Understanding Walking Meetings: Drivers and Barriers

Full text

Understanding Walking Meetings: Drivers and Barriers
Ida Damen1, Carine Lallemand1,2, Rens Brankaert1,3, Aarnout Brombacher1,
Pieter van Wesemael4, Steven Vos1,3
1Department of Industrial Design, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
2 Human-Computer Interaction research group, University of Luxembourg, Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg
3Fontys University of Applied sciences, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
4Department of the built environment, Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
1,4{a.a.j.m.damen, c.e.lallemand, r.g.a.brankaert, a.c.brombacher, p.j.v.v.wesemael, s.vos}@tue.nl
ABSTRACT
There is increased interest in reducing sedentary behavior of
office workers to combat the negative health effects of
prolonged sitting. Walking meetings offer a promising
solution to this problem as they facilitate a physically active
way of working. To inform future development of
technologies supporting these type of meetings, in-depth
qualitative insights into people’s experiences of walking
meetings are needed. We conducted semi-structured walking
interviews (N=16) to identify key drivers and barriers for
walking meetings in a living lab setting by using the
‘WorkWalk’. The ‘WorkWalk’ is a 1.8 km walking route
indicated by a dotted blue line with outdoor meeting points,
integrated into the room booking system. Our findings
provide insights into how walking meetings are experienced
and affect the set-up and social dynamics of meetings. We
offer design recommendations for the development of future
technologies and service design elements to support walking
meetings and active ways of working.
Author Keywords
Walking meetings; Physical activity; Sedentary behavior;
Office workers; Field study; Design research
CSS Concepts
• Human-centered computing~Field studies • Human-
centered computing~HCI theory, concepts and models
• Human-centered computing~Interaction design theory,
concepts and paradigms
INTRODUCTION
Working while walking has a rich history, especially in
philosophy. Well-known examples of philosophers with a
habit of walking were Aristotle, Friedrich Nietzsche, and
Emanuel Kant. Aristotle's nickname was ‘peripatêtikos’,
derived from the Greek ‘Peripatein’ or ‘walking’, which also
translates as ‘engage in dialogue while walking’ [30]. To
Nietzsche, walking was how he worked best. When writing
‘The Wanderer and His Shadow’, he walked for up to eight
hours a day while taking notes for his book [30]. Kant, on the
other hand, walked to escape, as “a distraction from work”.
He described walking as a way to recover from sitting in the
same place [30].
As illustrated by early philosophers, walking can be
beneficial for a number of reasons. Through walking
physical inactivity can be decreased, which has been proven
to reduce the risks of diabetes, cardiovascular diseases
[26,46] and all-cause mortality [57]. Furthermore, it can
improve mental well-being [5,39], general well-being [12]
and reduce fatigue and musculoskeletal discomfort [63].
Nowadays, up to 71% of working hours are spent sitting [19]
and our increasingly sedentary lives have become a major
public health risk [11]. Lee et al. (2012) even talk about a
pandemic of physical inactivity, which is now considered the
fourth leading cause of death worldwide [40]. The office
environment is one of the places where sedentary behavior
predominates [19], and research is needed to investigate how
to increase physical activity within this setting [18,47].
While most interventions at the workplace are designed to
reduce sedentary behavior by encouraging people to take
more breaks and interrupt work [24], a strategic perspective
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or
classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed
for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation
on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM
must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish,
to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a
fee. Request permissions from Permissions@acm.org.
CHI '20, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
© 2020 Copyright is held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to
ACM. ACM 978-1-4503-6708-0/20/04…$15.00
https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376141
Figure 1. Understanding walking meetings through the use of
the WorkWalk (photo by Bart van Overbeeke)
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 1

on this challenge is to combat physical inactivity by offering
office employees alternative ways of working and integrate
activity in office work practice. One way to integrate
physical activity and work are walking meetings. Although
walking meetings were common in ancient Greece, they
have lost their popularity in current office work practice.
Despite the known positive effects of walking [i.e. 12], we
have little knowledge on how we can support walking
meetings through design and technology. Bringing walking
meetings into the 21st century by designing supportive tools
and interventions is promising for healthy, creative, and
dynamic meetings. However, a profound understanding of
how and why people conduct walking meetings is needed to
leverage their full potential.
In this study, a service design called WorkWalk by [24] was
used in a living lab setting at a university campus (Figure 1).
The WorkWalk consists of a physical route that is 1.8 km
long, has meeting point signs at all faculty buildings, and is
integrated in the university’s room booking system [24]
(Figure 2). The WorkWalk was used as a design research
artefact to study walking meetings and reflect on them during
walking interviews with the participants.
By deploying the WorkWalk in the field for 14 months, this
research aims to answer the following research question:
“What are the barriers and drivers to have walking meetings
when using the WorkWalk?”. This paper presents the
qualitative findings of sixteen semi-structured walking
interviews with individuals who have used the system in the
past 14 months. We contribute new knowledge by
identifying 1) users’ practices and experiences when
conducting walking meetings, 2) how walking affects the
set-up and social dynamics of a meeting, and 3) users’ drivers
and barriers for walking meetings. From these findings we
derive design considerations for future explorations toward
the development of supportive tools and interventions for
walking meetings and active ways of working in the office
environment. By providing a deeper understanding of
walking meetings, this study sets the stage for future design-
research explorations.
RELATED WORK
The Benefits of Walking
Walking is beneficial for physical and mental health [12]. It
can lower blood pressure [48], reduce weight [14] and reduce
the risk of coronary heart disease [4,7,67]. In addition,
walking can reduce stress and anxiety [13,61] and prevent
depressive symptoms [21,48]. In therapy settings, walking is
used to facilitate psychological processing and promote a
collaborative way of working [43,54].
How walking affects our wellbeing is also dependent on our
physical environment [27]. A well-known example is how an
environment with natural elements can foster positive
feelings [27]. Natural environments facilitate restorative
experiences, such as recovering from fatigue [37]. In
addition, perceived safety of places were people walk makes
people feel more active [27].
Walking can also have a beneficial effect on work
performance by supporting attentional processes [22],
increasing perceived creativity [45], happiness and overall
mood [66]. A recent study shows that that the foot's impact
on the ground during walking modulates brain blood flow,
which may optimize brain perfusion, function and overall
sense of wellbeing [29].
An expert statement to reduce and prevent the negative
effects of prolonged sitting in predominantly desk-based
occupations was formulated by Buckley et al. [11]. These
recommendations read as follows: “Workers should aim to
initially progress toward accumulating 2 hours per day of
standing and light activity, such as light walking during
working hours, eventually progressing to a total
accumulation of 4 hours per day” [11]. Walking is
considered the preferred option in this respect [48].
Design and Interventions in Office Settings
Walking as a way to increase occupational health is studied
from a range of perspectives, including incentive conditions
for walking programs [34], the implementation, feasibility,
and acceptability of walking meetings protocols [20,62] and
the effects of walking on divergent and convergent thinking
[31]. However, very little research has been done on how
technology can mediate the practice of walking meetings.
This despite the growing interest in interventions and tools
Figure 2. The three elements of the WorkWalk installation. The room booking system, the meeting point sign, the dotted line along
the path (photos by Bart van Overbeeke)
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 2

