Thinking back to barely 10 years ago and I have little doubt that the organizers would have struggled to attract a tenth of the delegates that were present on the two days of the conference.

When introducing myself at meetings I often tell the story of my early days in the industry; talking to potential clients about the importance of employee health and being met with blank or even perplexed looks. Fast forward a decade and it is clear that workplace health has evolved from a niche area for a zealous few to a full blown movement.

I think this gradual change has occurred for a number of reasons. First, and probably the main reason, is the research that has been done over this period of time that has shown the clear link between individual health status and work performance. Although there probably always existed an intuitive belief among many that employee health was an important component of productivity, it seems that the majority of employers didn't take much notice until there was unequivocal, scientific evidence of the fact. What has probably clinched the debate is the demonstration that if you can improve individuals' health status, by getting them to address their lifestyle and behavioural risks, you can also improve their, and hence the employer's, productivity and performance.

There are also probably a number of other reasons that have galvanized many employers to invest in workplace health initiatives. The ageing workforce, the competition for talent and the need to continually innovate are all areas that can be enhanced by having a workforce that is fit both mentally and physically. With so much of the UK's economic output being driven by the service sector this reality is here to stay and it is my belief that if you, as an employer, don't embrace the "movement" then you are likely to get left behind.

Also, I think we often misuse the word, because incorporated in its definition is the concept for a remedy for all diseases or ills. So in reality we should be saying something along the lines of "I have a panacea for you", rather than, "I have a panacea for all of your health issues". Semantics and linguistic snobbery aside the closest thing to a panacea that we know of is physical activity.

The benefits of regular physical activity are truly phenomenal. Regular exercise significantly decreases our chance of developing many chronic and debilitating diseases, including heart disease, stroke, cancer and diabetes. It also improves our mental health and means fewer coughs and colds and days off work.

What is also quite interesting, and unlike almost any other type of intervention (be it pharmaceutical or behavioural), is there is no plateau effect. In other words, the more you do the greater the benefit you get. Clearly there has to be a stage when you can't do anymore because you ache so much or you've worn your joints away! But you get my gist.

So what are you doing to promote regular activity amongst your workforce? As already alluded to, those who are habitually active take less time off work due to illness and also deliver greater productivity. I have little doubt that corporate-wide physical activity promotion is a panacea for the modern business.

This is where I'd like some help from you dear readers; I need to put together a talk for a national conference in March highlighting new and innovative approaches that companies are undertaking to encourage and foster greater wellbeing in the workplace, preferably with a technological component to them.

If you're doing something that you're proud of please feel free to contact me as I need three or four case studies. Look forward to hearing from you.

The UK’s spiralling debt, together with the ongoing Eurozone crisis and a flat economy in the US are all going to make trading difficult for many organisations, both large and small.

Amidst the doom and gloom around there are perhaps lessons to be learned, and inspiration to be gleaned, from organisations that started operating in times of economic recession. Apparently, Hyatt, FedEx and Microsoft were all started during recession years; and although it is unlikely that any were quite as bad as what we have in store for us now, it is heartening to know that new ideas, and simply better ways of doing things, can prevail no matter what the economic outlook is like.

I think the take away message is clear. UK businesses need to take a critical look at what they are doing and how they are doing it. Nothing should be sacred and everything should be questioned. But, in order to do this we need energised, innovative and productive employees on the case. With this in mind there really is no better time than now to also take a critical look at your health benefits to make sure they deliver the best value to your employees as well as the best return to you as an employer.

Public sector expenditure is being pared back at a rapid rate. And although no politician will publicly acknowledge the fact, it is clear that front line healthcare services will be impacted in the future. I believe that employer provided health benefits have already started to be perceived as being more valuable by employees. Rather than the "nice to have" add on that they were in times of plenty, they are increasingly being seen as an integral element of the overall employment package.

From the employer's perspective a clear health and wellbeing strategy for the coming years is a must. How do you want to approach employee health? What do you want to get out of it and how are you going to achieve a healthier and more productive workforce? These are all questions that need to be asked, but they also provide a pathway to a better performing and more innovative organisation.

Although only a minor irritation to some, for many winter has a significant impact upon their health and wellbeing. The reason for this has only relatively recently been understood. As well as enabling us to see, light also has a profound impact upon human physiology. Receptors in the retina of the eye are directly connected to areas of the brain that are integrally involved in hormone production, mood, and the whole area of sleep and wakefulness.

