Design Inquiry: Employee Benefits

Susan Sammis, PHR, SHRM-CP, President
Society for Human Resource Management
Tompkins County Chapter
P.O. Box 208
Ithaca, NY 14851
December 2, 2016
Dear Ms. Sammis:
We are a team of senior students at Ithaca College taking a capstone course titled “Critical Issues in
Organizations.” This semester, we have researched issues regarding employee benefits in order to design
a solution that improves the current system. Based on our research, we have found that a disconnect
exists between employee needs and wants regarding their benefit options and which options they
actually select. Our team found that employers’ ineffective communication leads to employees’ poor
understanding of benefits and how they work. The following paper offers suggestions for solutions to the
issue we have defined above.
We understand you are the leading provider of resources serving the needs of HR professionals. We are
sharing our research with you because we believe the findings in the included report will be useful to
your mission of advancing the practice of human resource management.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Sincerely,
Katie Andresen
Sara Elwell
Julia Imbalzano
Sabina Leybold
Rachel Mooney

Employee Benefits
Katie Andresen, Sara Elwell, Julia Imbalzano, Sabina Leybold, Rachel Mooney
Ithaca College
2 Running head: EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

ABSTRACT
Employee benefits are meant to help satisfy, retain and motivate employees. Through our research,
we have found ineffective employer communication about benefits leads to employee frustration and poor
understanding of how to utilize benefits. Employees make benefits decisions based on what they know,
but without a decent understanding of benefits, employees may not select the benefits most appropriate
to their lifestyle. Based on literature reviews and interviews with human resource professionals, we
created systemic models to understand the source of the poor communication and combat the ineffective
education surrounding employee benefits. We came to the understanding that improved communication
begins with improving knowledge about benefit packages; therefore, conversations about benefits
must start as early as high school. Educating individuals prior to their entrance into the workforce will
ensure they have ample knowledge of employee benefits and are not at a disadvantage when they begin
working. Our final solution comes in the form of an app that individuals will be encouraged to download
prior to entering the workforce. We believe that our app’s design will allow all individuals to learn the
jargon and processes surrounding employee benefits, manage their individual benefit packages over the
course of their career, and provide an honest overview of the benefits that companies offer to increase
inter-company competitiveness based on available options. Through this app, we aim to bridge the gap
between employers’ communication and employees’ understanding of benefits to ensure that future
employees will utilize benefits offered at their jobs and choose the right benefits to match their lifestyles.
INTRODUCTION
At the beginning of our senior capstone course, Critical Issues in Organizations, we were assigned
to choose an issue that we felt passionate about within organizations. We decided to focus on the issue
of employee benefits. We believe this issue is important and prevalent as we will be starting our careers
soon and do not fully understand how benefit programs work. From our research, we have discovered
that insufficient understanding of benefits is common for all types of employees. A recent survey
conducted by the International Foundation of Employee Benefit Plans found that “most employees are
confused by their benefits, and an alarming 80 percent of employers don’t think their employees even
open or read information they provide about them” (Straz, 2016). Additionally, “only 20 percent of
employees surveyed had enough information to make informed decisions about their benefits, according
to Aflac’s 2015 WorkForces Report (Straz, 2016). To combat this problem, we initially researched the
benefits themselves to determine which ones are most important to each generation in order to design a
solution that improves benefit packages that satisfy all generations. However, as we began our research
we discovered that the failure to satisfy employees does not stem from undesirable options, but rather
from poor communication and ineffective education about available benefits.
In this paper, we examine the disconnect between employee needs and wants regarding their
benefit options and which options they actually select. Then, we discuss potential solutions ranging from
a new college curriculum to a mentor system, and finally propose an application that tracks and visually
displays an employee’s benefits over time, educates users on complex benefits terms and issues, and
encourages younger generations to learn about benefits to better prepare them for the workforce. While
we do not believe an entirely new benefits system is necessary, our dynamic and sustainable solution
addresses this issue and can be implemented in a way to bring positive systemic change in the workforce
at large.
CONTEXT OF THE ISSUE
The workforce is increasingly multigenerational and diverse in both gender and ethnic
background. Different generations are looking for different kinds of benefits, yet all populations struggle
to make the most of the benefits they are offered. For example, baby boomers are looking for “retirement
preparation plans” while millennials focus on “educational benefits,” “professional development
opportunities” and “flexible work options” (D. Merriman, personal communication, October 3, 2016),
3 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