for health promotion at work, illustrated by the growing
number of reviews on the effectiveness of workplace
interventions [16,58] and types of technology [33,60] used
to reduce sedentary behavior. Interventions to reduce
sedentary behavior include activity trackers [8], sit/standing
desks [50], persuasive designs and applications [25,38,59],
light designs [10,52,53] and prompting software
[6,35,41,44]. Social acceptance of these type of
interventions, however, remains a challenge [62].
A common denominator in interventions that aim to reduce
sedentary behavior or increase physical activity is how
physical activity is approached. Often physical activity is
seen as a break from work, and rarely considered as an active
way of working [23]. Approaching physical activity as a
break from work might influence the social acceptance of
these interventions.
Dynamic workstations present a promising exception to this
view by increasing physical activity without compromising
work performance [50,64]. Probst et al. [51] pioneered a new
concept of working “in-motion” by proposing an ‘Active
Office Workplace’ to support changes in work postures for
different tasks. They also proposed a Human Computer
Interaction (HCI) based design to promote activity in the
office environment through an interactive chair [49]. Similar
approaches can be found by Tobiasson et al. [64] in their
work on physical movement probes for in the office and the
work by Choi et al. on active workstations [17].
There is a relatively small body of literature on supportive
tools and interventions for walking meetings. Merely four
papers on walking meetings can be found in the Association
for Computing Machinery (ACM) library [1,2,3,24]. Three
studies investigated the use of mobile technology to mediate
walking meetings [1,2,3]. In these papers, the ‘Walking
metro’ mobile application and ‘Brainwolk’ mobile
application were introduced. A fourth paper by Damen et al.
[24] presents the WorkWalk, a service design for walking
meetings that is used in this study.
The applications by Ahtinen et al. [1,3] provide a tool to
introduce and increase the social acceptance of walking
meetings at work. Brainwolk features a map of the university
campus, suggestions for walking routes on the map,
checkpoints with short visual break exercises and
motivational thoughts about walking and a reward system
[2]. This concept was based on the initial concept ‘Walking
metro’, which was improved and renamed as ‘Brainwolk’. In
their first field study, Ahtinen et al. [2] presented 10 design
implications for mobile technology that can be used to
mediate walking meetings. These implications are presented
in three categories: designing for acceptability, non-
interrupting guidance, and discreet persuasion and
stimulation. One example of such a design implication is
“Enable the walking meeting to become an accepted way of
work”, for instance by designing an ‘official’ tool to support
acceptance [2].
Field Studies and Walking Ethnography
Although walking as a means to do research is not usual in
the field of HCI, it is more frequently found in other
disciplines. Walking methodologies can be used to bring a
more nuanced understandings of an environment, for
instance to inform policy [28]. In landscape research,
walking is used to actively engage, create and interpret
spaces collaboratively by participants and researchers
[37,65,68]. In the field of design, participatory design walks
can offer a way to stimulate memory, ideas and engaging
participation [36].
In the social sciences, Ross et al. [55] propose that mobile
research methods can be “utilized to understand everyday
experiences through embodied, multi-sensory research
experiences”. These experiences foreground movement and
focus attention on research relationships [56]. In his essay
“Walking in the city”, De Certeau [15] emphasizes the
immediacy and nowness of walking. Critical considerations
on walking methodologies are provided by Macpherson [42],
who discusses the rhythm and style of the walk, the walk
route terrain and distance, and the fitness and embodied
dispositions of the walker.
The WorkWalk Intervention
This study makes use of the WorkWalk service design, based
on prior work by Damen et al. [24]. The WorkWalk consists
of three elements (Figure 2): (a) A set walking route with a
visible physical 1.8 km dotted blue line, (b) outdoor meeting
point signs at the entrance of all faculty buildings and (c) the
WorkWalk is listed as a meeting location in the room
booking system. Reserving a WorkWalk is done in the same
way as booking a regular meeting room either by adding a
location to a calendar event or directly booking a room in the
booking system, with a self-selected duration. The duration
of a walking meeting following the WorkWalk line is
approximately 25 minutes. The WorkWalk was introduced
to the university employees in a newsletter to all university
secretaries in May 2018 when the WorkWalk was installed,
with a request to forward the message to their teams.
The WorkWalk acts as a research artefact, in the sense that it
allowed us to do research-through-design (RtD) and
investigate the dynamics of walking meetings in context as
well as the intervention itself. By deploying research
artefacts in the field, design researchers engage wicked
problems and address gaps in theory and models.
Zimmerman et al. [70] emphasize the benefits of a RtD
approach by stressing that “in evaluating the performance
and effect of the artefact situated in the world, design
researchers can both discover unanticipated effects and
provide a template for bridging the general aspects of the
theory to a specific problem space, context of use, and set of
target users’ (p. 497)”. The RtD approach in a living lab
setting enables a more naturalistic and explorative evaluation
over an extended period of time, thereby increasing the
ecological validity of the study [9].
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 3

METHODOLOGY
Participants
Sixteen participants (9 male, 7 female) took part in this study.
The mean age of our sample was 39 years (SD = 11, Min =
23, Max = 58). Prior to the study and since the deployment
of the service, people who booked the WorkWalk were
informed that they were participating in a living lab study
and could be invited via email for an interview about their
experiences with the WorkWalk. Participants were thus
sampled via the room booking data, followed by a snowball
sampling strategy (i.e. participants naming colleagues who
they knew have been doing walking meetings). Inclusion of
participants was until saturation of the data and study
participation was voluntary without incentive. People who
were not familiar with the WorkWalk or not able to conduct
a walking meeting were excluded from the study.
The participant sample for this study consists of five
professors (P1, P4, P7, P12, P13), five PhD candidates (P2,
P3, P5, P8, P14), four managers and non-scientific staff
members (P6, P9, P15, P16), one student (P11) and one civil
servant (P10). Their experiences with walking meetings
varied from one walking meeting only (n=2) to multiple
walking meetings a day (Table 1). Participant 10 appears to
be an outlier with considerable experience, which was
mostly gained at her own workplace outside of the university
campus, without the use of the WorkWalk.
Procedure
To study walking meetings 16 semi-structured interviews
[32] were conducted while walking and gain insights into the
drivers and barriers of walking meetings and experiences
with the WorkWalk. An interview guide was used, covering
the following topics; 1) usage of the WorkWalk, 2)
experiences with walking meetings, 3) characteristics of
these meetings, 4) perceived benefits and disadvantages of
walking meetings and 5) future possibilities to improve
walking meetings. A walking ethnography approach was
chosen to assess long-term cumulative experiences and
stimulate reflection and reminiscence of past walking
meetings. To maximize unbiased use of the WorkWalk, all
interviews were held post-hoc in the Summer of ’19 without
prior inclusion of the participants. All interviews were held
by the first author, trained in interviewing techniques.
Table 1. Frequency of walking meetings of participants and weather details per month
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 4

