Aetna buys bswift: Why benefit brokers must pay attention


More news from the technology front: Aetna acquires bswift. Last year, it was Towers Watson buying Liazon, now Aetna and bswift, and next year it will be someone else. Under the radar a little bit was the Oct. 16 Hodges-Mace announcement of their SmartBen acquisition. It doesn’t carry the cache of Aetna or Towers Watson, but it was still a market move. Is this just beginning of the dance where everyone needs to choose a partner? And what does this mean for the benefits market and the benefits broker?

For some, this acquisition may be strange. Aetna buys a company that provides technology used by their competitors. The bswift enrollment platform handles enrollment for many employers that don’t have Aetna insurance. Towers Watson bought a company distributed by their competitors, other brokers. What most people aren’t realizing is that the world has changed. In many industries companies that compete in one market segment may be partners in another. If you view this acquisition in the old world where competitors don’t work together you may see it one way, but in a new world it may look a little different.

My message to brokers on this is to start thinking differently. Those who don’t will get left behind. The rules of the game are changing and you don’t get to make all the rules.

I have been fortunate to have worked in some capacity with Mark Bertolini, CEO of Aetna, and Rich Gallun, CEO of bswift. Both are outside-the-box thinkers. Aetna has invested billions in technology preparing for what they view as a consumer-centric health care model. They want to reinvent the patient experience. To quote Bertolini, “We’re going to begin to change the health care industry by giving people tools they can put in the palm of their hand.”

Here is another quote from Bertolini that would make brokers pause. When asked about the future of health care, Bertolini responded: “There wouldn’t be plan designs. You wouldn’t need them. What you would do is invest in all those things that are necessary to keep people healthy.” You can see a full overview of the Aetna model by viewing this presentation from their 2013 Investor Conference.

More than a business move

Some may think this is an acquisition of a benefits enrollment platform by Aetna. But I see this as another step by Aetna to execute on a plan to compete effectively in a new health care world. A world where consumers are in more control. Where provider systems are engaged in a patients wellness and not just proving treatment after the fact. A world where health information and communication is moved via Web and mobile.

In this case, bswift made a strategic move into the consumer centric world through their private exchange technology with individual rating and decision support tools. Now it has paid off. This made them attractive to Aetna. Congratulations to bswift for a job well done.

So what does this mean for benefits brokers? A few weeks ago I wrote an article titled “Does Apple’s HealthKit signal the end of employer-based insurance?” Some may not relate Apple’s investment to the Aetna acquisition of bswift; however, I think they are related.

Apple is clearly one of the top consumer technology vendors in the market. Aetna is driving consumer centric health care. They are pieces of the same puzzle. It is a puzzle benefits brokers need to pay attention to because the market is changing around them. A carrier buying an enrollment vendor says one thing, Aetna’s and Apple’s investments mean something different. In a not-so-obvious way the health care world is changing in a way that most brokers are not recognizing. Consumer-centric; mobile; doctors as wellness facilitators; employers out of the risk business? Maybe. So get ready.

It’s Time to Ban the Term “Value Added Service” from the Benefits Broker Business


I hear the term “value added service” used in the benefits world all the time. Brokers always tell me about their value added services. What does value added service mean anyway? For most it implies “free”. We all know that nothing is free. I think it is time to bury this term. In fact I think it actually has negative implications in many ways so let me tell you why.

I googled the term “value- added service” to see how firms would define it. One definition I found came from a website www.wisegeek.com. They defined the term as “options that complement a core service offering from a company but are not as vital, necessary or important.” I guess that sounds right. For most benefits firms “value-added service” means, “I am going to give you something for free that I generally don’t do.” And I agree with the above definition that says it is not as necessary or important. The problem with what I see many benefits brokers doing is putting this label on things employers feel are important. If I am an employer and have something important to me who would I get it from, a vendor that makes it a core service or one that labels it a “value-added service”? If it is important then I would hope whoever I buy such a product or service from is good at it.

Value-added services for most brokers are listed on the last pages of their proposals. It is the fifth tab from the left on their website. It is the final 5 minutes of a sales presentation. It is presented with a level of importance that is, well, not important. To me value added service is like buying a hamburger at a Chinese restaurant. They don’t really want to sell hamburgers but for those adults with kids that don’t like Chinese food they do have something for them. If I wanted a hamburger I would go to Five Guys and not a Chinese restaurant.

In the benefits world some things that many brokers have labeled as value-added services are really becoming core to what a benefits broker should be doing. I won’t get into what I think all these services are but if the employer feels the services are vital then they will dismiss the firm that labels the service as “value added”. It will appear as unimportant. If a broker can’t make it a core service then maybe they shouldn’t be providing such a service at all. And if another broker is offering such a service as a core service then your labeling it as “value-added” may be detrimental to making a sale.