but regardless of each population’s priorities, many benefits go underutilized due to confusion or
misunderstanding. According to Giué (2016), “the value of these benefits is wasted, if the offerings are not
effectively communicated in a way that inspires employees to learn and take advantage of them.”
We explored multiple perspectives within organizations by considering both the capabilities
of employers and the needs of employees; however, we do not assume that employers and employees
always have different viewpoints. We researched this issue within American businesses classified in the
“professional and business services” sector as outlined in the United States Department of Labor’s Bureau
of Labor Statistics (Employment by major industry sector, 2015). This framing reflects the working
environments the majority of our Communication Management and Design class will pursue after
graduation.
DESIGN INQUIRY PROCESS
We sought to answer the following research questions through our design inquiry:
1. Are employees satisfied with the benefits they are offered?
a. If so, why?
b. If not, why not?
c. How can this issue be addressed? What steps can be taken to mitigate the issue?
2. How do companies currently communicate with their employees?
a. How can organizations more effectively communicate benefit offerings to employees?
3. How do companies currently educate their employees?
a. What techniques are useful for educating current and future employees about benefits?
4. What systems are currently in place to inform people about benefits?
a. Within organizations/companies?
b. Within school systems (high schools, colleges and universities)?
Our process began by reading articles, scholarly journals, and similar sources. Then, we used data
to write questions to ask our primary interview sources, who were all Human Resource and/or Benefits
professionals. We then modeled/analyzed the data to find holes in reasoning to identify further research
areas. Within this paper, modeling refers to a, “Graphical technique for visualizing connections between
several ideas or pieces of information” (Business Dictionary, n.d.). The models provided a visual guide for
abstract information, attitudes towards benefits, recurring problems, etc. We realized that our original
research questions were not addressing a more prominent issue. We modeled:
● What constitutes “work” vs. “life” and where the two overlap (Appendix A)
● What the similarities and differences are among the various generations in the workplace
(Appendix B)
● How employees are motivated and satisfied, based on George Homans’ Social Exchange Theory
(Appendix C)
● How Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs connects to benefit offerings (Appendix D)
○ In doing this we found that the benefits were not the issue, rather employers did not have
enough time to satisfy all employee needs. This led us to realize the issue was not about
benefits themselves, but about the employee/employer relationship in communicating
benefits.(Appendix D)
● Why employees do not take advantage of benefits (Appendix E)
○ This model led us to determine that a root cause of employee satisfaction with benefits was
the poor communication about benefits between employers and employees. We decided to
focus on the communication aspect and model what causes poor communication (Appendix
F)
● Where our research was targeted and for whom the solution would be created (Appendix G)
4 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

Originally, we asked questions based on the idea that benefits were not fulfilling employees’ needs,
or were outdated with the modern workforce. While we did find instances where this was true, we came
to find that there was a much broader challenge of employees not having an in-depth understanding of
the benefits that are offered. Because of this limited understanding, employees are not choosing benefits
that are suited to their lifestyle needs. Our methodical process, the articles we researched, and interviews
we conducted were critical to altering our direction of the project while still addressing a very serious
need in the workplace. Our sources discussed the short amount of time people have to choose benefits,
complex jargon, and other red flags that became a key point of discussion and ultimately led to our new
direction for the inquiry.
Throughout our process, we tried to eliminate a potential for bias as best as possible. We
interviewed professionals in the human resource field who specialize in benefits, compensation, and
training within the company they own or work for. This allowed us to avoid inquiring about someone’s
personal feelings or attitudes towards benefits. We only asked questions about the benefits offered at
the professional’s companies for broader information about the benefits offered in the United States.
We did not ask about personal benefits from any of our interviewees. We researched both the employer
and employee side of the issues to accurately find gaps between the two sides. Government databases
provided the categorization of industries and laws regarding benefits and compensation information. We
read scholarly journals from societies or organizations specifically involved in human resources, benefits,
or the changing workforce. We chose not to read articles sponsored by specific companies that offered
data only for their company or industry. By being aware of and diligent to bias, as well as fact-checking
information in order to ensure exaggerations were not used, our team created a final design to be utilized
by all organizations, and that will be beneficial for both employers and employees.
RESEARCH FINDINGS
Dissatisfaction with Selection of Benefits
Employees use benefit offerings as an “indication of how much they matter to their employers”
(Tillman, 2013). Benefits have a significant impact on employee retention. Employees who are satisfied
with their benefits packages are more likely to stay at their job. A survey by the International Foundation
of Employee Benefit Plans (IFEBP) found that most employees are confused by their benefits, and 80
percent of employers do not think their employees open or read information they provide about them
(Straz, 2016). Employers are aware that communication about employee benefits is inadequate; however,
an effective solution to combat this communication disconnect still needs to be established.
Employees who do not understand benefits packages are often unmotivated when it comes to
picking a package and therefore, spend minimal time choosing benefits. Prudential’s “Ninth Study of
Employee Benefits” found that “23% of employees spend less than 30 minutes selecting their benefits
packages” and “24% only spent 31-59 minutes” (2016). When employees do not take the time to
understand what they are signing up for, they are prone to choosing the wrong options and become
dissatisfied with their packages. Unum’s 2012 survey found that, “employees need a good three weeks to
review their benefits options” and “employees who rated their benefits education as “excellent” or “very
good” were most likely to have had three or more weeks to review their benefits, while those with less
than two weeks were more likely to report they did not have enough time (Shutan, 2012). These findings
indicate how crucial it is for employees to take the time to understand their benefit packages because
their choices affect their lives for an extended period of time.
We noted that current and former employees are increasingly filing lawsuits accusing companies
of “failing to ensure that the employee fully understands or understood his or her benefits” (Walters,
2008). The minimal time spent selecting benefits packages is in part due to the confusing jargon used
in benefits contracts and the incomplete education employees have about benefits packages. Chaney
(2016) suggests presenting information in “everyday language” and “defining terms as needed” to ensure
employees understand their packages. Furthermore, our research found that communication challenges
5 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