At the start of the walking interview, participants were told
that they could follow the WorkWalk path but were free to
deviate from it and follow a customized path of their choice.
This was done to accommodate the duration of the interview,
which exceeded the duration of the WorkWalk route. his
allowed us to gain insights into the places on the campus that
were perceived as interesting or meaningful by the
participants during walking meetings. During the interviews,
participants were asked about their deviations from the route
and how these deviations related to their walking meetings
experiences. This approach is similar to the ‘guided’ walks
described by Ross et al. [56] which trigger “a rich way of
socializing, and a closeness created through shared bodily
engagement with the environment” (p. 609). To that end, all
but three (due to technical errors) routes were collected using
a RouteTracker application. The interviews were audiotaped
and lasted between 30 and 80 min (mean duration = 48 min,
SD = 14.5).
Data Analysis
All interviews were transcribed verbatim, then coded and
analyzed with MaxQDA Analytics Pro 2018 by thematic
analysis using an inductive approach. The first and third
author independently coded an interview and made a coding
scheme, after which consensus was sought among the
researchers to derive a final coding scheme. Quotes used in
this paper were translated into English if necessary.
Participants’ routes during the interview were compared to
the WorkWalk line to see whether people deviated from the
route and to identify points of interests.
RESULTS
Drivers and Barriers
The qualitative insights of the 16 interviews revealed several
drivers and barriers to conduct walking meetings. Table 2
presents an overview of these insights with a brief
explanation. In the subsequent paragraphs the results from
the thematic analysis are provided.
WorkWalk use
The experiences of the WorkWalk as a service design varied
greatly amongst the participants. The following section
covers the use of the three elements of the WorkWalk,
namely the line, the meeting point signs, and the booking
system. Furthermore, the frequency and monthly use of the
WorkWalk is discussed.
Planning and Booking - The majority of the walking
meetings by the participants were not planned. Most of the
time, people decided on the spot to go for a walking meeting
and therefore did not book the WorkWalk via the room
booking system. Several participants questioned the need to
book a WorkWalk. In one case, one participant [P7]
expressed that the scarcity of meeting rooms at the university
played a role in not going on a walking meeting, since there
would not be a back-up room available on the spot. She
argues, “you cannot really spontaneously say I’m doing a
WorkWalk, and if not, I will book a meeting room” [P7]. She
does, however, mention that this is not a problem with two
people, since “you can always find a corner or place to sit.”
Drivers
Barriers
Different
social
dynamics
Walking meetings felt more informal and less hierarchical.
Participants felt they had better, more natural conversations,
and that it was easier to talk about difficult topics. It also felt
less confrontational and more collaborative.
Hierarchy
Participants felt reluctant to ask a person who has job seniority
to go for a WorkWalk and felt they should initiate the walking
meeting.
Positive
characteristics
Walking meetings felt more relaxed, physically as well as
mentally. Participants expressed to experience less stress.
Acquaintance
/ Assuming
intent
Not knowing the other person(s) or if the other person(s)
would be up for a walking meeting would hinder participants
to go for a walking meeting.
Visibility of
the WorkWalk
The visibility of the WorkWalk is perceived as a means to 1)
create awareness, 2) as a motivator to see in one’s agenda, 3)
normalise walking meetings and 4) provide guidance.
Group size
Participants felt meetings with more than 3 persons were
inconvenient to do a walking meeting.
Time
management
The environmental landmarks were used for time
management during walking meetings. It provided a shared
sense of time.
Time
management
Walking meetings were perceived as more time consuming
compared to ‘normal’ meetings. It also requiring a more
relaxed mindset.
Being outside
Being outside made participants associate more freely, less
distracted and more engaged in conversation.
Being outside
Participants felt more distracted outside as compared to
‘normal’ meetings.
Physically
active
Walking meetings felt more dynamic as well as more
energetic. It helped to get into action and initiate tasks.
No daily
routine
Walking meetings were not part of a daily routine and were
not on top of mind when going into a meeting.
Time Tracking
The WorkWalk route was used as way to keep track of time
Route
limitations
The WorkWalk route felt too fixed and static to accommodate
different types of meetings and different meeting durations.
Recall
The landmarks were perceived as a means to recall memories
and made it easier to remember the meeting.
Note taking &
presenting
Walking meetings did not accommodate note taking or
presenting and were therefore did the right fit for meetings that
require these activities.
Weather
Participants felt more inclined to go for a walking meeting
when the weather was nice (dry, not too cold or too hot)
Weather
Bad weather (rainy & cold) and not knowing what the weather
was like withhold participants to go for a walking meeting.
Table 2. Drivers and Barriers expressed by the participants (NB: these themes represent common arguments made by the
participants, not by all participants)
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 5

Some participants did book a WorkWalk to inform their
colleagues that the meeting would take place outside and
therefore serve as a reminder to bring a coat. Two
participants [P10, P15] expressed being motivated by the
presence of walking meetings in their agendas, and therefore
liked to book or color code walking meetings. According to
one participant [P6], the WorkWalk helped to ‘normalize’
walking meetings by making it part of the booking system
Frequency - The frequency with which the participants
conducted walking meetings varied greatly, ranging from
one in total to approximately three per day. Table 1 shows
the meeting frequencies, based on the booking data as well
as self-reported data of walking meetings that were not
booked by the participants. Two participants expressed peak
moments in which they went for walking meetings, one
participant due to recovery from hernia surgery [P13], and
another because of planned walking meetings scheduled by
a superior [P3]. Additionally, a common reason for a higher
frequency of walking meetings was the seasonal weather,
resulting in a peak usage in early summer (Table 1). For
some participants their walking meeting experiences were
less than a month prior to the walking interview, although for
others this had been a year ago [P1, P2, P16] (Table 1).
Almost all participants expressed a wish for more walking
meetings compared to their current standard.
Group Size - Walking meetings were considered most
practical with one or two colleagues, and one-on-one
meetings were most common. Groups over three were
considered impractical, since people would split into groups
of two or three. Three participants [P10, P13, P14] talked
about their positive experiences with walking meetings in
larger groups. These were generally part of a larger meeting,
in which the group was subdivided during the walk and
rejoined afterwards to round up the meeting.
Meeting Point - Most participants did not meet at the meeting
point sign. They either started at a meeting room, at the
coffee corner or picked up one another at their workplaces.
They would often walk to the meeting point sign together to
start or continue the walking meeting. As one participant
explained, “I think I would wait in our building, either
upstairs or downstairs, but close to the coffee” [P7].
Although the meeting point signs were not often used to meet
up, they did serve a function. According to the participants,
they created awareness and served as “promotional signage”
[P14]. In combination with the route, the meeting point signs
gave more substance to the WorkWalk, for instance by
providing information on the duration of the route.
Route and Physical Line - The way people made use of the
WorkWalk route varied considerably. Some participants
preferred to follow the route and not deviate, when others did
not follow the predefined line. The participants who deviated
least from the WorkWalk route during the interview [P2, P6,
P7, P8, P11], were often the ones with lesser walking
meeting experience. Participants who deviated most [P3, P9,
Figure 3. WorkWalk route and tracked routes of P4 & P7
P13] either had more experience with walking meetings or
expressed to know the campus environment well. Overall,
the participants expressed that the deviations during the
interview represented their walking meeting experiences.
Most deviations from the WorkWalk route were redirected
to more green areas on the campus [P4, P9, P11, P12, P13,
P14, P16]. As one of the experienced participants explained,
“I improvise, depending on the duration of the meeting. [..]
there are some very nice laps around the campus. If we have
more time, I even go to the lake” [P4]. In figure 3 we
illustrate the route of [P4], of which the northern areas
consist of more green areas of the campus. By contrast, the
route from [P7] exemplifies a route more closely to the
original WorkWalk route (Figure 3).
The fading visibility of the route was a problem for some
participants, who started following the blue dots but
eventually lost sight of them and continued on a different
path (Figure 4). One participant explained that he had to stop
a couple of times during the meeting to check where they had
to go next, breaking “the flow of the meeting” [P2]. For
another participant, “It leaves more space for the meeting if
you can avoid this environmental distraction” [P7]. The line
kept people in the “flow” of a meeting by eliminating the
need to discuss direction.
Figure 4. Scenes from the walking interviews, left: fading dots,
right: ending the walk at the meeting point sign
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 6