So there you go. The term “value-added service” shall be forever banned in the benefits world. And I will add that as a consultant to brokers this advice is not a value added service. It is what I do all day.

If You Want Results Like Zenefits You Need to Mow the Lawn


Some of you have heard about this new company from California that is disrupting the benefits brokerage market not just in California but across the U.S. I have heard from brokers in many states that lost business to this company named Zenefits. These brokers claim to have had good relationships with their clients yet those clients left them to move their business to Zenefits, who in many cases the employer most likely never met. According to some accounts Zenefits has added around 2000 employer clients with close to 50,000 employees in 2 years. Now these numbers may be exaggerated, I don’t know, but imagine if they were just half that. What broker in America has added 1000 new clients in 2 years?

So what is it that Zenefits is doing that would motivate an employer to fire their current broker and hire Zenefits? Many benefits brokers conclude by looking at their website that it is because they are giving away free Payroll with some HR and Benefits technology. While this may sound plausible I don’t think that is the case. One does not get 2000 new clients in two years because they give something away for free that could cost $5-$10 per employee per month. If “free” is the reason then that says even more about what these employers think about the value of a broker as a benefits advisor. I would contend that the reason that Zenefits is getting so many new clients is because they are delivering a value proposition that solves a big problem for employers that few other brokers are delivering.

This is where I get to the “mowing the lawn” stuff I referenced in the title. The Zenefits value proposition is clearly stated in an interview that the president conducted on Bloomberg News. In response to a question where the interviewer asked how his technology was different he answered as follows” “We handle everything else – employment agreements, compliance, getting them on payroll, getting them on benefits, all that stuff from soup to nuts. That’s the way I would have wanted it to work so that’s the way we built it.” Most of the brokers I speak to believe Zenefits are getting business because they give away some free technology. As you hear in the presidents response he is clearly stating that they provide services. Brokers think they are giving away lawn tractors when what they are really doing is mowing the lawn. I have had many brokers ask me if there is technology to compete with Zenefits. If you were to hire someone to mow your lawn do you ask to see their lawn tractor? Most brokers are missing the point.

As a business owner myself with 20 employees I can relate to the value proposition that Zenefits provides. I don’t have a HR person on staff and I wish someone would come in and offer to take care of all my HR, Benefits, and Payroll issues. I have a job to do; I don’t want to worry about these things. The other day an employee came into my office and asked about our 401k. My answer was “I don’t know.” As a small business owner I want someone else to worry about answering employee questions. I know what I want. I want “worry free”. If a company like Zenefits called me and said they would take care of all HR, Benefits, and Payroll and make me worry free I would say sign me up. I did have a company call me one day that did offer all this. That company was Paychex, not a traditional benefits broker.

So if you are a broker and want to generate new business like Zenefits you need to change your business and offer similar services. And remember, the employers attracted to their value propositions aren’t looking for lawn tractors. They are looking for someone to mow their lawn.

There is a Ghost Lurking in the Benefits Broker World


There is a ghost lurking in the benefits broker world. Many brokers are chasing it. I hear about it all the time when speaking to brokers. Yet, nobody can find it. Many claim to have seen it. Others claim to be the ghost. But I have yet to find it.

Is there really a ghost or is it in everyone’s imagination? I have come to the conclusion that this ghost is not a ghost after all. It is an idea. It is how to be different. Brokers are looking for that one thing that when they go out to a prospect and say let me show you something, everyone will want it. Many, many brokers are looking for this “ghost”. And most are still searching. They are searching for this dream or hope to find that silver bullet – that one thing that will separate their firm from their competitors that few can find.

The vendors calling on brokers know they are looking for this ghost or silver bullet and they promise to have found it. “I got the silver bullet”‘ the vendors promise. “I have that one thing where if you partner with me your dreams will come true. Prospects will flock to you. Just sign here and give me $1500 per month.” I hear this claim all the time. And brokers call me up and say “What do you think of so and so?” I ask, what are you looking for? I get no answer. It’s like they are looking for some undetermined thing. They take the meeting with the vendor. They spend the hour and a half and see some demo. But they can’t tell me what they are looking for. It’s a ghost.

Some brokers think they found it. They show me some technology or claim to have some unique service. I look at the technology. I understand the service. But I don’t see the silver bullet. They have not found the ghost. They are paying the $1500 and have shut down their search because they have found it. Or at least they think so. They want me to say it is the silver bullet but it isn’t so I can’t. And the search goes on.