also result from costs, timeliness, and internal politics. Additionally, employees assume if they have
told an employee something once, this is ensured comprehension of the message (Walters, 2008). This
specific insight gave us knowledge of where the points of disconnect between employers and employees
regarding the understanding of benefits lie.
Communication
The communication surrounding benefit packages is minimal and scattered. According to
Tillman (2013), “communication about benefits is just as important as offering benefits” and currently,
“employees feel ill-informed about about the types of benefits available to them and/or how to enroll.”
Thomas McCoy states, “Employee research has repeatedly shown a desire for common sense, education,
and communication to help [employees] determine an appropriate benefits strategy” demonstrating
how employees are actively searching for an easier way to choose benefits (McCoy, n.d). Employees often
feel overwhelmed with the amount of choices available in benefit offerings. McCoy cites Dale Alexander,
President of Alexander & Company, who found “employees are overwhelmed with too much information...
they just want to know they are doing the right thing” (McCoy, n.d.). These findings indicate that it is not
the benefit packages themselves that need to be fixed, it is the system of communication surrounding
the benefits that needs to be improved. Unum’s 2012 survey found, “One of the biggest communication
challenges is explaining the value of benefits to employees between the age 18 and 34” (Shutan, 2012).
As members of this age group enter the workforce, it will be increasingly important to effectively
communicate with them about benefits.
Improving communication within an organization will create a more cohesive understanding
of benefits. Communication “creates shared meaning, about the norms, values and culture of an
organization” (Gumus, 2007). When employees all share a similar understanding of an organization’s
benefits system, they can engage in more constructive conversations about benefits, allowing employers
to really gauge where the dissatisfaction with benefits lie. Gumus (2007) discussed how “knowledge
sharing is a form of communication” in an organization. Expanding employees’ knowledge about benefits,
will improve the communication around this topic because employees will feel more comfortable
discussing benefits when they have a stronger understanding. A survey by LIMRA found employees do
not know how much their benefits are worth and therefore, do not value their benefits as much as they
should. Miller (2011) questions, “without understanding the value of their benefits, how are employees
making knowledgeable choices about who they work for and the benefits they select?” Employees make
choices about benefits based on what they know, but if they do not have a sufficient understanding of
benefits, it is unlikely they are making the right choices.
Education
Most young people enter the workforce with little knowledge about how a work environment
actually operates. A 2012 McKinsey study found, “only one out four employers believe traditional
universities are doing an ‘adequate job of preparing students for the workplace.’” According the US.
Department of Education, schools do believe they are preparing students for the workforce by following
state and national standards, however, the Department also states, “standards and assessments generally
do not reflect the knowledge and skills necessary for student success in careers” (U.S. Department
of Education, 2010). Educators aim to prepare students for their careers by integrating different
subjects into the curriculum. Students study topics ranging from natural sciences to humanities to the
arts. However, the US. Department of Education finds that covering all these areas just to meet a state
standard may not be the best way to prepare students for their careers. It seems that the skills students
are learning in school do not correspond to the skills employers are looking for. The McKinsey study
found there is a huge disconnect in the communication between employers and education professionals,
reporting, “one-third of employers say they never communicate with education providers; of those
that do, fewer than half say it proved effective (McKinsey & Company, 2012). When employers and
6 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