Similar to the booking system, another common view among
the participants was that the physical line of the WorkWalk
enhanced the social acceptance of walking meetings.
“People can see you are actually having a meeting” [P8].
Feeling that it is legitimate to go for a walking meeting was
considered a crucial factor in the adoption of this practice by
most participants. In some cases, this legitimation was
projected on other users of the WorkWalk, not necessarily
the participants themselves. Similar to the meeting point
signs, the line also served as a reminder or call to action, “If
the problem is that people have intentions but no actions,
making it visible is already a good reminder. So, anyone
could walk without the dots, but the dots make it visible, and
easier to transform your intention into action” [P7].
Intentions
The participants had different intentions to go for a walking
meeting. This next section will elaborate on the perceived
drivers and barriers to initiate walking meetings. We will
focus on why and when participant would initiate a
WorkWalk and when they would not.
Intention to action - Although many participants had positive
views on walking meetings, they expressed that it was
difficult to transform their intention into action. One of the
main reasons was that walking meetings were not part of
their daily routine. There was no automaticity in booking or
planning a WorkWalk for most participants. They would
book or go to a meeting room out of routine without
considering a walking meeting.
Assuming intentions - Another common threshold was not
knowing if the other person or persons would be up for a
walking meeting. Although most participants expressed
enjoyment when people would ask them to go for a walking
meeting, they were hesitant to ask it themselves. “I was
always very happy because it is something that I enjoy. It is
something that I either don’t think about, I’m a bit lazy
because I first planned it in a normal meeting room. Or my
schedule is super busy. But when people suggested a walking
meeting, I’m super happy” [P7].
Being active and outside - A key driver for most of the
participants to go for a walking meeting is being physically
active and being outside. As one participant expressed “I just
don't like being in the office all day. That of course is also an
advantage of a WorkWalk, that you can go outside to stretch
your legs, and at the same time do something useful and
work” [P10]. One participant [P3] said he would not likely
plan walking meetings in the future. He said he did not feel
the need for physical activity since he is active enough
throughout the week. Another participant [P9] however said
that although “Quality of thinking is very important at a
university,'' he still believes the reason to go for a walking
meeting is because “it is nice to go for a walk, rather than
improving the meeting quality.”
Social Dynamics of Walking Meetings
Walking meetings have different characteristics as compared
to regular meetings. In the following section, we will discuss
the meeting types, the perceived formality and the
experienced dynamics of walking meetings.
Meeting Type - Walking meetings were most often used for
status updates, brainstorming and ideation sessions, getting
people on the same page, or to reflect on work processes.
They were also used for more emotional or difficult
conversations, for instance to tell a student her work was not
up to standard. The most experienced walker expressed the
view that there are “as many different walking meetings as
there are people” [P10]. She explained she had to watch out
that people did not think of it as “just a little bit of pointless
brainstorming”. She noticed that walking meetings “help to
get into action” and “initiate tasks” because you are active
and experience less stress.
Level of Formality - Participants experienced a different kind
of social interaction during walking meetings. Walking
meetings “break a level of formality” and have different
expectations compared to a meeting in a regular meeting
room. To the participants they felt more informal and less
hierarchical. For some, note taking was an essential factor to
determine the level of formality of the meeting. If more notes
were needed the meetings were considered more formal and
would therefore not be suited for a walking meeting.
The most experienced walker referred to indoor meetings as
“just harder” [P10]. To her “thinking and talking freely is
more difficult in a room where you are close together.”
Another participant [P2] had a similar experience during his
walking meeting. As he explained, the meeting “became
much more open” compared to a regular meeting where he
would “always try to maintain a certain structure”, using a
laptop and a preset agenda. Similarly, another participant
[P13] explained how a walking meeting pushed his student
to take a helicopter perspective on her project and explain her
project in her own words without getting lost in detail.
A shared view was that the person who has job seniority
should initiate the walking meeting. Often, participants
would be hesitant to invite their superior to a walking
meeting. The reasoning behind this was mostly based on not
knowing if their superior would be up for it and the feeling
that proposing a walking meeting would ask more time or
effort from their superiors. As one participant explained:
“With those who you know are extremely busy, you don’t
want to deviate from their normal style of meetings” [P11].
Meeting Characteristics - Walking meetings are also
perceived as less confrontational. This was explained by the
position people have relative to each other, resulting in less
eye contact. Because “you are walking somewhere together”
[P11] and “you are not constantly facing each other” [P15]
it feels more collaborative, according to one of the
participants [P2]. Another common view was that walking
meetings felt more relaxed, physically as well as mentally.
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 7

“During a walking meeting you have less conscious thoughts
about your own posture and appearance” [P11]. To some
people it even felt more intimate, resulting in a more
selective approach to who to invite for a walking meeting.
As one participant explains “I would not like to walk with
people I don’t like, because I associate this format with
informal but also very friendly encounters, intimate to some
extent. In that sense, this is not necessarily a sense of
intimacy that I want to share with people I don’t like” [P7].
On a related topic, most participants stated that they would
not go for a walking meeting the first time they meet
someone. An exception to this view was given by the
experienced walker, who invites people she does not know
to walking meetings. Because there is less eye contact,
people also found it easier to talk about difficult topics.
Several participants expressed the view that a different
environment can result in better, more natural conversations.
In a regular meeting, people “play a role and behave the way
they feel they are supposed to behave” [P12].
Meeting Dynamics - Although there is less eye contact, there
are more gestures during a walking meeting. For some this
resulted in experiencing walking meetings as more dynamic
as well as more energetic. One participant explained that
sitting down after a walking meeting “feels like an
interruption of the flow […]. Suddenly you sit down, my body
is still quite in the flow. It almost means that you need buffer
time before sitting down and have eye contact, a non-
dynamic way of being” [P7]. Some participants also felt they
were more creative while walking as compared to sitting in
a meeting room. Some participants felt more distracted
during a walking meeting as compared to a regular meeting.
In contrast, others were less distracted and more engaged in
conversation. In addition, some felt more receptive to the
surroundings and associated more freely outside. Walking
meetings are perceived differently in terms of time and space
as compared to regular meetings. The environmental changes
that result from walking provide cues for time management
and recall. In this section, we discuss the use of landmarks
and the different perceptions on the efficiency of walking
meetings.
Perceived efficiency - The time related aspect of walking
meetings was a recurring theme. On the one hand, they were
often perceived as more time consuming compared to regular
meetings. Workload was therefore often considered a barrier
to undertake walking meetings. People experienced that
being in a more relaxed state of mind resulted in more
walking meetings. Some participants also perceived walking
meetings to have a slower pace as compared to regular
meetings and therefore require a more relaxed mindset.
On the other hand, a couple of participants perceived walking
meetings as potentially more efficient. A practical example
was given by one interviewee, explaining how he used
approaching the building from which they departed as a
visual marker to conclude the meeting. “When people begin
to realize that when they are back, the issue must also be
settled, which is also a non-verbal way of making a clear
close. I don't like it if I have to actively send someone away.
You have to show it in one way or another that the meeting
is over. But it is nice if you don’t have to point to your watch
at the time” [P13]. One participant [P10] explained how she
uses the environment to manage time during a meeting. “For
example the bridge, when I’m there I know how much longer
the meeting will last. Furthermore, if you do the same round
more often with people, they have the same experience. This
leads to ‘a collective sense of time’ which is possible when
you have reference points. When you approach the office,
people tend to slow down with you and only step over the
threshold once you have finished the meeting” [P10].
Guideline for time management - The dotted line of the
WorkWalk conveyed a sense of time for some of the
participants. Following the dots was perceived as an easy
way to keep track of time, since “otherwise you are only
concerned with how long you have left and how you should
walk” [P16]. Another participant explained, “If you go off
the route, you no longer have a sense of time. A sense of time
is important in a meeting, and as soon as you stop following
the dots, you lose track of time” [P8]. One exception to this
view was expressed by [P10], as she expressed it to be
“unnatural to have one set path and set time”. She adapts
the routes at her workplace [not the university] to fit the type
of meeting, ranging from a 6-9 minutes indoor walk to a
relatively long route through the forest. Some university
employees [P4, P5, P12] expressed similar strategies for
altering the route to adjust the meeting time, for instance by
looping back across parts of the routes. Another strategy was
to start the first half of a meeting with the WorkWalk route
and spend the second part sitting down in a meeting room.
Environmental cues - People expressed linking discussed
topics to the specific places of the WorkWalk route, making
it easier to recall memories of those meetings: “What I
sometimes have is when I think back to the meeting, I
associate that with certain places we've been. When we were
there we talked about that and when we were there, we talked
about that” [P2]. He felt that it was easier to remember the
content of that single walking meeting experience even
though it had taken place months prior to the interview. He
however wondered whether this would also hold true if he
were to participate in more walking meetings. Another
participant raised the question of how people would ideally
want to remember their work time, “I mean who wants to
remember worktimes by sitting in meeting rooms?!” [P10].
Future Concepts to Improve the WorkWalk
When asking the participants how they would like to see the
WorkWalk evolve, several suggestions were made. The
following section highlights the main topics to improve
walking meeting practice. In addition, some suggestions for
assistive technologies are provided. Ideas on how to adapt to
changing weather conditions were expressed frequently, for
instance by creating indoor routes or a system that
automatically books a meeting room in case of rain. The need
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 8