You see the ghost is not a Private Exchange, or some technology. It is not compliance alerts or wellness newsletters. It is not a HR Call Center or some web-based HR Library. The ghost is inside you. It is an idea yet to hatch because most are looking for someone else to deliver it. I personally believe there are many opportunities to be different. To rattle the market in a way where people will start talking. But it starts with the person in the mirror. So my message is stop chasing the ghost. The vendor that knocks on your door with that great idea is knocking on everyone’s door. There are big opportunities to make this benefits world better. But one must start on the inside and not out. As Mark Cuban once said, The best way to predict the future is to invent it.”

Benefits Is Going Mobile – Is Your Benefits Firm Ready?


I have had a few experiences over the past few months that have convinced me that Employee Benefits is going to go mobile faster than most may believe but not in the way most benefits brokers would think. My first experience was with my own staff. We launched a web and mobile system to manage our HR, Benefits, and Payroll on July 1st. What was amazing is that 100% of my employees used their mobile phones within the first 5 weeks to request a vacation day. What was more interesting though was that my employees all of a sudden became more aware of their benefits. One individual commented that she did not know the company provided disability insurance and another mentioned how he went to the doctors and forgot his medical card and then remembered seeing the benefits button on his Smartphone. What I found most interesting is that none of my employees went to the smartphone to see what their benefits were. They went there to request a vacation day and “bumped into” the benefits button.

The second experience started with me seeing a statistic (that I can’t find now) that said that 60% of the American workforce did not have internet access or email at work. As an office worker myself in a predominantly office based market that did not seem realistic, but I saw that stat when I was at a conference in Vegas. And if you walk around the casinos in Vegas it is easy to see how this stat could be true. So I decided to test this stat when speaking at a conference just yesterday in Richmond, VA. I was speaking about HR/Benefits technology to an audience of HR people from various employers. I first asked the audience “if you had something real important to communicate to your employees how do you do it?” One woman answered that she sends an email. I then asked the crowd to raise their hands if their employees don’t have a work email. Half the audience raised their hands. I followed this by asking what percent of their workforce they thought owned a Smartphone. Almost all that answered said they thought all their employees owned smartphones.

If you add these two stories together it draws a picture of how employers are going to communicate with their employees and how employees are going to access information. It is going to be same the same way we all do in our personal lives and that is via smartphone apps and text messaging. The thing about smartphones is that they are always with us. We stare at them when we kill time at a doctor’s offices, during commercials when watching television, and between innings of our kids baseball games. We consume information on our smartphones because it is easy.

I started this by saying benefits is going mobile but not in the way most benefits brokers would envision. I would imagine benefits brokers would look for some standalone benefits mobile app. However, when you actually look at how employees utilize their benefits few employees use their benefits beyond an office visit or getting a prescription in any year. So, remembering where to find information one almost ever needs is a challenge. I saw a stat the other day where the average American has 18 users names and passwords in their lives. How are employees going to remember a user name and password to some app or website they never use? The answer is to put the benefits information right next to something employees use frequently such as requesting a vacation day. For this reason deploying a solution that has everything an employee would need from their employer in one spot is the best way to communicate benefits to employees.

Now let’s quickly address text messaging. Imagine I am an employer and I have 30 people that did not go online to enroll in their benefits and there are only 3 days left to enroll. For 50% of employers their employees don’t have a company email. Wouldn’t it be real easy to send these employees a text message? We all text in our personal lives because it is a quick and easy way to communicate. I believe text messaging will become a common form of employee communications in the near future.

The opportunity exists for benefits brokers to take a leadership position by helping employers realize this opportunity to leverage mobile and text messaging to improve the way employers administer and communicate benefits. It simply makes sense. So, let’s go!

Here is What a Private Exchange Is and Isn’t


Over the past 9 months I have been speaking at conferences or sitting on panel discussions where the topic was Private Exchanges. In some cases the audience consisted of employers and other times the audience was filled with benefits brokers. On each occasion I asked the audience the question, “What is a Private Exchange?” In all circumstances there was never any agreement on what a Private Exchange was. Yet in my presentation I highlight several studies one which says over 70% of employers would consider switching to a Private Exchange. I am wondering what these employers thought a Private Exchange was when they were answering the question. Seventy percent of employers want something that nobody can agree on what it is. And just the other day I was asked by a broker if I could help them respond to an RFP where the employer was asking if the broker (who is supposed to be an independent advisor) had a Private Exchange.  I can’t imagine what response we would get if we asked the employer to define what they meant by a Private Exchange? I think if the broker asked she would not get the business so I did not advise she ask. What I do know, whatever a Private Exchange is, the broker needs to have one. Maybe she will have a better chance to get the business if she had 3 or 4 Private Exchanges. Who knows?