education professionals do not communicate, it becomes unclear what students should actually be
focusing on because each side has a different opinion of which skills are important. Communication and
education professionals need to work together to understand the skills students need to be prepared
for the workforce and to implement those skills into college curriculums. The McKinsey study suggests
implementing “education-to-employment” programs to better prepare students for the work force
(McKinsey & Company, 2012).
Implications of Ineffective Communication/Education
We discussed potential causes of why employees do not take advantage of their benefits (Appendix
E). We included possibilities, such as inadequate knowledge and understanding about benefit packages,
employees feeling overwhelmed by the options, and poor communication between the organization and
the employees regarding benefits. Once we analyzed our ideas, we drew connections between the ideas
as well as paths of causation. We noticed most problems could be traced back to poor communication.
Insufficient communication leads to employees feeling overwhelmed by the benefits offered, and also
leads to a lack of understanding and knowledge about the benefits packages. An important first step
would be solving insufficient communication between employers and employees regarding benefits
packages.
After discovering that poor communication was a cause of underutilization of benefits, we
mapped out its causes (Appendix F) We included factors including “poor channel choice,” “inconsistency
of message,” and “jargon.” Straz suggests that employees do not know what is important because of the
format in which benefits are communicated to them. They are left “sorting through a pile of information,
digesting it, and then having to make a critical decision without the proper education” (2016). Due to
the various causes of poor communication, it is crucial for employers to consider multiple techniques
and methods for improving communication with employees. Employers cannot just focus on one
communication method because employees have different preferences for communication and some
respond better to one method over another.
Previously, benefits packages were static, with no option for flexibility or choice. Newer “defined
contribution” programs allow employees to pick and choose which features they want in their package,
especially when it comes to 401(k) plans. Larry Zimpleman said, “Employees like choice. The problem
is that left to their own decision-making, employees don’t make the right choices, leaving us with a
voluntary system where people are making really bad choices” (as cited in Adams & Salisbury, 2014).
With more options, employees will have to be better educated about benefits programs to make the right
choices.
The Role of the Employer
Employers can engage with employees to help them make the right choices. Thornton (2016)
suggests employers should “assess employee demographics,” “use data to optimize benefit programs” and
“know employees’ financial/insurance literacy.” These practices can help employers understand the needs
and priorities of their employees, which can lead them to initiate or improve communication policies and
training programs that better prepare employees to choose their benefit packages wisely and utilize them
fully.
During our initial research, we created a “Generational Venn Diagram” map to display the
differences between Baby Boomers, Gen X and Millennials in terms of what they are looking for in a
benefits package (Appendix B). Although our project does not focus on the benefits themselves anymore,
we still believe this map is applicable because each generation has different expectations about how
their plans should be communicated. For example, members of Generation Y prefer text messages,
tweets and instant messages to communicate in everyday life. Those in the Baby Boomer generation and
older Generation Xers would rather use the phone to speak to someone instead of texting. Additionally,
younger Millennial employees tend to use a lot of abbreviations and informal language in their
7 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

everyday communication and have a preference for communication through social media (Giué, 2016).
Through this model, we discovered that one method of communication won’t fit everyone’s needs and
communication methods need to be customized to individual’s needs. A one-size-fits-all solution would
be ineffective, so we have directed our solution efforts to assisting Millennials and following generations.
Since younger employees are the future of the workforce and if we implement a solution within this
generation, it will carry on through future generations.

PRELIMINARY SOLUTIONS
To address the problem of dissatisfaction with benefits caused by poor communication and incomplete
knowledge of employee benefits, we considered a handful of potential solutions:
1) “Life Ed”
Given McKinsey’s (2012) findings that employers and educators lack the cohesion to teach college
students about workplace skills, we considered the implementation of an “education-to-employment”
program that will bridge the gap between academic experience and workforce readiness. This involves
the creation of a new college curriculum that aims to educate students about employee benefits, work
expectations, and human resources. The curriculum would cover topics that new employees find difficult,
such as negotiating compensation and benefits, the jargon and process of benefits enrollment, and how to
compare available benefit offerings when examining job prospects. While some colleges and universities
already offer classes like these, our solution differs from existing offerings. The curriculum would be
incorporated into a mandatory educational program, similar to general education requirements, and it
would eventually become standard on all college campuses. The curriculum would include additional
topics such as personal finance skills, business writing skills (such as Ithaca College’s “Writing for the
Workplace” course), and other necessary concepts for students to understand before beginning their
careers.
This solution would help to both standardize communication about benefits to minimize variation
between companies and establish a baseline understanding to equip new employees to make better
choices in the short amount of time they take to select a plan (per the 2016 Prudential study). In addition,
employees will better understand their job offers beyond the paycheck, which satisfies employers’
desire for employees to acknowledge and appreciate the money spent to offer these benefits (D. Leybold,
personal communication, November 8, 2016).
This solution lacks true feasibility, however, as each higher education institution controls its own
general education requirements. Intervening in the education system in this way aims to use the the
leverage points of “structure of information flow” and “rules of the system,” but each college or university
itself has the stronger leverage of its “power to add, change, evolve, or self-organize” (Meadows, n.d.). This
makes this type of change difficult because of the conflict between the goal of “Life Ed” implementation
and the institution’s power to prevent that change due to lack of resources or prioritization.
2) Cheat Sheet
As discussed above, Straz (2016) suggests the format and jargon of the communication
surrounding benefits makes it difficult to digest a large amount of technical information without
prior education. One solution we considered to help bridge the gap between highly detailed benefits
information and a realistic expectation of employee understanding is a cheat sheet that breaks down
a larger employee benefits manual into 1-2 pages of its most crucial elements. It would include an
educational component that aids employees in choosing benefits that fit their needs, shows them how to
read and understand their fuller benefits package details, and explains how to apply their plan in their
professional and personal lives. The cheat sheet would be available in multiple forms to help remedy
the “generational differences” aspect of poor communication discussed above; these forms include
text-heavy paper copies, interactive infographics, and e-learning modules to walk employees through
8 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

