IN
DEGREE PROJECT INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY,
SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2020 ,
The digitalisation of worksite
benefits programs from a product development perspective
MÁRTON ELODI
KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
SCHOOL OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER SCIENCE
Aalto University School of Science
Master’s Programme in ICT Innovation - EIT Digital Master School
Márton Elődi
The digitalisation of worksite benefits programs from a product development perspective
Master’s Thesis
Budapest, June 10, 2020
Examiner: Associate Professor Ylva Fernaeus, KTH Royal Institute of Technology
Supervisor: Dr. Marianela Ciolfi Felice, KTH Royal Institute of Technology
Advisor: M.Sc. Róbert Oroszi, Vern Insurance Technologies
AALTO UNIVERSITY School of Science
Master’s Programme in ICT Innovation EIT Digital Master School
Abstract of Masters’s Thesis
Author: Márton Elődi Title of the thesis: The digitalisation of worksite benefits programs from a product
development perspective
Date: June 10, 2020 Publishing language: English
ICT Innovation - EIT Digital Master School Major: Human Computer Interaction and Design Supervisor: Associate Professor Ylva Fernaeus
Thesis advisors: Dr. Marianela Ciolfi Felice, M.Sc. Róbert Oroszi
This research presents a way for digitalising worksite benefits programs. The related work analysis and results of user interviews showed the important role of benefits programs in the wellbeing of employees, and as a result in company performance and employer branding. However shortcomings were discovered in the current format of worksite programs and suggested that digital transformation might help to address these shortcomings. The research used semi-structured interviews and analysis, user journey mapping, prototyping, and heuristic evaluation methods to deliver the concept of an employee insurance wallet. Furthermore, the research stepped beyond product design and presented a comprehensive framework for developing, monitoring, and operating such digital worksite benefit product. The framework incorporates stakeholder needs to ensure business success and user-centred design methodology to embrace usability and engagement principles. According to the research results, the real-life version of the product was developed.
Keywords: worksite benefits, employee wellbeing, insurance, insurtech, digital transformation
Number of pages: 47
AALTO UNIVERSITETET Högskolan för teknikvetenskaper Masterprogram i IKT-innovation EIT Digital Master School
Sammandrag av diplomarbete
Författare: Márton Elődi Titel: Digitaliseringen av arbetsplatsen gynnar program från en produkt
utvecklingsperspektiv
Datum: June 10, 2020 Språk: Engelska
ICT Innovation - EIT Digital Master School Major: Mänsklig Datorinteraktion och Design Övervakare: Universitetslektor Ylva Fernaeus
Handledare: Dr. Marianela Ciolfi Felice, M.Sc. Róbert Oroszi Denna forskning presenterar ett sätt för digitalisering av
arbetsplatsfördelningsprogram. Den relaterade arbetsanalysen och resultaten från användarintervjuer visade den viktiga rollen som förmånsprogram har för anställdas välbefinnande, och som ett resultat i företagets prestanda och varumärke från arbetsgivare. Emellertid upptäcktes brister i det aktuella formatet av
arbetsplatsprogram och föreslog att digital transformation kan hjälpa till att lösa dessa brister. Forskningen använde semistrukturerade intervjuer och analyser,
kartläggning av användarresor, prototyper och heuristiska utvärderingsmetoder för att leverera konceptet för en anställdsförsäkringsplånbok. Vidare gick forskningen bortom produktdesign och presenterade ett omfattande ramverk för att utveckla, övervaka och använda sådana digitala arbetsplatsfördelar. Ramverket innehåller intressentbehov för att säkerställa affärsframgång och användarcentrerad designmetodik för att omfatta användbarhets- och engagementsprinciper. Enligt forskningsresultaten utvecklades den verkliga versionen av produkten.
Nyckelord: arbetsförmåner, anställdas välbefinnande, försäkring, insurtech, digital transformation
Sidantal: 47
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the supportive guidance and feedback to my advisor, Dr. Marianela
Ciolfi Felice from KTH Royal Institute of Technology. The remarks of my peer partners,
Niels Dikken and Lena Hegemann were also essential during the research and writing of
this thesis. Furthermore, I want to show my gratitude to my co-workers, especially Dániel
Sarkadi and Róbert Oroszi, for their long-term support in both my studies and the
completion of this research.