So I am going to define what a Private Exchange is and isn’t. Maybe it will start right here where we all will begin using the same language to describe what these new benefit offerings are or aren’t. One may ask who anointed me the king of defining this. My last name is not Webster (as in Merriam Webster Dictionary). Nobody anointed me. But if no one is going to take the lead why not me. I don’t have a horse in the race. I am not a broker, not an insurance company, and not a technology vendor wanting to promote my technology. I also don’t sell insurance to employers. So I have no vested interest in whatever Private Exchanges are. I will say that I do understand the technology as that is my business. And I know what Defined Contribution and Cafeteria plans are as I sold them in the late 80’s. So I do have some knowledge in the area.

I am going to keep this simple. To me a Private Exchange is intended to be a Private version of a Public Exchange. The entire US population is being educated by the government, media, and other interested parties about what an Insurance Exchange is. To take the word Exchange, and make it something different from what the populace is being told an exchange is, I will say is somewhat “deceptive”. In fact, when I do ask employers what a Private Health Exchange is they usually describe it as a marketplacewhere an individual can get access to a wide range of health insurance options from many insurance companies. In my personal life I think of an Exchange or Marketplace as someplace that has many options from many companies.  I know the difference between an Apple Store and Best Buy. I know the difference between buying a product at the NIKE, SONY, or Apple website versus Amazon. And I know all you reading this do too.

So using this logic of the way the world understands the term Exchange or Marketplace then the majority of the Private Exchanges being promoted today by benefits consultants and brokers, insurance companies or technology vendors, are not Exchanges or Marketplaces. If there are not multiple products from multiple vendors available where the buyer is free to choose what they want from the menu then it is not an Exchange. Multiple products on a technology platform from the same company is not a Private Exchange. And I don’t want to hear the argument that they have Medical, Dental, and Life from different carriers. That is like saying you can buy a TV, stereo, and mobile phone from the same store but you only have one vendor option for each type of product. While there are some states where real Exchanges exist (CA and MD Small Group Markets) and they do exist for individual insurance, for the majority of the group market there are no Private Exchanges. You can offer more medical options and provide a different methodology to fund these options, aka Defined Contribution, but don’t call them Private Exchanges. You are confusing the buyers.

I’m pretty sure this article won’t stop those with agendas from calling these things Private Exchanges and I will have to advise my broker customers that they may have to play the game because they don’t make the rules, but hey, I tried.

For the Record – The HR Technology Advisors Position with ADP


In today’s business world getting your message out is both easier and more difficult. With the internet, Smartphones, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, blogs, and more, it is really easy to publish your message for the world to see. You type, hit a button, and it is available to the world. In that sense it is easy to get your message out. It also easier for your competitors to get their message out. The hard part is getting anyone to listen and getting someone to find your message in a world of information overload. Whether you like it or not you have to play the game. If you don’t spread your message and define yourself others will and not always in the way you want. When that happens you will have to respond. Just look at the “noise” created during a Presidential campaign. The candidates spend as much time trying to define or label their opponent as they do defining themselves.

That gets me to the purpose of this article. I am about to launch a marketing campaign that I know will be misinterpreted by the market. Maybe saying misinterpreted is the wrong word because those who directly hear my message will more likely understand what my message is. What I do anticipate is that there will be noise created by others who do not hear my message that will misrepresent my message in the market. Some simply don’t want to take the time to listen and others may have their own agenda. This article is intended to clearly state my message for those that want to understand my position as it relates to this issue with ADP.

My firm, HR Technology Advisor (HRT), is launching a big marketing campaign highlighting how employee benefits brokers can leverage ADP to deliver a Private Exchange or Defined Contribution plan to the employer market. This concerns brokers because many see ADP as a competitor. Other technology firms who we do business with will not like it because ADP is a big competitor to them and I am promoting an idea based on a competitor. To many brokers, payroll companies, and HR and Benefits Technology vendors, ADP is arch-enemy number 1. As a consultant to benefits brokers and by extension an objective advisor to their clients when choosing technology, this “perceived” favoritism to ADP may not sit well. The key word is perceived. Let me get into the details.

At a high-level some people don’t understand the core purpose of my (our- Don Rowe is my partner) company, HR Technology Advisors. HRT is first and foremost a consultant to benefits brokers. Our job is to help benefits brokers understand how technology is impacting their business; how it will impact their clients HR and Benefits; know who the players are; and help position their firm competitively in the market. And then, as a paid representative of the brokers firm, we assist the brokers with direct client and prospect situations where we help them advise their clients on HR and Benefits technology and sometimes help them get prospects by participating in prospect presentations.