definitions, jargon, and nuances of their benefit packages. The advantages of our cheat sheet would be
universal accessibility of materials and varied communication methods that meet individuals’ needs and
preferences rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.
As part of this solution, we also considered altering the Fair Labor Standards Act, a law that
mandates which documents must be posted in a workplace (such as minimum wage information and
workplace safety requirements) to include displaying the benefits cheat sheet in the workplace. This
addition would help to standardize communication and ensure that it is readily available and commonly
seen, which would help employees to regularly engage with benefits plans and understand their
implications.
Unfortunately, this idea is not legally feasible. According to the Department of Labor, “the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) requires plan administrators...to give plan participants
in writing the most important facts they need to know about their retirement and health benefit plans
including plan rules, financial information, and documents on the operation and management of the
plan” (United States Department of Labor, n.d.). Dennis Leybold, pension/retirement benefits lawyer,
explains that under ERISA, employees must be provided a separate summary plan description (SPD) for
each part (such as retirement, health plan, 401(k), etc.) of their benefits plan (personal communication,
November 1, 2016). Additionally, “SPDs should summarize everything that’s material in the plan and
make it so everyone can understand, but certain types of plans are very complicated, especially pension,
which makes it difficult to explain them fully in a way everyone can understand” (D. Leybold, personal
communication, November 1, 2016). While SPDs are often 12-14 pages each, they can still pose problems
for legal compliance; oversimplification of complicated information aids in understanding, but removing
crucial information for the sake of comprehension can create conflict between the SPD and plan itself that
is “legally difficult” (D. Leybold, personal communication, November 1, 2016).
3) Benefits Advising
One reason employees struggle to understand their benefit plans is due to the mass of information
that new hires have to absorb. Leybold says, “Most people, when they get hired, are given an employment
package with policies and that’s where your benefits explanations are too. It’s overwhelming, and there’s
no way you can pay attention to your benefits on top of everything else” (personal communication,
November 8, 2016). Leybold suggests employers can reduce overwhelm by breaking each employee’s
package apart and giving them information at different times as it is needed, then meet with them to
review their understanding of benefits, examine their choice in plan, and address their needs. He says,
“A face-to-face dialogue helps point choices in the right direction” (D. Leybold, personal communication,
November 8, 2016).
Benefits advising serves a similar function as academic advising in higher education institutions,
in which students receive counseling to help them choose classes that will fulfill their needs (based on
program requirements) and outside interests. In the workplace, personal interaction provides in-person
support for benefits decisions and shows human resource personnel where employees may need more
explanation or coaching.
This idealistic solution, however, is challenging to implement. Leybold says, “unfortunately it holds
HR people accountable, and there have been court cases with a he-said-she-said [debate]”(D. Leybold,
personal communication, November 8, 2016). It is also a very time-consuming and expensive process
for HR representatives to undertake, so companies often choose a middle ground of group information
sessions which allow face-to-face interaction without the challenge of one-on-one counseling (D. Leybold,
personal communication, November 8, 2016).
Design Requirements and Constraints
At the onset of this project, we identified scope as our biggest design constraint. It would be
nearly impossible to analyze all industries, so we narrowed our focus to address primarily professional,
9 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

managerial, or administrative workers in office environments. This means our analysis glosses over
highly task-oriented and vocational industries like manufacturing, hospitality, mining, etc. This choice
was intentional; when examining benefits packages themselves, we realized that the needs of vocational
workers were geared primarily towards safety and health care rather than concerns about technology or
scheduling flexibility (which were two issues we were examining).
After our issue shifted to dissatisfaction caused by poor communication, our scope widened. While
our proposed designs favor professional workers, they are applicable in more technical trades as well.
Issues with communication are common in a variety of environments, and our designs seek to address
those breakdowns in understanding regardless of industry.
Our preliminary and final solutions are, however, aimed at the Millennial and Generation Z
populations. The “Life Ed” class is geared toward college students, the infographic and e-learning
module formats of the cheat sheet are likely to be favored by younger employees, and benefits advising is
primarily directed at new hires who are inexperienced with benefit plans.
PROPOSED SOLUTION
Most organizations only communicate which benefits are offered without much synthesis of why
and how they contribute to employees’ well-being. We determined this by looking at company websites
across multiple industries including financial services, technology, consumer products, healthcare,
and government; we found that most companies simply list the benefits they offer and do not convey
an underlying philosophy about how these benefits relate to their employees’ lifestyles. For example,
Facebook’s benefits page separates its benefits by country and then provides a bulleted list of 8-10 words
for each offering without further explanation (Facebook, 2016). According to Sinek (2009), employees
are more likely to respond when shown how and why ideas impact them directly. To more effectively
communicate benefits and promote greater understanding, employers should focus on why these
benefits are useful and how they work. As previously stated, we no longer believe the solution lies in
redesigning the current system of the benefits themselves, but rather we hope to add the why and how
factors to existing communication. The lack of robust benefits packages isn’t the problem; the problem is
dissatisfaction due to inadequate communication and underutilization.
We propose to design and implement Benefits-U, our new benefits application (to view a basic
application mock-up, see Appendix H). The interactive, educational application will include profiles
in which individuals can track their benefits. The main feature will be a 3-D visual diagram that will
be unique to each individual to help make sense of what they should prioritize when selecting benefit
packages (see Appendix H for visualization). Users will answer a series of questions about their
characteristics such as values, priorities, life events, age, etc. and the application will use an algorithm
to create a unique 3-D amoeba/mandala-like shape that represents who they are. Users can access
recommendations and explanations about which benefits are most compatible for their individualized
shapes. The visual will be located on individuals’ pages and will update as users progress through their
careers and undergo life changes. Additionally, a history setting will allow users to view all past visuals
to see their progression of benefits. This visual format and personalization will combat the problem of
a one-size fits all education. (Please note: to avoid privacy issues, the application will not be connected
to social networks. Personal profile pages will be private and will only be seen by the individual who is
signed in.)
We were inspired to incorporate this visual shape after reading Evan Barba’s working paper
“Measuring Sophistication in Systemic Design and Computing” which proposes generating unique shapes
to display progress in student understanding. The technology uses spider graphs to achieve “the result of
connecting individual numerical values on a radar chart...a polygon whose shape gives a holistic picture
of the learner at glance” (Barba, 2016). We plan to use similar technical components in the coding and
development of Benefits-U to create each user’s shape.
Another feature of the application is company benefit pages. Companies can opt to create a
10 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS

benefits page that lists their offerings, and users can interact with these pages by clicking on certain
benefits or packages for more in-depth explanations. If they have worked at the company, users can also
add packages to their personal benefits history on their profile. Companies will also be able to explore
the benefit offerings of other companies. The opportunity to explore competitors’ available plans is an
incentive to use Benefits-U to boost their talent management strategy by improving or expanding benefit
offerings to be competitive in their industries.
Benefits-U also includes tabs that keep users informed and educated. The first tab is a benefits
guide, which will explain terms and jargon used by human resources professionals and in benefits
descriptions that the everyday user may not understand (see findings section for more information).
This guide will provide definitions, FAQs, and examples that make terms easier to understand. Another
tab will be ‘News,’ which will contain the latest information regarding benefits. This will keep Benefits-U
up to date and provide new content for users. Additionally, a “Chat” tab lets users interact anonymously
with others to share their questions or concerns regarding benefits. Users who are early in their careers
could ask experienced employees for information or opinions on their own benefits they determine their
packages.
The most significant differentiation of our proposed solution is its interactivity, which sets it apart
from existing handouts about benefits because it presents information in smaller sections that can be
more easily understood. Additionally, Benefits-U encourages both employees and employers to engage
in an online platform where all company information is posted and users can monitor and reference
their benefits packages quickly and easily. It provides definitions in the benefits guide, and terms can
be added or modified as features of benefits, compensation, and other human resource-related policies
changes over time. The design is personalized to each individual user, which is an effective way to make
employees feel more connected to their benefits and more likely to utilize them fully. This interactivity
gives Benefits-U the potential to rise to prominence as a professional development tool.
Benefits-U will integrate interactive features like a notification system and other engagement and
gamification concepts into its design. Notifications will allow for the application to periodically remind
users to check in without being overwhelming or annoying; algorithms will notify users when favorite
companies update their profiles, new companies are added, benefits enrollment is upcoming/happening,
etc. Gamification elements of the application will include mini-lessons such as “benefit word of the day.”
Similar to online dictionaries’ “word of the day,” this program creates a fun way to encourage users to
regularly interact with the application while also gaining knowledge.
While Benefits-U will function mostly as a mobile application, we will also develop a website
version for those who prefer an online format. The website will also include an option to download
and/or print a PDF of benefits information for users who prefer hard copy handouts. While those users
may miss out on the advantages of interactivity, our primary goal is that all users can more readily
access and understand information about benefits, so our solution must address a variety of options for
communication.
Our application is purposefully designed for the Millennial generation and younger. As Dr. Harold
Nelson explained during a workshop with our class, systems cannot be designed for everyone; instead,
they can be designed for a specific audience and later modified for others. He specifically suggested to our
group that we choose to focus our design towards Millennials in order to add boundaries to the project
(H. Nelson, personal communication, November 2, 2016).
Given this focus, we hope to begin implementation in high schools to start teaching about benefits
early in students’ career paths and to cultivate a sense of social pressure to actively use Benefits-U. Rather
than employers directly encouraging their workers to use the application, we want to shift norms to
motivate people to independently understand, discuss, and track their benefits throughout their entire
careers.
To influence high school students to use Benefits-U, we hope to first target their guidance
counselors who, in turn, will introduce their students to the application. We hope to engage guidance