That's all well and good, but it's not like we're existing with candles or a camp fire as our only source of light is it? The advent of electricity in the home and workplace has provided us with some marvellous indoor lighting options, however, these all are solely developed to enable visually directed tasks. The light that is produced by a standard indoor lighting source does not contain enough "short wavelength" light to impact those important areas of the brain that control how we feel and function. As a consequence many of us feel at best "out of sorts", but at worst downright depressed during the winter months.

There's a vocal group of supporters who advocate remaining on British Summer Time all year long and moving away from a near 100 year tradition of tinkering with the clocks twice a year (there were in fact a few years in the 1960s when we stayed on BST throughout the year without turning the clocks back). Without getting into the pros and cons of the respective arguments for and against clock changing, the main issue is actually that we choose to live at northern latitude of more than 50 degrees, and with this comes the inevitable short days in the winter time.

So…what does this all mean to employers and providers of workplace health programmes Well, this is still quite a difficult question to answer. Some researchers have shown a greater incidence of mental health problems, including suicides, during the winter months in those living at northern latitudes, others, however have shown the converse, with a peak of such issues during the summer months, possibly due to "too much" daylight and lack of sleep. Without trying to unpick the possible reasons for these disparities it is clear that changes in light and dark do have a profound effect on how many people feel, perform and also how well they sleep. Surveys have consistently shown that high proportions of western working populations have regular sleep issues. In turn, sleep problems and sleep disturbance has a knock on effect upon stress symptoms and work performance as well as effects upon appetite and blood pressure.

The most common sleep problem reported is insomnia, the definition of which includes difficulty falling asleep, difficulty staying asleep and waking up too early and not being able to get back to sleep. Data from the National Sleep Foundation in America, who conduct an annual survey on sleep problems, suggests that half of all adults experience regular symptoms of insomnia. Some commentators have suggested that this has contributed to the rise in obesity in society. How so, you may ask? Interestingly sleep deprivation alters appetite; it has a subtle effect on our food choices, with tiredness tending to drive a desire for higher fat and higher sugar food types than during times of alertness. In addition, researchers have shown a clear link between total sleep time and obesity; those sleeping for shorter lengths of time have a much higher chance of being obese. An imbalance of two important hormones, leptin and ghrelin, in these individuals appear to stimulate appetite whilst simultaneously decreasing energy expenditure.

It is clear that sleep, wakefulness, appetite and the season can have a profound effect upon individuals. It is also clear that we are a long way from understanding everything we need to know about these interactions. But what we do know is that one of the most important components for individual health and wellbeing is getting regular, good quality sleep.

The fact that so many of the population report regular and unresolved sleep issues is perhaps not surprising when you consider that doctors in training get virtually no instruction on sleep and the treatment of sleep disorders. Couple this with the lack of good quality sleep disorder investigation and treatment centres and you see a real public health issue that is not just an inconvenience, but a threat to both health and productivity. Perhaps it is time for employers to step in with some much needed help?

And what a conference it was; the place was buzzing with over 1,500 delegates and a plethora of both start-ups and established health technology companies presenting and discussing new ideas, and fresh takes on old ideas.

California certainly seems to at the heart of a vibrant health technology community looking to harness our now ubiquitous internet connectivity to improve the healthcare experience for all.

One of the main areas of focus during the 3 days of the conference was the electronic health record (EHR), and specifically a new breed of cloud based software as a service vendors of these solutions. In a way it is not surprising that the EHR is such a hot topic at the moment. The US federal government are offering hefty incentives for medical practitioners to start to use electronic records. Interestingly, only about 30% of providers to date use one, with the majority it would appear still preferring pen and paper records. Undoubtedly this will change, just as similar types of products have changed the lives of HR professionals and sale people over the last few years. There's one company that is even giving away its EHR for free, so keen are they to drive adoption.

Another area that warrants mention is the relatively nascent "patient engagement" market. In an extension from the now well established employer sponsored health management approach, new players are taking some of these solutions and repositioning them for doctors to use in engaging their patients in discussions around medical condition management and lifestyle choices. What is becoming clear is that there is likely to be greater connectivity with regard to health data. There is a growing movement to connect workplace health initiatives with medical records and health and fitness apps, with the consumer holding the key and granting access where needed.

These are interesting time in health technology and there's a real feeing that we now have the technology to make some big leaps forward in the coming years.

You'd be forgiven for looking rather quizzical and asking what on earth an NCD is.