This is where ADP comes in. According to our statistics at HRT, employers are predominantly looking for technology that includes either HR and Benefits functionality or HR, Benefits, and Payroll in a single platform. Many have heard me say employers don’t want one system to track vacation days, sick days, and performance reviews; another to track benefits and enroll employees; and a third to process payroll. In fact, in 2013, close to 90% of the employers we assisted wanted a system that included HR and Benefits or HR-Benefits-Payroll all in one. And according to a recent market survey we did, ADP has a 46% market share of those employers using technology for Benefits Enrollment. Paychex was second with 29% and the next closest was 7%.  So whether a broker likes ADP or not the majority of any brokers’ clients are going to be using ADP as a tool to manage their benefits. It is not a broker’s choice as to what technology an employer wants to use to manage their HR-Benefits-Payroll. It is also not our choice at HR Technology Advisors. As a consultant to employers we work with ADP more than any other company because they have the largest market share. I equate this to the average benefits broker who may work with their local Blue Cross plan more than any other insurance company. They do so because in most markets Blue Cross has more than 50% market share. That does not mean the broker is solely a representative of Blue Cross nor are we only a representative of ADP.

As a consultant to brokers we use this knowledge to help our broker clients position their firm more competitively. While many brokers are running from ADP because they think they are a competitor (We addressed this in an article written in 2009 titled, “ADP – Friend or Foe” – download at www.joemarkland.wordpress.com ) we understand the value that brokers can bring their clients by having a service model to support those clients that have ADP or want ADP. Trust me, many clients need help with their technology and most brokers aren’t delivering the help. Here are a few questions I have asked brokers.

–          Have you ever helped your client test their ADP Benefits Enrollment System for accuracy?

–          Have you ever analyzed the pages employees would be accessing when enrolling in their benefits and see how well the benefits information is presented?

–          Have you ever uploaded a 2 minute video on the ADP platform that explains to an employee what Critical Illness Insurance is?

I have never had a broker answer yes to all of these questions. Helping clients with ADP is a service clients will value.

Now in 2013 Private Exchanges hit the market. Many brokers scrambled to sign-up with some benefits only technology vendors. At the same time we continue to engage clients who repeatedly tell us they want HR-Benefits-Payroll in one system. I found this conflict between what brokers were delivering  and what clients wanting to be very interesting so I wrote an article titled “An Alternative Approach to Private Exchanges” (also on my blog) and held webinars with the same title. In my article and on my webinar I predicted that ADP will be the largest Private Exchange technology vendor within 2 years. Not because I am going to make them but simply because more employers are using their system to manage their benefits than any other platform. So, as a consultant to brokers and employers I have helped employers figure out how to use their current ADP platform as a Private Exchange of Defined Contribution plan. Why? Because that is what employers wanted. They did not want to use another system simply to provide their employees with more medical options in a Private Exchange. So we worked hard with ADP to develop a model using third-party technologies, content from insurance companies, and internal programming resources to help employers leverage their ADP system as a Private Exchange. My marketing campaign is designed to bring our methodologies and message to the market so that employers can get what they want and the brokers that deliver this solution a competitive advantage.

I want to finish this by addressing the other technology vendors we have worked with at HRT. As I have stated we represent the brokers interest and by extension their clients. We have sold and implemented solutions from many vendors and there are many great solutions in the market. Yes, ADP has 46% market share, but they don’t have the other 54%. That being said I had one vendor ask me why I am doing this with ADP and not them. My simple response is because nobody asked. If a HR-Benefits Technology vendor does not offer the ability to administer a Private Exchange simply ask and I will show you how.

Do You Want Wellness Newsletters or Do You Want a Competitive Advantage?


I was making a presentation to a brokerage firm a few years ago about how they can position their firm more competitively in a rapidly changing environment. In the middle of the presentation one of the producers asked me a question and that was, “Do you have Wellness Newsletters”? It was an odd question at the moment because it came out of left field but it was indicative of what was going on in the benefits brokerage community. With the benefits brokerage business being somewhat commoditized and more competitors entering the space benefits brokers have been looking for that “silver bullet” –  that one thing that they think could separate their firm from the pack. That silver bullet that can help them attract new business.

Vendors have capitalized on the benefits brokers desire to find the “silver bullet” so their advertisements and sales pitches promise a “competitive advantage”.  Then they say you better buy/sell their product or the broker down the street will first. And of course when that broker buys in, you, the procrastinator, the indecisive one, will lose.