counselors during annual trade shows, meetings, conferences and workshops. Counselors could create
their own profiles to gain an understanding of the application and familiarize themselves with the
impact of their past and present benefits. Then, they could encourage and guide their high schoolers
to start exploring their future options. It is important to expose students to benefits information at the
high school level because this knowledge applies to all members of the workforce. Implementing this
application early is especially beneficial for students who do not choose to pursue a higher degree and
enter the workforce immediately after graduation.
As previously mentioned, overhauling the entire benefits system is not necessary to improve
employee satisfaction. Instead, our design adds to the lifelong process of professional decision-making.
Tanisha Malone, Human Resources Operations Coordinator at Ithaca College, says, “If you put processes in
that support people’s lives and are written in good faith, anybody can utilize them whether you’re young
and just starting out...or you’re middle aged and are toward the end of your career here. If you have good
structures in place, anybody can utilize them” (T. Malone, September 28, 2016).
The major cost for Benefits-U will be development and maintenance. The 3-D design visuals and
the notification algorithms are complex and will be expensive and time-consuming to create. Updates to
the news tab, bug fixes, and other maintenance tasks will also incur costs. We plan to generate funding
for this application by offering Benefits-U Premium Service, which expands the application’s features to
include access to personalized services for a monthly fee. Similar to Amazon Prime or LinkedIn Premium,
this service will offer additional paid resources in order to gain the revenue needed to create a free
version of the application for everyone. We suggest a monthly fee of $10, as this is low enough to attract
membership while also making profit. Services will include a series of one-on-one consultation sessions
with professionals working at Benefits-U in which users can discuss their current benefits and how to
create their ideal package. The Premium subscription will also include a designated chat room where
Premium users could communicate among themselves to ask/answer questions.
We hope to determine if dissatisfaction with benefits is resolved and communication is improved
by using the notification system to send out surveys to users. These surveys will determine if users’
knowledge about and satisfaction with their benefits has increased. For example, one survey element will
be a “knowledge check” to test users on their understanding of benefits and if it has improved; a sample
question might ask users to define “compensation.” To incentivize users to take these surveys, Benefits-U
will offer a chance to win a subscription to the Premium service described about.
The goals of Benefits-U are to make the benefits experience more personalized, easier to
understand, and in a central location for each individual. Ideally, this application would become as
common as LinkedIn, and people would use it throughout their careers.

References
Adams, N., & Salisbury, D. (2014, July). Employee benefits: today, yesterday and tomorrow.
Employee Benefit Research Institute, 401, 2-18. Retrieved from https://www.ebri.org/pdf/
briefspdf/EBRI_IB_401_July14.EE-Benefits.pdf
Barba, E. (2016). Measuring sophistication in systemic design and computing. Unpublished
manuscript.
Chaney, D. (2016). Effective communication is the key to a successful benefits package.
Retrieved from http://www.houze.org/index.php/latest/effective_communication_is_the_key_
to_a_successful_benefits_package
Facebook Careers. (2016). In Facebook [Group Page]. Retrieved from
https://www.facebook.com/careers/benefits/
Giué, C. (2016). Effective communication to employees about benefits is more important than
ever. Retrieved from
http://www.njbiz.com/article/20160115/INDINSIGHTS/160119832/effective-communication-
to-employees-about-benefits-is-more-important-than-ever
Gumus, M. (2007). The effect of communication on knowledge sharing in organizations. Journal
of Knowledge Management Practice, (8)2. Retrieved from http://www.tlainc.com/articl133.htm
McCoy, T. (n.d). Making voluntary choices understandable. Retrieved from
http://www.roughnotes.com/benefitsereport/archives/v40_february2014/page24/page24.htm
Meadows, D. (n.d.). Leverage points: Places to intervene in a system. Donella Meadows
Institute. Retrieved from
http://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/.
McKinsey & Company (2012). Educating to employment: designing a system that works.
Retrieved from
http://mckinseyonsociety.com/downloads/reports/Education/Education-to-Employment-exec-
summary_FINAL.pdf
Miller, S. (2011). Employees value benefits, don’t understand costs. Society for Human
Resource Management. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/
benefits/pages/benefitsvalue.aspx
Mind mapping. Business Dictionary. Retrieved December 5, 2016, from

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/mind-mapping.html
The Prudential Insurance Company of America (2016). Ninth study of employee benefits: Today
& beyond. Retrieved from http://research.prudential.com/documents/rp/benefits_and_
beyond_2016.pdf.
Shutan, B. (n.d.). Unum survey points to lack of knowledge and understanding as major benefit
communication challenges. Retrieved from https://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaws.com/
MBGH/f665b23a-8642-4ce4-b9a7-e16e56de7b0b/UploadedImages/Unum%20survey%20
points%20to%20lack%20of%20knowledge%20and%20understanding%20as%20major%20
benefit%20communication%20challenges.pdf
Sinek, S. (2009). How great leaders inspire action. Retrieved from
https://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_how_great_leaders_inspire_action
Society for Human Resource Management of Tompkins County. Retrieved from
http://shrmtc.shrm.org/?_ga=1.112360326.347137293.1480628387
Straz, M. (2016). This is why employee benefits communications fail. LinkedIn. Retrieved
from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-employee-benefits-communications-fail-matt-straz
Thornton, J. A. (2016). Best practices to engage employees in voluntary benefits program.
Benefits Magazine, 53(4), 48-52. Retrieved from http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.ithaca.
edu:2048/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=a9bbbdfc-8ea7-486e-b981-a52838b8824d%40sessio
nmgr106&vid=3&hid=107
Tillman, A. (2013). Improving Worker Satisfaction Yields Improved Worker-Retention Rates.
Employee Relations Today, 39(4), 27-31. doi:10.1002/ert.21386
United States Department of Education (2010). College and career ready students. Retrieved
from https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/college-career-ready.pdf
United States Department of Labor (2015). Employment by major industry sector. Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_table_201.htm
United States Department of Labor (n.d.). Plan information. Department of Labor. Retrieved
from https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/retirement/planinformation.
Walters, C. (2008). Communicating value of benefits package is a must. HR-Works Inc.,
Rochester Business Journal. Retrieved from http://www.hrworks-inc.com/article/communicating-
value-benefits-package-must