for note taking or presenting was also commonly
emphasized. “I wish there was a tool for data gathering,
something that has voice recognition, or context
recognition” [P10]. According to one participant, it would
have been interesting if Google Glasses had worked better,
“if I had a way to refer to text and include gestures to
improve expressions” [P5].
Some participants thought of how the outdoor infrastructure
could be beneficial for walking meetings. As one participant
explained, you could “use the campus as a canvas. [...] Like
if I have to talk about a specific topic, let’s go to a place that
represents that” [P5]. Another participant would like to see
how you could set a specific meeting time and let the route
be set out for you according to that set time [P2]. In addition,
several people [P1, P2, P12, P14] expressed that the
WorkWalk could be part of a regular meeting and encourage
people to be more open to shifting from one setting to
another. It would also help to create awareness of the
possibility to have a WorkWalk route indoors. Several
participants [P4, P6, P7, P8, P13] noted that the vertical
distance, number of floors up in the building, to the front
door was a greater threshold to going for a walking meeting
as compared to horizontal distance. They had experienced
previous workplaces that were closer to the ground floor in
which they experienced less effort to go outside. In addition,
one participant explains that “upstairs you might have less of
a notion about the temperature, and whether it is nice to go
outside” [P6].
DISCUSSION
Our findings contribute to existing work on active ways of
working by providing in-depth insights into drivers and
barriers related to walking meetings. With the field
implementation of the ‘WorkWalk’ service design we found
that walking meetings have different social dynamics
compared to regular meetings. Walking meetings were
perceived as less formal and more relaxed and were often not
planned but had a more opportune character. How walking
meetings were conducted varied greatly among participants,
ranging from brainstorming and ideation sessions to being
suited for serious and private conversations.
Key drivers to go for a walking meeting were being
physically active, positive characteristics of walking
meetings, the visibility of the WorkWalk route and meeting
point signs, the use of landmarks for recall and time
management, being outside and enjoying the weather.
According to the participants, walking meetings put them in
a different mindset and triggered a distinct perspective on the
matters at hand. Key barriers were the perceived duration of
a walking meeting, WorkWalk route limitations, distractions
from being outside, group size, hierarchy, the unconscious
routine of going to a meeting room and the need for
presenting or note taking during a meeting. In addition,
uncertainty about the weather outside prevented people to
undertake walking meetings. Moreover, uncertainty if
someone would be up for a walking meeting was also
perceived as a barrier.
The insights presented in this study apply to walking
meetings, but also have wider implications for the field of
HCI in the context of office work. Walking meetings are one
example that illustrate opportunities for physically active
ways of working. With this, we move beyond technological
interventions that aim to encourage break taking behavior to
increase physical activity in the office environment. HCI and
design research play an important role in the development of
supportive technologies to accommodate healthy and
dynamic work practices. Based on the insights gathered in
this study, several opportunities and recommendations were
found for the development of novel technological tools and
services to support and enhance walking meetings in
particular and active ways of working in general.
Design considerations
Although some participants liked to book a WorkWalk, most
participants did not do so. Often, booking a WorkWalk was
not considered necessary since it is not a ‘room’ that needs
to be reserved. Moreover, walking meetings were often
initiated on the spot. This raises the question of how the
booking functionality could play a more relevant role in the
WorkWalk service design, for instance to overcome the
barrier that walking meetings were not part of participants’
daily routine. Ahtinen et al. [1] propose that the system
should suggest a walking meeting when the user is planning
a meeting. Using context awareness, the booking system
could provide the suggestion of a walking meeting at the
right time and at the right place. Furthermore, it could book
an alternative room automatically in case of bad weather or
provide an indoor walking route alternative. This could
increase the adoption of walking meetings by addressing bad
weather, which was also perceived as a barrier. A more
context-aware system, that understands the constraints and
characteristics of one’s calendar entries, could support the
adoption of active ways of working and enrich the overall
user experience of supportive technologies.
Recommendation 1: Context-aware support systems could
overcome perceived barriers of planning and appropriation
of active ways of working
There were notable differences between the opinions and
reflections of novice walkers as compared to more
experienced ones. Novice walkers tended to use the
WorkWalk line more and followed it more closely.
Experienced walkers deviated more from the predefined
WorkWalk route. The WorkWalk line thus seems to serve as
a starting point for people to get familiar with walking
meetings, guided by concrete and tangible elements. The
route was used more freely by experienced walkers who
actively adjusted their route according to the type and
duration of their meetings. This shows the importance of
designing the service components in line with, and adaptable
to, the users’ level of experience [69]. While the current
service design allows for free interpretation and
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 9