That gets me back to this producer who asked me for Wellness Newsletters. My response to his question was, “Do you want Wellness Newsletters or a competitive advantage?” Somewhere along the way he was sold the idea that Wellness Newsletters was something he needed and that would give him a competitive advantage. And of course the broker down the street was offering their clients Wellness Newsletters. He responded to my question by acknowledging he was looking for a competitive advantage. The marketing machine of some company had convinced him that Wellness Newsletters was a competitive advantage. I can tell you Wellness Newsletters are not a competitive advantage. In fact my benefits broker emails me a Wellness Newsletter every week. I immediately hit “Delete”. First, I never asked for them and he never asked me if I wanted them. They just started to show up. Second, I already subscribe to a WebMD Daily Newsletter and I don’t need his.

This gets back to the bigger problem for benefits brokers. For the past 10 years they have been sold a “competitive advantage”. First it was benefits websites, then Wellness Newsletters and Compliance Alerts, now it is online HR Libraries, and HR Call Centers. All cost the broker money and none of these solutions delivers a relevant competitive advantage. Usually, within a short period of time, every broker is offering the same thing – it doesn’t generate any new business – and they are saddled some multi-year contract and ongoing expense. While the broker was looking for some way to tie the client to them it is the broker who actually is the one being tied down or handcuffed to some vendor.

So what should a broker do? First I would say start with solving real client problems. Don’t follow the guy down the street. Think logically and don’t respond to every sales pitch or press release you see about how some broker is doing some grand thing. Ask your clients what they want and make sure they know you are the resource to solve their real problems. By approaching the market in a thoughtful way and by doing proper strategic planning you will feel secure with your market position and not have to worry every time you here of some wild promise of some grand thing.

The Coming Obsolescence of Stand-alone Benefits Enrollment Systems


Let me start by saying that I realize the title of this article alone is going to be met with objections and criticism from many in the benefits technology business, some of who are my friends. It is also not something that I wish upon the industry. But as a consultant to the industry I have seen the trends for some time and the time has come to declare that the demise of stand-alone benefits enrollment systems is in sight. And it is time for all who either own such a system, sell such a system, or use such a system to prepare for the inevitable.

The beginning of the end started in 2006 when ADP acquired Employease, which at the time was one of the largest benefits enrollment vendors in the space. This was followed in 2007 by the acquisition of Benetrac by Paychex. These leading payroll firms made these acquisitions not because they wanted to be in the benefits enrollment business, but because they recognized the opportunity and the increasing market demand by the employer market for a single system to manage HR-Benefits-Payroll. Since that time they have quickly become the leading benefits enrollment companies in the U.S. with ADP controlling approximately 45% of the market and Paychex 26%. [i]

While I recognized this trend as early as 2002 I first wrote about it in an article published in Employee Benefit Advisors magazine in September 2009 titled, “Payroll Firm, PEO’s, and BPO’s Have Got it Right”. (See this in the Article Section in my blog at https://joemarkland.wordpress.com/past-articles/) In this article I pointed out that employers would be looking for a “single system that stores all HR, benefits and payroll information”.  Many employers don’t want one system to track someone’s pay, another to track benefits, and a third to track someone’s vacation days, performance, and other data that an employer may track on an employee. Employers don’t want to makes changes to 3, 4 or 5 systems if an employee simply changes their address. And “for employee self-service, accessing one system to see all pay, benefits and time-off information is much more user-friendly”. I often compare this merging of systems to the iPhone. At one time I had an iPod, a camera, and a cell phone. Now the iPhone and the rest of the smart phone market has all three features in one.

At the time I had written the article and on many occasions since I have claimed that the transition to a single platform would occur in about 5 years. We are now a little over three years since the article and based on recent market activity and my assessment of that activity, I still believe this to be true. My belief is based on statistics gathered from my own company’s customer base. As an HR and Benefits technology advisor to benefits brokers, and by extension their clients, we conduct needs assessments and recommend HR-Benefit-Payroll solutions to employers. They use this analysis to make purchase decisions. We work with anywhere from 20-40 employers per month and have been doing so for about 10 years. Over the last 36 months we have seen a huge shift in demand with stand-alone benefits enrollment systems moving from 55% down to 10% of our activity. The following chart shows our data as to the type of systems employers have been requesting in our assessments.

Benefits Enrollment Only

HR-Benefits-Payroll

2011

55%

45%

2012

35%

65%

2013

10%

90%

The HR-Benefits-Payroll column in the above chart may represent systems that either are HR and Benefits or HR-Benefits-Payroll. Keep in mind that we are introduced to these employers by benefits brokers, so one would think the statistics would lean more to benefits enrollment only systems. That is not the case. Employers, by a 9-1 ratio, are predominantly looking for a single system. This statistic not only plays out for new customers. We are also witnessing a significant migration of existing clients that use benefits enrollment systems convert to a single HR-Benefits-Payroll solution. Over 95% of those that have changed systems have transitioned to a single platform.