Table of contents
Abstract of Masters’s Thesis 2
Sammandrag av diplomarbete 3
Acknowledgements 4
Table of contents 5
1. Introduction 6
2. Related work 8
2.1. The digitalisation of financial services in Hungary 8 2.2. Advisory and consultancy in financial services 9 2.3. From worksite marketing to employee wellbeing 10
2.4. Ongoing trends in benefits programs 11
3. Methods 14
3.1. Stakeholder and user interviews 14
3.2. Ideation, feature selection and prioritisation 15
3.3. User journey mapping and prototyping 16
3.4. Evaluation 17
4. A design for digitalisation 18
4.1. Stakeholder and user expectations 18
4.2. Product strategy 25
4.3. Employee journey map and feature selection 25
4.4. Prototype and heuristic evaluation 29
4.5. The structure design of the product 32
4.6. Evaluation framework 33
4.7. Product development framework 34
5. Discussion 38
6. Limitations 41
7. Conclusion 42
8. Bibliography 44
1. Introduction
The wellbeing of employees is a growing concern for employers, from both a performance and an employer branding perspective. Worksite benefits programs can develop both perspectives by offering employees complimentary and discounted services (Aflac WorkForces Report, 2014). Insurance is the most common among these services because it can equally support the employee’s physical, mental, and financial wellbeing (Willis Towers Watson, 2020b).
In the Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) region and especially in Hungary, worksite benefits programs are operated by insurance intermediaries. An intermediary (also commonly referred to as an insurance broker) builds up a worksite benefits program from insurance services of one or more insurance companies. The worksite benefits program is then sold to large-size employers, where employees gain access to the services.
The financing of benefit services differs based on the agreement between the intermediary and the employer. When the employer finances the cost of the insurance and it covers employees at no extra cost, it is called group insurance. If the employee has to pay the price of the insurance (even if the price is discounted), it is referred to as an individual or voluntary insurance. As a result, the worksite benefits program might be entirely free for the employer, but it might also comprise up to one-third of the organisation’s total labour costs (Hewitt Associates, 2002).
Although worksite benefits programs should be beneficial for employees, employers, and intermediaries alike, results do not support this theory. On a global level, only 8% of employers say that their benefit strategies are very successful and interestingly 14% do not understand their programs’ performance (Aon, 2019). Based on discussions with employers and intermediaries, the results are similar in Hungary. Benefit programs seem to operate with low conversion and engagement rates, that are only able to attract 1-3% of employees.
The problem lies in the format and delivery of benefits programs. As it is clear by (Aon, 2019), most employers use emails, posters and face-to-face conversations to communicate benefits. In Hungary there are sometimes microsites dedicated to insurance sales through employers, however, employees show little engagement with such solutions.
Communication between the employer and the intermediary also happens via emails and
spreadsheets. The lack of transparency creates major ambiguities when an employee’s
enrollment or removal for insurance services takes place asynchronously. Although the cost
of the benefits program is a pressing issue for most employers in the region (Willis Towers Watson, 2020b), employers do not have a clear picture of their return on investment.
Aon and Willis Towers Watson, two market leader intermediary and benefits program operator emphasise “provide greater benefits choice to meet a growing and broader range of needs” (Willis Towers Watson, 2020a). However, they present little implementation guidelines and technological background to do so. This implies that intermediaries did not digitalise their benefits programs consciously, despite that changes in technology, regulation and customer needs started a radical transformation in the insurance sector (Trias Pinto, 2017). It also suggests intermediaries’ shortcoming in digital competencies regionally.
Vern Insurance Technologies is developing digital insurance distribution and assistance solutions for Hungarian insurance companies and intermediaries. While traditional companies’ role is to maintain the trust of the public by operating safely and reliably, Vern as an insurtech startup can experiment with innovative ideas more freely. The company is developing an entirely digital worksite benefits product. As a product developer at Vern, my role is to facilitate this digitalisation process, by finding a synthesis between traditional benefits programs and modern solutions. Although the product comprises multiple components, this research only discusses the transformation of employees’ access to benefits. The platform providing this access is referred to as an insurance wallet or simply a wallet.
Based on research results and international examples of this field, I define methodology and follow a user-centred design process to develop a prototype. During this process, I also incorporate business requirements and legal restrictions. The outcome of the research presents a mobile application prototype; product strategy, structure and evaluation as well.
According to the results, the product is positioned in the value-chain of current worksite benefits programs, suggesting a go-to-market plan based on partnerships. Finally, I discuss employee adoption and engagement towards the designed product and look out for further implications in the digital insurance sector.
The product discussed in this research was successfully designed, developed and launched
to the market in June 2020. Its first real production usage is expected to be in early 2021.
2. Related work
The digitalisation of worksite benefits programs is not an actively researched subject in the region, therefore the topic is examined from neighbouring perspectives.