appropriation, the creation of additional and more diverse
routes could be considered. On the one hand, this would
support the onboarding of novice users, by offering guidance
and reducing the perceived negative effects of deviating from
the line, such as the barrier of losing track of time. On the
other hand, this could showcase and support different ways
of doing a walking meeting and thereby addressing the
barrier of static and fixed route limitations. One could for
instance imagine a stimulating creative route for ideation, a
landmark route for decision making or a quiet scenic route
for trust building and sensitive matters. These alternatives
could be based on the positive characteristics of walking
meetings found in this study.
Recommendation 2: Adaptability and diversity stimulate the
onboarding of new users and facilitates open ended use in
active ways of working
Our findings show that walking meetings entail a high
relational aspect, with people often reflecting on them using
social and hierarchical terms. Participants sometimes felt the
barrier that walking meetings were not really accepted as part
of the work culture or did not dare to enforce walking
meetings on their colleagues. We follow Ahtinen et al.’s [2]
design implication to “Enable walking meetings to become
an accepted way of working” and deepen the understanding
of how to achieve this goal. The visibility of the WorkWalk
concept enhanced the social acceptance of walking meetings.
This was mainly due to the presence of the dotted line and
meeting point signs on the campus, showing that the
institution supported the practice of walking meetings. We
thus stress the importance of physical elements in the built
environment to legitimate active ways of working for users
as well as observers.
Recommendation 3: Embedding active ways of working in
existing infrastructure and work routines by making it
physically visible increases social acceptance
Our data also indicates that nudges to walk should not only
be placed outside, but rather have a starting point or trigger
indoors to bridge both environments and lower the threshold
to engage in walking meetings. More creatively, participants
indicated that walking meetings presented an opportunity to
manage time in a more natural way. Landmarks were for
instance used by experienced walkers as cues to smoothly
end a meeting, thus adding to a sense of efficiency and time
management. Indirect cues, such as coming back to the
starting point, were used as soft interaction points. This could
also be considered when designing new walking routes,
shaped according to meaningful landmarks and felt
experiences of users. Lowering the threshold to engage in a
walking meeting by using the indoor and outdoor
environment creates more opportunities to increase the
uptake of walking meetings.
Recommendation 4: Using the indoor and outdoor
environment and significant landmarks could leverage the
potential of walking meetings and their implementation.
Our findings show that walking affects the social dynamics
and set-up of meetings. As our drivers indicate, walking can
reduce the feeling of formality, hierarchy and stress. In
addition, walking meetings felt more relaxed as opposed to
regular meetings, both in a physical and mental way. As
previously reported on walking therapy sessions [54], we
found that walking also promotes a collaborative way of
working in the office context. Therefore, walking can be
used to positively influence the social interaction in and
nature of conversations.
Recommendation 5: Walking methodologies can be used to
improve the social dynamics and set-up of meetings.
In HCI and design, insufficient attention has been paid to the
development of supportive technologies that stimulate
physically active ways of working in the office [23]. Based
on our findings, we see potential for technology and design
to enhance the user experience of walking meetings and
active ways of working. Reducing the pragmatic differences
between regular meetings and walking meetings could
leverage this potential. Portable devices embedding Speech-
to-Text software could be used to facilitate notetaking while
walking, and public screens or specific meeting hubs could
be used to share slides or sketch ideas. Additionally,
technological nudges in ordinary meeting rooms could
encourage users to switch between a regular meeting setting
and a walking meeting.
We acknowledge that the campus setting in this study
provides favorable circumstances for walking meetings. Not
all office environments present the same facilitating
conditions which need to be considered in terms of
transferability of walking meetings to other contexts. In the
absence of significant landmarks, one could for instance rely
on the design of ambient technology to act as environmental
cues for walkers to adjust the dynamics of their meetings.
This offers fertile ground for future research in this area.
CONCLUSION
Walking meetings are an adequate means to integrate
physical activity within office work. Our research shows how
design can facilitate the uptake and adoption of walking
meetings. We offer an in-depth qualitative understanding of
the drivers and barriers associated with walking meetings,
revealing the social implications and variance of this
practice. The deployment of the WorkWalk allowed us to
find different scenarios and recommendations for walking
meetings that could be used as a basis to redesign the
workplace. This study sets the stage for future HCI research
explorations and the development of supporting technologies
for walking meetings and other active ways of working.
Challenging current work paradigms allows us to rethink the
office environment, the relations within that space, and
improve these environments to increase efficiency,
effectiveness and overall quality of work life. Let us take
inspiration from great philosophers such as Nietzsche who
said, “all truly great thoughts are conceived while walking”
and follow their thread.
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 10

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank all the participants for their valuable
contributions. This study is supported by the Vitality
Academy: an initiative by the strategic alliance of Utrecht
University, Eindhoven University of Technology and
University Medical Centre Utrecht.
REFERENCES
[1] Ahtinen, A., Andrejeff, E., Harris, C., & Väänänen, K.
(2017). Let’s walk at work - Persuasion through the
brainwolk walking meeting app. In Proceedings of the
21st International Academic Mindtrek Conference,
AcademicMindtrek 2017 (Vol. 2017-January, pp. 73–
82). Association for Computing Machinery, Inc.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3131085.3131098
[2] Ahtinen, A., Andrejeff, E., & Väänänen, K. (2016).
Brainwolk - A mobile technology mediated walking
meeting concept for wellbeing and creativity at work.
In ACM International Conference Proceeding Series
(pp. 307–309). Association for Computing Machinery.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3012709.3016062
[3] Ahtinen, A., Andrejeff, E., Vuolle, M., & Väänänen, K.
(2016). Walk as you work - User study and design
implications for mobile walking meetings. In ACM
International Conference Proceeding Series (Vol. 23-
27-October-2016). Association for Computing
Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2971485.2971510
[4] Alavi, S. S., Abbasi, M., & Mehrdad, R. (2016).
Wellbeing & risk prevention: Get up, stand up, get
moving. Occupational Health & Wellbeing, 68(4), 11–
13. https://doi.org/10.5812/ircmj.29518.Research
[5] Biddle, S., Mutrie, N. & Gorely, T. (2013). Psychology
of Physical Activity. Psychology of Physical Activity (p.
488). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203019320
[6] Bond, Dale & Thomas, J & Raynor, Hollie & Moon,
Jon & Sieling, Jared & Trautvetter, Jennifer &
Leblond, Tiffany & Wing, Rena. (2014). B-MOBILE -
A Smartphone-Based Intervention to Reduce Sedentary
Time in Overweight/Obese Individuals: A Within-
Subjects Experimental Trial. PloS one. 9. e100821.
10.1371/journal.pone.0100821.
[7] Bonnie Berkowitz and Patterson Clark. 2015. Don’t
just sit there. Harvard Health Letter 40, 7: 1.
[8] Brakenridge, C. L., Fjeldsoe, B. S., Young, D. C.,
Winkler, E. A. H., Dunstan, D. W., Straker, L. M., &
Healy, G. N. (2016). Evaluating the effectiveness of
organisational-level strategies with or without an
activity tracker to reduce office workers’ sitting time:
A cluster-randomised trial. International Journal of
Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 13(1).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-016-0441-3
[9] Brankaert, R., & den Ouden, E. (2017). The Design-
Driven Living Lab: A New Approach to Exploring
Solutions to Complex Societal Challenges. Technology
Innovation Management Review, 7(1), 44–51.
https://doi.org/10.22215/timreview1049
[10] Brombacher, H., Arts, D., Megens, C., & Vos, S.
(2019). Stimulight: Exploring social interaction to
reduce physical inactivity among office workers. In
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems -
Proceedings. Association for Computing Machinery.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3313094
[11] Buckley, J. P., Hedge, A., Yates, T., Copeland, R. J.,
Loosemore, M., Hamer, M., … Dunstan, D. W. (2015).
The sedentary office: An expert statement on the
growing case for change towards better health and
productivity. British Journal of Sports Medicine,
49(21), 1357–1362. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-
2015-094618
[12] C3 Collaborating for Health. (2012). The benefits of
regular walking for health, well-being and the
environment. The Benefits of Regular Walking for
Health, Well-Being and the Environment, 8
(September), 48.
[13] Carmack, C. L., Boudreaux, E., Amaral-Melendez, M.,
Brantley, P. J., & De Moor, C. (1999). Aerobic fitness
and leisure physical activity as moderators of the
stress-illness relation. Annals of Behavioral Medicine,
21(3), 251–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02884842
[14] Carr, L. J., Karvinen, K., Peavler, M., Smith, R., &
Cangelosi, K. (2013). Multicomponent intervention to
reduce daily sedentary time: A randomised controlled
trial. BMJ Open, 3(10).
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003261
[15] De Certeau, Michel. (1984). The practice of everyday
life. Berkeley: University of California Press
[16] Chau, J. Y., Van Der Ploeg, H. P., van Uffelen, J. G.
Z., Wong, J., Riphagen, I., Healy, G. N., … Brown, W.
J. (2010). Are workplace interventions to reduce sitting
effective? A systematic review. Preventive Medicine.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2010.08.012
[17] Choi, W., Song, A., Edge, D., Fukumoto, M., & Lee,
U. (2016). Exploring user experiences of active
workstations: A case study of under desk elliptical
trainers. In UbiComp 2016 - Proceedings of the 2016
ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and
Ubiquitous Computing (pp. 805–816). Association for
Computing Machinery, Inc.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2971648.2971756
[18] Chu, A. H. Y., Ng, S. H. X., Tan, C. S., Win, A. M.,
Koh, D., & Müller-Riemenschneider, F. (2016). A
systematic review and meta-analysis of workplace
intervention strategies to reduce sedentary time in
white-collar workers. Obesity Reviews, 17(5), 467–481.
https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12388
[19] Clemes, S. A., Oêconnell, S. E., & Edwardson, C. L.
(2014). Office workersê objectively measured
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 11