Other than the obvious, which is the employer’s desire for a single system, I attribute this rapid conversion to the following:

  1. Increase in number of vendors – Any competitor to ADP or Paychex has had to develop similar capabilities. While some are still evolving, the number of vendors offering these capabilities has grown tremendously creating a greater awareness in the market while giving employers more options
  2. Reduction of HR Staff – Employers want to the reduce costs related to corporate overhead. HR is one area. Therefore efficiency in HR by leveraging technology is a goal for many employers.
  3. Compliance – HR and Benefits is getting more complex. Employers need to organize their data to stay compliant. The reporting needed for the Accountable Care Act is an example of this. Payroll Companies have led the way here with this type of reporting.
  4. Employee Self-service – Employers do want to expand employee self-service in an easy to use way. A single point of entry to all HR-Benefits-Payroll information provides a better and easier employee experience while reflecting well on the company.

Many benefits brokers and benefits enrollment companies will debate these statistics. Around the industry benefits enrollment vendors are having an outstanding year in 2013. I expect 2014 to be just as promising. I believe this can be attributed to several reasons. The first reason is that many benefits enrollment systems are either fully funded or partially funded by benefit brokers and/or insurance companies. Brokers and carriers continue to use technology and what I call “giveaways” as a differentiator or to sell product. In the past it was benefit websites. Today it is benefits enrollment systems and HR Call Centers. These free or discounted systems and services creates a false perception of market demand. Many of these systems were implemented without ever having gone through an analysis to determine employer needs. Why should they, in many of these situations the employer is not making a purchase decision. It is the brokers, carriers, or whoever is funding it that is the customer of the benefits technology vendor. I would estimate that close to 50% of the stand-alone benefits enrollment systems are funded by some third-party.  Of systems my firm has implemented that number is closer to 75%. Competition in the benefits brokerage business has increased the number of “free” enrollment systems but this does not represent a real increase in employer demand for such systems. Give away anything for free for a day and I will show you an increase in demand.

Now along comes health care reform and the threat of reduced compensation from medical insurance. How many stories have you read about how a broker can make up for lost medical commission by selling more voluntary and worksite products? This push has resulted in an even greater funding of benefits enrollment technology by insurance companies that sell voluntary and worksite products.

For a while I thought the development of Private Exchanges would give the benefits enrollment companies some reprieve. I still think it may for a year or two. With Private Exchanges the technology bar has been raised and the enrollment technology vendors have had to add functionality to handle defined contribution plans and provide decision support tools to help employees make better insurance purchase decisions. In my opinion this technology edge will be short-lived as all other vendors will have to add these capabilities. In my short experience with Private Exchanges I still have found the majority of employers wanting to run their Defined Contribution Plan or Private Exchange within their existing HR-Benefits-Payroll technology. Using third-party tools I can Private Exchange-ize almost any HR-Benefits-Payroll system. With all these new employee contribution methods and the increase in voluntary products I still find the ease of making the payroll deductions a primary requirement of the employer. This once again puts the single system vendors in the driver’s seat.

My predictions come in a year when benefits enrollment company Benefit Focus went public and raised around $75 million in their IPO after showing a previous 6 month operating loss of $15.2 million[ii] . More recently Towers Watson acquired benefits enrollment company Liazon for $215 million. I think both may disagree with my labeling them as benefits enrollment technology companies but that is how I see them. That is the goal isn’t it – to enroll people in their benefits? As for the money aspect of these transactions I say “good for them”. They capitalized on the opportunity. However, neither of these events changes my opinion as to where the market is going.

If broker competition, health care reform, the push to sell more voluntary products, and the advance of Private Exchanges is creating more demand what is going to stop the advance of benefits enrollment only solutions? The answer is two-fold and includes increased employer demand on one side and the ever-growing vendor market providing the supply. In the end logic will prevail and employers will get what they want which is a single system; and the army of payroll vendors, HRIS vendors, HR Consultants, and even some benefits brokers will educate the market and deliver the solutions. I guarantee that brokers who work with me will be delivering such systems. Think of this for a minute, ADP has around 800 sales people calling on employers every day and they are just one company. Collectively there are thousands of sales people calling on employers to deliver these solutions. They will move the market.