2.1. The digitalisation of financial services in Hungary
The core feature of the designed product is digital access to insurance services. To understand the opportunities and restrictions of digitalising such financial processes, it is important to have an overview of what related activities had been done and can be done.
In financial services, I distinguish two major categories: banking and insurance. Digital banking services are called fintech, and insurtech stands for insurance. The digitalisation of the two categories are closely related to each other, however, fintech solutions are more advanced compared to insurtech (Deloitte, 2018). The transformation of the insurance industry has come rather late and it has yet to exploit the full potential of digital technologies (Eling & Lehmann, 2018).
Hungarian incumbent financial institutions are increasingly adopting digital solutions, however, the overall digitalisation is still immature (Magyar Nemzeti Bank, 2020). The principal causes are usually linked to the underdeveloped financial literacy and digital competence of customers; the unresolved issue of online customer authentication; and lack of customer-centric approaches (Digitális Jólét Program, 2019; Fehér & Varga, 2017;
Magyar Nemzeti Bank, 2020). Institutions are often insisted on branches and in-person contact instead of digital channels (Ferrari, 2016; Magyar Nemzeti Bank, 2020). From all insurances, 21% is distributed via digital channels, however, this value widely varies between 0,2% and 74% based on the complexity of the insurance service (Magyar Nemzeti Bank, 2018, 2020).
Accelerating financial innovation and digitalisation is a high priority for the Central Bank of Hungary (Magyar Nemzeti Bank, 2020). Making digital finance regulations more flexible is a fundamental part of this acceleration, with multiple organisations actively working on the issue (Becsei, Bógyi, Csányi, & Kovács, 2018; Digitális Jólét Program, 2019; Magyar Nemzeti Bank, 2020). There are also yet unaddressed questions including the changing role of branches, product complexity, mobile-based services, improvement of customer experience, and organisational level adaptation capabilities (Csedő, Zavarkó, & Sára, 2019;
Eling & Lehmann, 2018; Fehér & Varga, 2017; Ferrari, 2016). The swiftness of digital
transformation is constrained by obsolete IT systems and preference for stability, security and cost-effectiveness over rapid innovation (Digitális Jólét Program, 2019; Ferrari, 2016).
The fintech sector is dynamically expanding, with an increasing customer base, employees, funding and revenue (Magyar Nemzeti Bank, 2020; Trias Pinto, 2017). Financial innovation is also a national economic interest for the Central Bank of Hungary. This innovation can only happen when stable incumbent institutions start an active collaboration with agile, digitally competent companies and startups (Carletti, 2017; Digitális Jólét Program, 2019;
Magyar Nemzeti Bank, 2020; Trias Pinto, 2017).
Regulatory compliance of financial services remains a perennial concern, but other issues such as data protection and cybersecurity are emerging as well (Willis Towers Watson, 2020b). Fintech companies and incumbent institutions fall under identical regulations because of fair competition principles (Magyar Nemzeti Bank, 2020), however, this creates an unfavourable situation where fintech startups are restrained by law constructed for large-size core financial companies. Online customer authentication and contract signing is an unsolved issue from a legal perspective, preventing completely paperless administration (Becsei et al., 2018; Digitális Jólét Program, 2019; Magyar Nemzeti Bank, 2020). The regulation for online insurance distribution is stated by (Magyar Nemzeti Bank, 2015) and affects the accessibility, clarity and communication of these services with a key focus on meeting the customer needs.
2.2. Advisory and consultancy in financial services
Distribution of financial services and especially insurance sales, always followed a consultative sales paradigm, meaning that customers have been able to get help from human advisors.
The importance of advisors in Hungary is significant, as 85% of all insurance is sold through human agents (Magyar Nemzeti Bank, 2018). It is a shared understanding between industry professionals, that human agent contact cannot be replaced because of its need for the customers’ trust (Portfolio, 2020; Trias Pinto, 2017). Although algorithm- based advisory (robo-advising) is an emerging technology, its reliability and legal aspects are still ambiguous.
The need for advisory is easily justifiable when financial journeys are becoming more
complex, but customers’ financial education has significant gaps in it. From planning for
retirement to managing healthcare costs and caring for family members, all contribute to their feelings of financial wellness (Bank of America, 2019; Jenkins, 2004; MetLife, 2003).
Therefore, customers require guidance about their financial issues, but getting the right financial advisor is not always easy (Ferrari, 2016).