APPENDICES
Item A: Work/Life Balance Model
Item B: The Generational Venn Diagram

Item C: Employee Motivation/Satisfaction Model
Item D: Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Map

Item E: Why Employees Don’t Take Advantage of Their Benefits Model
Item F: Poor Communication Model

Item G: Boundary Map
Item H: Application Mock-up

Item I: Personal Communications
Keila Barros, Director of Human Resource Support, Suffolk Construction, October 11, 2016.
Deborah Merriman, Benefits Programs and Compliance Administrator, Ithaca College, October 3, 2016.
Dennis Leybold, Pension/Retirement Benefits Attorney and Partner, Stoel Rives LLP, November 1 and
November 8, 2016.
Diane Gayeski, Dean, Roy H. Park School of Communications, Ithaca College | Owner of Gayeski Analytics,
September 28th, 2016.
Harold Nelson, Visiting Professor, University of Montana, November 2, 2016.
Jeffrey Viviano, Vice President of Benefits and Wellness, Constellation Brands, October 22, 2016.
Jennifer Bubel, Talent Management Manager, Dresser-Rand, October 7th, 2016.
Katie Sack, Benefits and Work/Life Administrator, Ithaca College, September 29, 2016.
Tanisha Malone, Human Resources Operations Coordinator, Ithaca College, September 28, 2016.

Item J: Glossary
The purpose of this document is to provide clarity and direction for terms that will be used throughout
this design inquiry project. These terms may seem to have understood definitions; however, they will be
used in the specific way defined below.
Benefit: Anything that is helpful as a result or effect.
Benefits: Economic goods granted to employees in addition to base pay, which can include both financial
benefits and nonmonetary benefits; any kind of incentive of value included in the package.
Benefit Packages: A bundle of programs or services offered to employees that support compensation
and give employees a platform to meet their needs, by giving the ability to enhance their health, their
wealth and endeavor to protect them from various risks. Most commonly used to to retain, recruit and
attract employees.
Changing Workforce: Transformations to the workplace environment including millennials entering the
workforce, multiple generations working together, and a shift in the way employees are going to work
that differs from the traditional 9-5 workday. This creates new cultural pieces to the workplace such as
telecommuting, working from home and developing flexible work schedules.
Compensation: Pay for work or service: could be in the form of pay, allowances, salaries, wages, stipends,
fees and commissions, bonuses, stock options, etc.
Comprehensive: All-encompassing; meets a wide variety of needs.
Employee Assistance Program: A service offered to help counsel and support employees in dealing with
personal problems or issues. Designed to help organizations identify and diagnose a variety of problems
Employee Development: Opportunities for learning and skill-building to improve job performance
within an employee’s position or to prepare them for advancement within an organization.
Employee Retention: The ability to keep employees hired at an organization
Employee Satisfaction: The level of happiness and value an employee feels in his/her position with an
organization
Flexibility: The ability to easily modify one’s workplace structures and policies, including benefits,
scheduling and leave, managed care, spending accounts, staffing, and work options. Flexibility can be part
of a benefits package or ingrained into workplace culture, such as flexispace and flextime.
Generations:
● Baby Boomers: Adults born between 1945 and 1965
● Baby Busters/Gen X: Adults born between 1961 and 1981
● Gen Y/Millennials/Nexters: Adults born between 1980-2000
Human Resources:
● The staff of an organization that is not in the financial or material resources of the organization
● “The organizational function that deals with the people who manage, produce, market, and sell the
products and services of an organization” (Tracey 78).

Professional Development:
● Continuing and deliberate process to assist, encourage, and enable individuals in developing their
skills, knowledge, abilities, and values
Work Week: Commonly and traditionally defined as Monday through Friday 9:00am to 5:00pm to create
an 8 hour work day and a 40 hour work week. However, each industry and company has their own
constraints that change this definition.

Design Inquiry: Employee Benefits

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (8)

Similar a Design Inquiry: Employee Benefits

Similar a Design Inquiry: Employee Benefits (16)

Más de Sabina Leybold

Más de Sabina Leybold (13)

Último

Último (12)

Design Inquiry: Employee Benefits