The transformation has begun but will still take some time. In the near future mergers will happen between enrollment vendors, payroll vendors, and HR vendors to meet the market demand. Some stand-alone enrollment systems will survive to meet the needs of those clients with very complex benefits or those who want best in class solutions. This will more likely be in the 1000+ employee market, even though many larger companies such as Nokia with 50,000 employees are implementing a single system. (See http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240210585/Nokia-Solutions-Networks-HR-rejects-best-of-breed-for-best-of-platform ) In the less than 1000 employee marketplace I predict that by the end of 2015 you will see an even larger percentage of the market convert to a single system for HR-Benefits-Payroll. If you are in the benefits business then you will have
to make some changes to prepare for this market change. Or, I could be wrong. I presented my facts so that you may decide.


[i] HR Technology Advisors 2011 Study

[ii] Street Insider August 14, 2013

It’s Time to Simplify Benefits


Since I have been in the benefits business, either as a distributor or as a technology advisor, benefits communication has always been a problem and a topic of discussion. Brokers and employers have been developing fancy benefit booklets or creating detailed benefits statements all in an effort to get employees to understand and appreciate their benefits. Now with the advent of the web, brokers and employers have built websites and developed videos to give employees access to benefits information 24/7 often only to take them down a year or two later because nobody is using them. Trust me, I have seen hundreds of utilization reports and very few people are using these sites. Yet, after all this effort the majority of employees still don’t understand their benefits. I say enough already! Why don’t we try to make things easier? Well I have some suggestions.

Let’s start with the health insurance business. When I got in the business in 1986 many plans were still straight deductibles and coinsurance. In fact, one of the most popular products was the Guardian Insurance $100 deductible 100% plan. While I realize this type of plan was not sustainable financially, I will say it was simple. Concurrently there was the growth of HMO, PPO, and POS plans. Along with that came all kinds of copays and new rules on whom you had to see first before you saw someone else. Now there are HSA’s and HRA’s sold with high deductible plans. I think it’s funny that they call high deductible plans, Consumer Driven. Wouldn’t it have been easier if we just took a straight $100 deductible 80/20 to $5000 plan from 1986 and adjusted the deductible and coinsurance every year for inflation?

Today health insurance is very confusing and it’s going to get worse. I think my prescription drug card today has like 8 different copays. Recently I had treatment for a health condition and between my primary care physician, the specialist, the hospital, and the lab, I have so many bills I had to bring them all to the office and try to figure them out. Each bill had about 6 different figures on them. Between what they were billing, the discounts, copays, deductibles and coinsurance I could not figure things out. It’s been two weeks and the bills are still on my desk. There is no way the average American is going to figure this out. I have such a headache from this I need to see a doctor.

While I do realize the logic for creating these monster plans, it simply hasn’t worked. The health insurance business is becoming like the tax code. Everyone is manipulating the system to modify behavior. If you want people to buy more cars then you give a “Cash for Clunkers” tax credit. You want people to buy more houses you lower interest rates and give people an interest deduction. You want people to stop using Emergency Rooms you give them a $100 ER deductible. And that gets me to my prescription copays – I simply punt on that one. When I go the Pharmacy I just say “tell me what I owe you”, and I assume the pharmacy is telling me the truth. I have no idea whether the drug is name brand, generic, generic plus, or whatever new category has been created. Enough already!

Personally I think this whole country could operate on about 10 easy to understand health insurance options. As an employer and employee would I care? No. I don’t need all those options. I would bet that I could develop 10 plans that would be within 3% actuarially of every plan in America today. What I believe is that other than all the little nuances in health care plans (that nobody understands) the majority of plans in effect today are almost exactly alike. Imagine how easy it would be for employees, doctors, hospitals, etc… to understand and administer such plans. This would not eliminate competition. It would make Aetna’s Plan 1 the same as Blue Cross and United Plan 1. I would go to the doctor and say I have Plan 1 with Aetna and everyone would understand. To make things even easier I would go back to straight deductible and coinsurance plans. Obviously this is not going to happen with ObamaCare. Just think of what a $100 deductible 80/20 to $5000 plan from 1986 would look like if you adjusted the deductibles and copays for inflation.

I could go on and on with other insurance coverages. Your Spouse can buy Voluntary Life equal to 50% of the employee amount but the employee can get no more than 3 times earnings to a maximum of $150,000 when combined with the Base Life paid for by the employer. And if the employee is 65 and is subject to a reduction schedule it needs to be multiplied by 65% assuming his birthday is closer to the last renewal date than the next one. What?

If you are a benefits broker or insurance company the idea of making things easier may be considered blasphemy. I can hear all the arguments already. But one really has to honestly ask, does anyone really care about all these plan differences? Personally I don’t think so.