Table 3.

Coding Frame

Node	Main Category	Subcategory	Definition	Coding Rules
Existing interfaces & Interfaces that should be established	Operational	Joint actions	Example(s) for actions are given where OHM/ WHP and CSR are actively involved.	Punctual activities/ actions in contrast to a long-term strategy Excluding joint work on standards and certification
		Overlap of responsibilities a) in the same department b) for the same person	a) In the organisation chart (formal or informal), OHM/ WHP and CSR are attributed to the same department, but not the same person. b) One person is responsible for OHM/ WHP and CSR.	a) Explicit reference to one department responsible b) explicit reference to one single person responsible
		Extension of the health circle or CSR-board	At least one person of the other department is part of the health circle or CSR-board respectively.	Health circle or CSR-board are mentioned explicitly.
	Strategic	Standards and certification	CSR and OHM/ WHP both contribute to standards and certifications.	Standards and/ or certifications are mentioned explicitly. Contribution can be everything from a constant collaboration to punctual data interchange.
		In general	Long-term corporate alignment of CSR and OHM/ WHP, with or without a written plan of action	Strategy is mentioned explicitly or paraphrased according to the definition. Strategy other than standards and certifications
	Cultural	Corporate philosophy	A company’s value system and overall attitude towards an interplay between OHM/ WHP and CSR that goes beyond the question of responsibility.	The corporate philosophy is mentioned explicitly or paraphrased according to the definition. No strategic alignment, e.g. no plan of action, but possibly a written value statement
		Health as part of the leading principle ‘social responsibility‘	OHM/ WHP are considered to be a component or integral part of a company’s “social responsibility”. In this context, social responsibility is addressed as a fundamental value and not primarily a strategy.	“Social responsibility” or “corporate responsibility” is mentioned explicitly as a motive for or root of OHM/ WHP. No strategic alignment Focus on social/ corporate responsibility and not a company’s overall philosophy
Open concerns & Reasons for no existing/ planned interface	Operational	Lack of resources	Resources such as time, money or personnel are mentioned as concerns or reasons against an interplay.	Resources other than knowledge are listed.
		No appropriate internal structures and/ or knowledge in the company	Internal structures on the side of CSR and/ or OHM/ WHP are non-existent and/ or knowledge regarding at least one of the topics is missing.	Internal structures and/ or knowledge are mentioned explicitly.
		Location of OHM and CSR at different operational levels	The internal structures exist, but CSR and OHM/ WHP are operated and organised from different company levels.	Related to organisation chart/ company structure
	Strategic	Lack of overlapping stakeholders	The addressees of OHM/ WHP and CSR do not overlap. Therefore, also the management systems themselves cannot interplay.	Related to the persons/ groups affected by CSR and OHM/ WHP
		OHM not primarily a company task	OHM, especially non-legally mandatory health promotion is not primarily a task for companies. In contrast, public institutions, state regulations and other macrosocial structures that transcend a single company’s sphere of influence are responsible for providing a framework.	Macrosocial structures (‘the big picture’) are mentioned explicitly.
	Cultural	No practical implementation of the corporate philosophy	Corporate philosophy, i.e. value system or statement emphasising the interplay exists in theory/ on paper. However, it differs from the values that are held up and lived in the company.	Discrepancy between two value systems/ philosophies, lived and written, is explained.