The demand for financial advisory also emerged at customers’ workplaces, their main source of living. Advice from professionals was ranked as the most important financial wellness program feature for employees and a key incentive to purchase benefits (Aflac WorkForces Report, 2018; Bank of America, 2019). Employees also prefer that their employer actively guide their benefits choices to aid understanding and support decision making (Jenkins, 2004; Willis Towers Watson, 2020a). Traditionally, employers have focused on education and communication to help employees make more informed decisions but failed to prioritise reliable advice on financial security (Benify, 2019a; Willis Towers Watson, 2020a). There are also sensitive matters where employees would seek advice but do not feel confident to share with their employers. (Aon, 2017b)
2.3. From worksite marketing to employee wellbeing
Worksite marketing as a term dates back to the 1940s and it has been used to describe the distribution of financial services to employees via an employer. The range of services under this heading could be very wide - from car insurance to mutual funds and health cover to banking products (Jenkins, 2004). These offerings are associated with employee satisfaction, which in turn is linked to attitudes and behaviours that serve the interests of the employer (Dulebohn, Molloy, Pichler, & Murray, 2009; Harris & Fink, 1994).
Since then, the need shifted from a pure marketing opportunity to a more robust approach covering the employee’s physical, financial, emotional and social wellbeing (Willis Towers Watson, 2020b). Nowadays employee wellbeing programs mean physically and mentally healthy, financially stable employees, with higher productivity, engagement, job satisfaction and a more positive employer perception (Aflac WorkForces Report, 2014; Aon, 2017b;
Mitchell, 2004; Willis Towers Watson, 2020a). Employers with a sense of societal purpose understand the concept of sustainable human capital and help employees to thrive with an integrated approach and higher investment towards wellbeing and employee benefits (Benify, 2018; Dulebohn et al., 2009; Willis Towers Watson, 2019, 2020a, 2020b).
The model of distributing financial services through workplaces has evolved into a
beneficial alternative to every stakeholder across the value chain. Benefit providers (e.g.
insurance companies) and intermediaries gain significant distribution channels at a much lower cost compared to cold-calling or mass marketing (Jenkins, 2004). Cost-effectiveness is similarly a key driver for employers (Jenkins, 2004; MetLife, 2003; Oyer, 2004), however, they experience more significant advantages in talent attraction, retention and being competitive in the labour market (Aflac WorkForces Report, 2018; Dulebohn et al., 2009;
Jenkins, 2004; Majid, 2019; MetLife, 2003; Randstad, 2019). Developing employees professionally, physically and mentally affects the company’s brand and performance as well (Guest, 2002; Randstad, 2019; Wein, 2015; Willis Towers Watson, 2019, 2020a).
Worksite programs can also address the changed employee expectations. Employees are no longer satisfied with clocking in and out and receiving a paycheque, they are looking for a supportive, collaborative environment, and an employer that can match their lifestyle (Gallup, 2013). They are looking to strengthen their financial education and position, and employer-provided benefits are a reliable, convenient and affordable method for this.
Employees trust their employer has chosen the benefits that best meet their needs thus simplifying their decision (Jenkins, 2004; Leary & Hekeler, 2003; MetLife, 2003).
2.4. Ongoing trends in benefits programs
After understanding the intention of worksite benefits, it is important to see that the concept itself was born in a non-digital era. The user expectations of today have been addressed only partially and mostly in the form of proposals instead of actions. This chapter gives a brief insight into the shortcomings of current benefits program designs and presents emerging solutions.
The probably most pressing issue is communication and access to benefits. Most times, there is no platform for employees to access benefits digitally. Existing alternatives are out- of-date corporate pieces of software and therefore many employers are naming the lack of technology as a top challenge for managing benefits programs (Aon, 2017a; Majid, 2019;
Willis Towers Watson, 2020b).
Because employees do not have a direct connection with benefit offers, communication
about them is also insufficient (Aon, 2017a; Willis Towers Watson, 2020b). As a result,
many employees remain uninformed about the offered services (Aflac WorkForces Report,
2018; Benify, 2017). It is generally accepted that good benefits engagement occurs when
employees understand the true value of their benefits through effective and personalised
internal communication in a single place (Andrus & Paul, 1996; Aon, 2017a, 2020b; Benify, 2019b; Fontana, 2018; Willis Towers Watson, 2020a).
As many noted, successful benefit access and communication might happen through mobile applications (Aflac WorkForces Report, 2018; Jenkins, 2004; Social Chorus, 2018; Willis Towers Watson, 2020a). The global workforce is becoming increasingly mobile and the majority of employees already use apps for work-related activity (Salesforce & Digital Intelligence, 2014; Strategy Analytics, 2016). Personal access via mobile app eliminates the difficulties of corporate intranets, addresses employees who are not sitting at a desk during work, and matches up in experience to the everyday mobile tools employees are using.