The answer is pretty much any chronic disease that is not caused by an infecting organism; cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancers and chronic respiratory diseases all fall into the broad definition. What is quite interesting is this is the first global health related UN summit since the 2001 meeting on AIDS, so it seems that they're serious about trying to do something about the ever increasing prevalence of chronic diseases across the world.

The facts are actually quite concerning; some 63% of all worldwide deaths are due to NCDs, and although we cannot claim to have eradicated infectious diseases such as TB, malaria and cholera, these, for the first time, are not at the top of the list of world killers. I wait to hear what the great and the good from the world's major economies have to say on the subject.

My fear, however, is that this may just be another talking shop with plans put forward that no-one will enact because of the dire global economic situation. If I were to give one piece of advice to the delegates it would be to break down the silos between healthcare provision and healthcare financing. If, as we are lead to believe, the summit will advocate a greater responsibility for businesses in tacking the issue of NCDs then this cannot be done without some form of "carrot" or recognition. We cannot expect business to do their part, but not reward them.

If we are truly serious about reversing the trend in lifestyle related disease then we have to work in partnership. If company X puts in place a worksite health management programme they should be rewarded on outcomes. The question then is how should they be rewarded? The obvious answer is some form of tax break - if as a nation we do not put our money where our mouth is, so to speak, then we will only see the forward thinking few implement such worksite initiatives and we will continue to inexorably slide into costly ill-health related oblivion.

My first thought on reading the story was one of despair…despair at the lack of strategic direction the health service has with regard to technology, and specifically consumer facing technology. Here is a government department that has all but squandered ten billion pounds on the world's largest IT initiative with hardly anything to show for it.

I still sit in my hospital out-patient clinic on a weekly basis with an unruly pile of paper masquerading as a set of patient notes…not an electronic medical record in sight! And now they're talking about smartphone apps? "Hold On", I hear you say. "Surely any news is good news?" And I take your point; the willingness of the NHS to even start to think in this way is cause for celebration.

Starting to think about using technology to engage the general population in monitoring and discussing their health issues and needs is precisely where we need to go if we are to have any hope of managing the burgeoning costs of delivering comprehensive healthcare coverage to the population of the UK. However, rather than focusing upon the cool and happening technology of the moment we need a strategic plan.

One that provides a direction that can harness existing technology, but one that is also flexible enough to incorporate new applications as they gain greater population wide penetration. The overwhelming majority of the UK population has access to the internet, as well as having a mobile phone. Sure smartphone penetration within society is increasing, but currently only about a third of all mobile phones are classified as "smart".

My message to the government and the department of health is simple; sure, have a poke around the new and emerging trends in communication and information transfer, but do this from a solid base of using the existing tech that is already available.

There's no need to reinvent the wheel (although the NHS has a penchant for doing this) - there are plenty of vendors of health management solutions out there; so bring them in, get them to tell you what they can do and then…and this is the big leap that needs to occur, make sure there is appropriate funding for these types of solutions so that doctors can use them together with their patients.

I've recently been doing a fair amount of work with American companies and it is clear that the US has taken the "what's in it for me" culture to a new level. Many US employers provide incentives to their employees to engage in workplace health promotion initiatives.

A decade or so ago these incentives used to be things like a cap or a t-shirt, however now they are "cold hard dollars". Complete an annual health risk assessment questionnaire? That'll be $100 thank-you very much.

Enrol in a weight management or smoking cessation programme - $50, and a further $50 on completion. This may seem staggering to us with a state funded healthcare system here in the UK, but with the majority of healthcare insurance costs still being borne by employers in America they are desperate to try any means they can to stop the costs escalating. But would this approach work here?

A couple of years ago I remember the NHS getting some rather bad press for piloting a scheme that paid obese people to lose weight, despite the fact that a significant proportion of those targeted did actually manage to meet weight loss targets. So does the incentives model have a future here in the UK? I guess the main question that needs to be asked is whether the changes that are being incented are sustainable? Looking at the research literature it is very clear that incentives, whether in the form of direct cash rewards or lottery style approaches, do work in getting more people engaged in a particular endeavour, as well as delivering better short- to medium-term outcomes.

Examples include weight loss, smoking cessation and medication adherence. The downside, however, is that once the incentives are removed behaviour tends to regress back to that at the start of the programme. A number of organisations offer incentives for high attendance rates at work. Possibly one of the most infamous schemes was that of the Royal Mail offering cars to employees who had exemplary absence records. So maybe we should be thinking about the whole area of offering incentives for individuals to adopt healthier lifestyles? After all, the evidence linking health to productivity and performance is extremely good.