantly improve VO 2 Max (P < 0.002), interpersonal communication within teams (P < 0.05) and mean weekly physical activity duration (P < 0.002) when compared to the control group [8]. Other individual, social-group and organisational health outcomes showed non-significant improvements in the intervention group.
The full results of the study can be found in Brinkley et al [8].

Individual health
Employees described their participation in workplace team sports as positively influencing their perceptions of their own competence in physical activity and in their self-efficacy (confidence) in taking part in in physical activity outside the programme: Adoption refers to the number of participants willing to participate in an intervention over time, and the reason behind their engagement or disengagement from the programme [7]. Twenty-seven out of 28 participants attended at least one CTG session (no participants attended all CTG sessions).
Excluding the one participant who did not attend any intervention sessions, the average attendance across the 27 participants was 48.13%. The adjusted attendance rate for frequent nonattendance (<25% of intervention sessions) (n = 23 participants) was 56.42%.
At least 75% of participants (21 of 28 participants) completed all T 1 outcome measures across the study duration. A series of one-way ANOVAs (see Figure 2) examined week-by-week attendance. No significant differences in attendance rates were observed between weeks 1-9 and weeks 11-12 (P > 0.05). A significant difference between participants was observed at week 10 (P < 0.037, η 2 = 0.276). Post-hoc tests revealed significantly less participants attended week 10 (soccer) compared to all other weeks (P < 0.037). Soccer was the least successful sport in weeks 4 and ten (34% attendance). Basketball in week 3 and handball in week 10 were the most successful sports with 67% attendance.

Implementation (highly successful)
3.7.1. Theoretical underpinnings CTG was underpinned by Self-Determination Theory, which proposes that meeting basic needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness fosters optimal functioning, well-being and autonomous motivation [9,10]. Thwarting these basic needs are known to lead to poor wellbeing and controlled forms of motivation [9,10]

Competence
Data from the process evaluation questionnaire found that CTG participants rated highly on basic needs for sports competence following participation in the programme (74.74  12.15). The intervention programme was designed to support needs for competence by offering participants sports that could be adapted to their own rules, and which required skills and traditions which were transferable between the sports such as catching in cricket and rounders, and similar spatial awareness skills for soccer and handball [9,10]

Maintenance (moderately successful)
Thirteen participants (44.5%) continued with the leisure-time and workplace physical activity they were participating in prior to CTG. Fourteen participants participated in additional physical activity in their workplace or with their colleagues since completing the CTG intervention programme. More specifically, since completing CTG two participants had begun active commuting (7.4%), and during the working week, two participants attended the gym at lunch (7.4%), six participants had taken up indoor football during lunch (22.2%), one participant had taken up squash during lunch (3.7%) and three participants has started running during lunch (11.1%).
However, many participants identified challenges in maintaining participation in team sport for the long-term. These included communication, funding and leadership within the organisation.
Health and wellbeing messages and programmes appear to have a low reach due to the style and level of communication adopted by the organisation. Participants described the importance of changing the culture within the workplace. Despite pressure from the employer to implement novel forms of workplace health promotion, a culture driven by health and safety and a work-and high work demands challenged the maintenance of CTG:

Discussion
This study reports the findings from our process evaluation of CTG [8], a team sport intervention programme designed for the workplace. Strength of our process evaluation is the use of triangulation, whereby data from several sources were evaluated together. We evaluated CTG through the RE-AIM framework. The reach of CTG had limited success. The adoption and maintenance were moderately successful at an individual level due to targeting and supporting autonomous forms of motivation in the intervention group. However, success at an organisational level was limited due to the work demands, and the culture of the organisation. CTG was highly successful in terms of its efficacy and implementation. The intervention programme offered novel and adaptable sports with transferable skills across the different sports through the leadership of workplace champions who provided a social environment that supported autonomy. This social component of the intervention was therefore effective in supporting participation in CTG.
CTG reached a modest percentage (29.86%) of the intervention and control worksites.
Previously, the reach of workplace team sport studies has been poorly reported [5]. However, one intervention study reported a reach of 19.25%, albeit from 1000 employees [17]. In both cases, it is interesting that the reach of team sport is less than other forms of group physical activity such as activity challenges (32.24%) [18].
Reach was conservatively calculated from the two worksites (intervention and control) only.
Whereas the 5080 employees represents the UK workforce and employees working remotely (to whom the programme was not communicated to), if implemented across the entire workforce, the actual reach of the programme may have been higher than what was reported here.
In the case of CTG, the reach of the programme may have been influenced by the communication strategy and management teams within the organisation. The 2016 annual report from the participating organisation consistently echoes the importance of participation in physical activity in the workplace 2 . However, the recruitment communication for CTG was reported as being ineffective by the participants in the process evaluation. One explanation offered by participants was a lack of support by middle management and team leaders. Whilst not reported as directly unsupportive, it appeared managers may have chosen to not raise their colleagues" awareness of the programme or to offer their direct approval for participation. Evidence shows that managers and superiors are influential stakeholders in encouraging participation and adherence to research studies and health promotion programmes [15,19,20]. In the case of CTG, participants drew negative social comparisons with the behaviour of their superiors. It is plausible these comparisons may have thwarted participant"s needs for relatedness (e.g., to feel social supported) and therefore reduced participants" motivation for participation in CTG [21].
An alternative postulation to a low reach may be the perceived and actual demands placed upon employees within the workplace. Consistent with other FTSE 100 service organisations, employees in the current study were subjected to long working hours, in a culture where working non-stop is encouraged [20]. Job demands have also been found to also challenge a workplace walking programme [20]. If the reach of health promotion programmes (e.g., team sport), within workplace settings are to match their apparent efficacy, these challenges must be better addressed. For example, by creating a workplace culture that supports and encourages health promotion participation through work practises that promote flexible working [4,15,20].
The adoption of CTG can be considered moderately successful. Evidence shows workplace physical activity programmes typically have a low level of adoption over the short term [21,22].
CTG was successful at engaging 75% of participants from T 0 to T 1 . This figure is consistent with previous workplace team sport interventions at 12-weeks (75%) and at 40-weeks (58.5%) [23,24].
Soccer was found to be the least successful sport in terms of attendance (34% in weeks 4 and 10), whilst basketball in week 3 and handball in week 12 proved to be the most popular with 67% attendance respectively. A low attendance rate for soccer may be explained by a lack of expertise in this sport. Sports such as soccer are known to challenge perceptions of competence, and likewise reduce participation [25]. However, given the limited number of sports investigated so far within the research, it may be unwise to conclude on the success and failure of certain sports within a workplace setting [5,15]. Future workplace team sports intervention studies should to continue to explore the acceptability and feasibility, and tailor a range team sports into a workplace setting.
Modest attendance rates observed in CTG may be explained by several interpersonal, organisational and environmental factors [15]. The data reported within the current study indicates CTG participants were challenged by pressure to work during structured breaks despite the support of the organisation. Further, the culture within the workplace presents challenges whereby nonparticipants were willing to work through breaks and therefore implicitly pressure the attendance of their participating colleagues.
A further challenge faced by participants was the support of their organisation and more specifically, of their employer. Whilst messages of support are conveyed within annual reports and communications within the workplace, these appear not be consistent with employee attitudes to health promotion within the workplace. Past research exploring employers has drawn similar conclusions [26]. For example, despite acknowledging the importance of an active workforce, employers have been found to be resistant, uncertain and cynical to providing the support for workplace physical activity promotion [26]. In the case of CTG, downsizing within the organisation may have placed further stress on the workforce, and influenced the creation of cultures which support working non-stop.