sedentary behavior and physical activity during and
outside working hours. Journal of Occupational and
Environmental Medicine, 56(3), 298–303.
https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000000101
[20] De Cocker, K., Veldeman, C., De Bacquer, D.,
Braeckman, L., Owen, N., Cardon, G., & De
Bourdeaudhuij, I. (2015). Acceptability and feasibility
of potential intervention strategies for influencing
sedentary time at work: Focus group interviews in
executives and employees. International Journal of
Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 12(1).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-015-0177-5
[21] Coombes, J. S., Law, J., Lancashire, B., & Fassett, R.
G. (2015). “Exercise is medicine”: Curbing the burden
of chronic disease and physical inactivity. Asia-Pacific
Journal of Public Health, 27(2), NP600–NP605.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1010539513481492
[22] Courchesne, E., & Allen, G. (1997). Prediction and
preparation, fundamental functions of the cerebellum.
Learning and Memory. https://doi.org/10.1101/lm.4.1.1
[23] Damen, I., Brombacher, H., Lallemand, C., Brankaert,
R., Brombacher, A., Van Wesemael, P., Vos, S. (2020).
A Scoping Review of Digital Tools to Reduce
Sedentary Behavior or Increase Physical Activity in
Knowledge Workers. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020;
17(2):499. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17020499
[24] Damen, I., Brankaert, R., Megens, C., Van Wesemael,
P., Brombacher, A., & Vos, S. (2018). Let’s walk and
talk: A design case to integrate an active lifestyle into
daily office life. In Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems - Proceedings (Vol. 2018-April).
Association for Computing Machinery.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3174353
[25] Van Dantzig, S., Geleijnse, G., & Van Halteren, A. T.
(2013). Toward a persuasive mobile application to
reduce sedentary behavior. Personal and Ubiquitous
Computing, 17(6), 1237–1246.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-012-0588-0
[26] Dempsey, P. C., Owen, N., Biddle, S. J. H., & Dunstan,
D. W. (2014). Managing sedentary behavior to reduce
the risk of diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Current
Diabetes Reports. Current Medicine Group LLC 1.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-014-0522-0
[27] Ettema, D., & Smajic, I. (2015). Walking, places and
wellbeing. Geographical Journal, 181(2), 102–109.
https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12065
[28] Evans, J., & Jones, P. (2011). The walking interview:
Methodology, mobility and place. Applied
Geography, 31(2), 849–858.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.09.005
[29] Greene, E. R., Shrestha, K., & Garcia, A. (2017). Acute
Effects of Walking on Human Internal Carotid Blood
Flow. The FASEB Journal, 31(1_supplement), 840.23-
840.23.
https://doi.org/10.1096/fasebj.31.1_supplement.840.23
[30] Gros, F. (2019). A Philosophy of Walking : Thoreau ,
Nietzsche and Kant on Walking. Farnam Street, 1–9.
[31] Holmes, Guy & Evans, Nicki. (2011). Walk and Talk.
In 1st International Conference on Multi-dimensional
Aspects of Wellbeing at University of Central England
(July 2011)
[32] Horton, Joanne., Macve, Richard., and Struyven. Geert.
(2004). Chapter 20 - Qualitative Research: Experiences
in Using Semi-Structured Interviews1. In The Real Life
Guide to Accounting Research, Christopher Humphrey
and Bill Lee (eds.). Elsevier, Oxford, 339–357.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008043972-3/50022-0
[33] Huang, Y., Benford, S., & Blake, H. (2019, February
1). Digital interventions to reduce sedentary behaviors
of office workers: Scoping review. Journal of Medical
Internet Research. Journal of Medical Internet
Research. https://doi.org/10.2196/11079
[34] Hutcheson, A. K., Piazza, A. J., & Knowlden, A. P.
(2018). Work Site–Based Environmental Interventions
to Reduce Sedentary Behavior: A Systematic Review.
American Journal of Health Promotion, 32(1), 32–47.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0890117116674681
[35] Jimenez Garcia, J., Romero, N. A., Keyson, D., &
Havinga, P. (2013). ESTHER 1.3: Integrating in-situ
prompts to trigger self-reflection of physical activity in
knowledge workers. In ACM International Conference
Proceeding Series (pp. 1–4).
https://doi.org/10.1145/2535597.2535609
[36] Kanstrup, Anne & Bertelsen, Pernille & Madsen,
Jacob. (2014). Design with the feet: Walking methods
and participatory design.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2661435.2661441
[37] Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature:
Toward an integrative framework. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 15(3), 169–182.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-4944(95)90001-2
[38] Khot, R. A., Pennings, R., & Mueller, F. F. (2015).
EdiPulse: Supporting physical activity with chocolate
printed messages. In Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems - Proceedings (Vol. 18, pp. 1391–
1396). Association for Computing Machinery.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2702613.2732761
[39] Kilpatrick, M., Sanderson, K., Blizzard, L., Teale, B.,
& Venn, A. (2013). Cross-sectional associations
between sitting at work and psychological distress:
Reducing sitting time may benefit mental health.
Mental Health and Physical Activity, 6(2), 103–109.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mhpa.2013.06.004
[40] Lee, I. M., Bauman, A. E., Blair, S. N., Heath, G. W.,
Kohl, H. W., Pratt, M., … Wells, J. C. (2016). The
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 12

