An absence of accountability: Evidence of employers’ failure to measure and manage employee health benefits administration

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Sara J. Singer , Jeffrey Pfeffer , Margaret C. Nikolov
{"title":"An absence of accountability: Evidence of employers’ failure to measure and manage employee health benefits administration","authors":"Sara J. Singer ,&nbsp;Jeffrey Pfeffer ,&nbsp;Margaret C. Nikolov","doi":"10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118131","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Because employers provide health benefits to &gt;50 % of the working age U.S. population, benefits managers at companies who purchase and potentially oversee design and delivery of health benefits have an important role in affecting healthcare delivery. We sought to assess how companies measure and manage health benefits, because these dimensions of accountability affect the performance of the health ecosystem. We randomly sampled companies and obtained data from &gt;200 people knowledgeable about health benefits administration in their organizations. Our novel survey comprehensively inquired about what data concerning health benefits operations companies collected and who, if anyone, was responsible for aspects of employee benefits experience and outcomes. We found a surprisingly small amount of accountability for employer-provided health benefits. For instance, 39 % of companies <em>never</em> requested any feedback from their employees about their health benefits, just 6 % assessed the time employees spent getting questions about their health benefits answered, and &lt;5 % of companies measured how often employees postponed filling a prescription or seeing a doctor because of cost. Moreover, there was a widespread absence of accountability for the performance of health plans. On average, 64 % of 15 health benefits performance dimensions were managed by <em>no one,</em> and more than half of respondents reported that no one in their organizations was held accountable for either the physical (64 %) or emotional (59 %) wellbeing of the workforce. Companies mostly provide minimal oversight of the health plans they provide to their employees. This lack of accountability is inconsistent with employers’ responsibilities to effectively manage the benefits they provide and almost certainly contributes to the well-documented problems of employee dissatisfaction with third party health benefits administrators and the frustration and wasted time spent accessing care and reimbursement that occasionally results in care delayed or denied, with consequences for both behavioral and physical health.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":49122,"journal":{"name":"Social Science & Medicine","volume":"377 ","pages":"Article 118131"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953625004617","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Because employers provide health benefits to >50 % of the working age U.S. population, benefits managers at companies who purchase and potentially oversee design and delivery of health benefits have an important role in affecting healthcare delivery. We sought to assess how companies measure and manage health benefits, because these dimensions of accountability affect the performance of the health ecosystem. We randomly sampled companies and obtained data from >200 people knowledgeable about health benefits administration in their organizations. Our novel survey comprehensively inquired about what data concerning health benefits operations companies collected and who, if anyone, was responsible for aspects of employee benefits experience and outcomes. We found a surprisingly small amount of accountability for employer-provided health benefits. For instance, 39 % of companies never requested any feedback from their employees about their health benefits, just 6 % assessed the time employees spent getting questions about their health benefits answered, and <5 % of companies measured how often employees postponed filling a prescription or seeing a doctor because of cost. Moreover, there was a widespread absence of accountability for the performance of health plans. On average, 64 % of 15 health benefits performance dimensions were managed by no one, and more than half of respondents reported that no one in their organizations was held accountable for either the physical (64 %) or emotional (59 %) wellbeing of the workforce. Companies mostly provide minimal oversight of the health plans they provide to their employees. This lack of accountability is inconsistent with employers’ responsibilities to effectively manage the benefits they provide and almost certainly contributes to the well-documented problems of employee dissatisfaction with third party health benefits administrators and the frustration and wasted time spent accessing care and reimbursement that occasionally results in care delayed or denied, with consequences for both behavioral and physical health.
缺乏问责制:雇主未能衡量和管理员工健康福利管理的证据
由于雇主为美国50%的适龄工作人口提供健康福利,因此公司的福利经理在影响医疗保健服务方面扮演着重要的角色,他们购买并可能监督健康福利的设计和提供。我们试图评估公司如何衡量和管理健康福利,因为问责制的这些维度影响健康生态系统的绩效。我们随机抽取了一些公司的样本,并从200名了解公司健康福利管理的人员那里获得了数据。我们的新调查全面询问了公司收集了哪些关于健康福利运营的数据,以及谁(如果有的话)对员工福利体验和结果的各个方面负责。我们发现对雇主提供的健康福利的问责少得惊人。例如,39%的公司从未要求员工对他们的健康福利提供任何反馈,只有6%的公司评估了员工花在回答健康福利问题上的时间,5%的公司衡量了员工因为成本而推迟开处方或看医生的频率。此外,保健计划的执行情况普遍缺乏问责制。平均而言,在15个健康福利绩效维度中,64%无人管理,超过一半的受访者报告说,他们的组织中没有人对员工的身体健康(64%)或情绪健康(59%)负责。公司通常对员工的健康计划提供最低限度的监督。这种问责制的缺乏与雇主有效管理其提供的福利的责任不一致,几乎肯定会导致员工对第三方健康福利管理人员的不满,以及在获得医疗和报销方面的沮丧和浪费时间,有时会导致医疗延迟或被拒绝,从而对行为和身体健康造成影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Social Science & Medicine
Social Science & Medicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
5.60%
发文量
762
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Social Science & Medicine provides an international and interdisciplinary forum for the dissemination of social science research on health. We publish original research articles (both empirical and theoretical), reviews, position papers and commentaries on health issues, to inform current research, policy and practice in all areas of common interest to social scientists, health practitioners, and policy makers. The journal publishes material relevant to any aspect of health from a wide range of social science disciplines (anthropology, economics, epidemiology, geography, policy, psychology, and sociology), and material relevant to the social sciences from any of the professions concerned with physical and mental health, health care, clinical practice, and health policy and organization. We encourage material which is of general interest to an international readership.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信