Evidence indicates CTG is a programme with a high level of efficacy due to its successful implementation which was underpinned by Self-Determination Theory [9,10], whereby needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness were supported. The research investigating workplace team sport has broadly been of low-quality [5]. The findings of the current evaluation provide a stronger case for employers considering promoting team sport. The current study indicates participation in workplace team sport may have a positive influence upon individual, social group and organisational health. This data is consistent with what has been reported previously [5,15]. Though several benefits were highlighted which have not been identified by research, these include positive changes in behaviour and productivity [5].
At the end of the intervention, perceptions of needs the provision of autonomy support were rated as high (i.e., over the mid-point). Confirming the theoretical underpinnings of the programme, participants" perceptions of an autonomy supportive intervention predicted the satisfaction of basic needs. The findings of the current study also provide support for the recommendations of research, which suggests adult sports programmes should be underpinned and led by leaders (e.g., champions) supportive of basic needs [27].
Consistent with previous evidence examining an autonomy-supportive environment upon adults" sports participation and basic needs, autonomy support positively predicted autonomy (volition) [28,29]. Qualitative data suggests intervention components such as promoting enjoyment and personal development in sport supports needs for autonomy. Evidence has linked these factors to intrinsic regulation (autonomous motivation), and controlled forms of motivation such as identified regulation [9,10]. Given workplace champions adopted an autonomy supportive leadership style (e.g., offering choice and ownership) when delivering sports to their colleagues, it is theoretical logical participation in an intervention offering healthy motivation and functioning during sport would foster perceptions of autonomous participation [9,10].
Our regression analyses found that autonomy support did not predict perceptions of competence [30]. However, our qualitative data suggests that key intervention components such as a taster session, adapting sport rules, providing novel sport, and promoting "success" as personal development, rather than outright competition between peers foster needs for competence. Sports which are adaptable and use transferable skills should be considered within future programmes.
Given the low statistical power achieved within our regression analysis, future studies should consider larger samples sizes when examining the impact of an autonomy supportive team sport programme on basic needs.
CTG was designed to support relatedness through the delivery of sessions by workplace champions, and employees participated with their colleagues and superiors. Following the completion of the intervention, autonomy support did not predict perceptions of relatedness. Our qualitative data however, provides support for this intervention component, in that participants sought relatedness (e.g., social support, empathy, cohesion, group identity) from their colleagues, superiors and employer to support participation. Promoting an autonomy supportive team sport with colleagues and through workplace champions may form a pragmatic method to support relatedness for future research.
If the benefits of workplace team sport are to be sustained, the maintenance of programmes must be improved. Despite participants adhering to physical activity (i.e., sport, active transport, exercise) post-programme, the maintenance of CTG can be considered moderately successful. In the case of CTG, several cultural challenges to long-term participation such as communication, funding and leadership of sport were identified. Workplace culture is known to influence participation in physical activity [15,31]. A culture supportive of physical activity is understanding of flexible working and provides the necessary emotional, informational and tangible support for participation [15,32]. In contrast, a culture not supportive of workplace physical activity promotes non-stop working and provides little "actual" support for participation. In the case of CTG, a culture was identified which while offering messages of support through organisational outlets (i.e., message boards, reports, company communication), provided little support for employees participating in the programme or wishing to continue participation post-programme. These obstacles to participation are consistent with previous research [15].
If workplace team sports programmes such as CTG are to become a successful form of health promotion, a culture shift is required within workplaces. Evidence has indicated multicomponent interventions whereby theories of behaviour change are incorporated alongside organisational changes such as workplace culture may be more successful than behaviour change alone [31].
Although, CTG did adopt a participatory approach to account for the likeness of organisational challenges such as an unsupportive workplace culture, more could be done to affect these challenges occurring prior to the intervention commencing.

Conclusion
Through a mixed methods RE-AIM framework, the current study evaluated CTG, a team sport programme implemented within a FTSE 100 organisation. CTG was highly successful in terms of efficacy and implementation, the reach, adoption and maintenance could be improved. Changing the culture within organisations prior to interventions may better assist the reach, adoption and maintenance of future programmes.

Conflict of Interest
All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.