pandemic of physical inactivity: Global action for
public health. The Lancet, 388(1), 234.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30370-1
[41] Luo, Y., Lee, B., Yvettewohn, D., Rebar, A. L.,
Conroy, D. E., & Choe, E. K. (2018). Time for break:
Understanding information workers’ sedentary
behavior through a break prompting system. In
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems -
Proceedings (Vol. 2018-April). Association for
Computing Machinery.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3173701
[42] Macpherson, H. (2016). Walking methods in landscape
research: moving bodies, spaces of disclosure and
rapport. Landscape Research, 41(4), 425–432.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2016.1156065
[43] McKinney, B. L. (2013). Therapist’s perceptions of
walk and talk therapy: A grounded study. Dissertation
Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and
Social Sciences, 73(7-A(E)), No-Specified. Retrieved
from
http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-
2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&r
es_dat=xri:pqm&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:3504560
[44] Morris, D., Brush, J. B., & Meyers, B. R. (2008).
SuperBreak: Using interactivity to enhance ergonomic
typing breaks. In Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems - Proceedings (pp. 1817–1826).
https://doi.org/10.1145/1357054.1357337
[45] Oppezzo, M., & Schwartz, D. L. (2014). Give your
ideas some legs: The positive effect of walking on
creative thinking. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Learning Memory and Cognition, 40(4), 1142–1152.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036577
[46] Owen, N., Salmon, J., Koohsari, M. J., Turrell, G., &
Giles-Corti, B. (2014). Sedentary behaviour and health:
Mapping environmental and social contexts to
underpin chronic disease prevention. British Journal of
Sports Medicine, 48(3), 174–177.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2013-093107
[47] Owen, N., Sugiyama, T., Eakin, E. E., Gardiner, P. A.,
Tremblay, M. S., & Sallis, J. F. (2011). Adults’
sedentary behavior: Determinants and interventions.
American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Elsevier
Inc.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2011.05.013
[48] Brandy Parker and Lodge McCammon. 2015. Walking
Meetings: The Research on Why We should "Walk and
Talk". Retrieved June 18, 2017 from
http://flipthemeeting.com/wp-
content/uploads/2015/04/WalkTalk-Research.pdf
[49] Probst, K., Lindlbauer, D., Greindl, P., Haller, M.,
Schwartz, B., Schrempf, A., & Trapp, M. (2013).
Rotating, Tilting, Bouncing: Using an Interactive Chair
to Promote Activity in Office Environments. In
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems -
Proceedings (Vol. 2013-April, pp. 79–84). Association
for Computing Machinery.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2468356.2468372
[50] Probst, K., Lindlbauer, D., Perteneder, F., Haller, M.,
Schwartz, B., & Schrempf, A. (2013). Exploring the
use of distributed multiple monitors within an activity-
promoting sit-and-stand office workspace. In Lecture
Notes in Computer Science (including subseries
Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture
Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 8119 LNCS, pp. 476–
493). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40477-1_30
[51] Probst, K., Leitner, J., Perteneder, F., Haller, M.,
Schrempf, A., & Glöckl, J. (2012). Active Office:
Towards an Activity-Promoting Office Workplace
Design. In CHI Ext. Abstracts 2012 (pp. 2165–2170).
New York: ACM Press.
[52] Xipei Ren, Bin Yu, Yuan Lu, Biyong Zhang, Jun Hu,
and Aarnout Brombacher. 2019. LightSit: An
unobtrusive health-promoting system for relaxation and
fitness microbreaks at work. Sensors (Switzerland) 19,
9.
[53] Ren, X., Yu, B., Lu, Y., & Brombacher, A. (2018).
Exploring cooperative fitness tracking to encourage
physical activity among office workers. Proceedings of
the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 2(CSCW).
https://doi.org/10.1145/3274415
[54] Revell, S., & McLeod, J. (2016). Experiences of
therapists who integrate walk and talk into their
professional practice. Counselling and Psychotherapy
Research, 16(1), 35–43.
https://doi.org/10.1002/capr.12042
[55] Ross, N. J., Renold, E., Holland, S., & Hillman, A.
(2009). Moving stories: Using mobile methods to
explore the everyday lives of young people in public
care. Qualitative Research, 9(5), 605–623.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794109343629
[56] Ross, N. J., Renold, E., Holland, S., & Hillman, A.
(2009). Moving stories: Using mobile methods to
explore the everyday lives of young people in public
care. Qualitative Research, 9(5), 605–623.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794109343629
[57] Schmid, Daniela & Ricci, Cristian & Leitzmann,
Michael. (2015). Associations of Objectively Assessed
Physical Activity and Sedentary Time with All-Cause
Mortality in US Adults: The NHANES Study. PLoS
ONE. 10. 10.1371/journal.pone.0119591.
[58] Shrestha, N., Ijaz, S., Kukkonen-Harjula, K. T.,
Kumar, S., & Nwankwo, C. P. (2015). Workplace
interventions for reducing sitting at work. Cochrane
Database of Systematic Reviews. John Wiley and Sons
Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010912.pub2
[59] Simons, D., De Bourdeaudhuij, I., Clarys, P., De
Cocker, K., Vandelanotte, C., & Deforche, B. (2018).
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 13

Effect and process evaluation of a smartphone app to
promote an active lifestyle in lower educated working
young adults: Cluster randomized controlled trial.
JMIR MHealth and UHealth, 6(8).
https://doi.org/10.2196/10003
[60] Stephenson, A., McDonough, S. M., Murphy, M. H.,
Nugent, C. D., & Mair, J. L. (2017). Using computer,
mobile and wearable technology enhanced
interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour: a
systematic review and meta-analysis. The International
Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity,
14(1), 105. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-017-0561-4
[61] Stringer, L. (2017). Ten Bad Habits that Should Be
Banned from the Workplace Forever. The Journal of
Medical Practice Management : MPM, 32(4), 288–
291. Retrieved from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29969551
[62] Thorp, Alicia; Clark, Bronwyn; Gardiner, Paul; Healy,
Genevieve; Keegel, Tessa; Owen, Neville; Winkler,
Elisabeth. (2009). Stand Up Australia Sedentary
behaviour in workers. Medibank Private.
https://doi.org/10.2337/db09-0087
[63] Thorp, A. A., Kingwell, B. A., Owen, N., & Dunstan,
D. W. (2014). Breaking up workplace sitting time with
intermittent standing bouts improves fatigue and
musculoskeletal discomfort in overweight/obese office
workers. Occupational and Environmental Medicine,
71(11), 765–771. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2014-
102348
[64] Tobiasson, H., Hedman, A., & Sundblad, Y. (2014).
Still at the office: designing for physical movement-
inclusion during office work. IHC.
[65] Tudor-Locke, C., Schuna, J. M., Frensham, L. J., &
Proenca, M. (2014). Changing the way we work:
Elevating energy expenditure with workstation
alternatives. International Journal of Obesity. Nature
Publishing Group. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2013.223
[66] Wang, F., Orpana, H. M., Morrison, H., De Groh, M.,
Dai, S., & Luo, W. (2012, December 15). Long-term
association between leisure-time physical activity and
changes in happiness: Analysis of the prospective
National Population Health Survey. American Journal
of Epidemiology. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kws199
[67] World Health Organization. (2008). Preventing
noncommunicable diseases in the workplace through
diet and physical activity. Geneva: World Health
Organization (pp. 1–52). https://doi.org/ISBN 978 92 4
159632 9
[68] Wiederhold, A. (2015). Conducting fieldwork at and
away from home: shifting researcher positionality with
mobile interviewing methods. Qualitative Research,
15(5), 600–615.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794114550440
[69] Yardley, L., Spring, B. J., Riper, H., Morrison, L. G.,
Crane, D. H., Curtis, K., … Blandford, A. (2016).
Understanding and Promoting Effective Engagement
With Digital Behavior Change Interventions. American
Journal of Preventive Medicine, 51(5), 833–842.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2016.06.015
[70] Zimmerman, J., Forlizzi, J., & Evenson, S. (2007).
Research through design as a method for interaction
design research in HCI. In Conference on Human
Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings (pp. 493–
502). https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240704
CHI 2020 Paper
CHI 2020, April 25–30, 2020, Honolulu, HI, USA
Paper 14
Page 14