(Benify, 2019a; Emergence Capital, 2018; Willis Towers Watson, 2020a).
Other issues concern the variety of benefits for employees. Traditionally, worksite programs have offered stand-alone benefits to address specific issues, however, flexibility is closely linked with employees’ benefits appreciation. Technological advances are removing some of the roadblocks associated with providing greater choice. But offering a wider range of benefits might cause employees to find the financial decisions complex and stressful. A working option might be to provide a small set of manageable choices and limit the range of adjustments as much as possible (Willis Towers Watson, 2020a).
Different needs of employees might also cause a problem in managing benefits programs.
Up to four generations may work side by side, and expectations may differ even in the same generation based on e.g. profession or education (Dulebohn et al., 2009; Trias Pinto, 2017; Willis Towers Watson, 2020a, 2020b). Dulebohn et al. argues that benefit preferences change in predictable ways over time with the life-stage of the employee (Dulebohn et al., 2009). Diversifying the benefits offering based on employee segments might boost its performance and return-on-investment (Aon, 2017a; Dencker, Joshi, & Martocchio, 2007;
Jenkins, 2004). Aon suggests to segment the workforce according to their differing attitudes and mindsets (Aon, 2017a). Benify offers a solution where the segmentation can be set based on paygrade, position, gender, age and other employee information. It was also expressed that varying benefit offerings by employee segments may present legal issues (Dulebohn et al., 2009).
Another challenge is the monitoring and adaptation of the benefits program (Aon, 2018).
Employers have to continuously evaluate their workforces’ wants and needs to provide a
suitable program for them (Aon, 2017a; Willis Towers Watson, 2020a). Nonetheless, 80% of
the employers do not measure the return-on-investment of their benefits strategy and third
of them do not know if their benefits scheme meets their objectives (Aon, 2017a, 2018).
The lack of data is a key challenge for operating the benefits program, causing practitioners to make their way by trial and error (Dulebohn et al., 2009; Willis Towers Watson, 2020b). Measuring the benefits program’s performance is difficult because current methodologies are complex, costly and time-consuming, and because benefit satisfaction depends both from the content and the used platform (DeVries, 2010; Dulebohn et al., 2009; Williams, 1995; Williams, Malos, & Palmer, 2002). Although technology can offer multiple ways to track engagement behaviours and gain a deeper understanding of employees, surveying and in-person meetings are still the most common ways of collecting feedback. (Aon, 2019, 2020b; Benify, 2019b; Eisingerich, Marchand, Fritze, & Dong, 2019;
Servick, 2015; Willis Towers Watson, 2020b)
As Jenkins summarises, “Success of benefits programs is a complex question. It requires
providers to overcome internal organisational design issues, implement new operating
models and ensure that they have a detailed understanding of the business drivers and their
impact on financial performance” (Jenkins, 2004).
3. Methods
This chapter presents the methods used to analyse the ways of digitalising worksite benefits programs.
3.1. Stakeholder and user interviews
The qualitative research started with exploring the current stakeholder practices and user expectations. From a product design perspective, I found two main stakeholders:
intermediaries and employers. Employees were defined as the primary user group. I conducted semi-structured interviews with each of these actors based on my pre-developed guidelines (DiCicco-Bloom & Crabtree, 2006). The interviews were semi-structured because little was known beforehand about the participants’ level of involvement with the subject.
It also offered a more casual conversation with participants who are not used to such techniques.
Initially, the interviews were made in-person while later they happened over video call, because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were from Hungary, therefore, all discussions were made in Hungarian and translated to English afterwards. Age of participants varied from 23 to 61 with a median age of 41, 8 identified themselves as women and 6 as men. All conversations were recorded with the consent of participants.
Two interviews were made with managers in charge of corporate benefits programs at an intermediary. I formed the interview around the current practices and technologies of managing benefits programs and discussed the expected results and present outcomes. It also included a conversation about communication with employees and how their feedback can be incorporated to improve user experience. Finally, the business and technical requirements of the designed product were clarified.
Six interviews with HR administrators at middle and large-sized companies discussed how they establish, operate and communicate their worksite benefits programs. HR administrators are managing employee benefits programs daily, therefore they could offer valuable insights on the problems and challenges they face with benefits. They are in close contact with employees, therefore we could discuss the feedback and expressed needs of their workforce.
Finally, six employees were recruited from various companies and industries. These
interviews were conducted to find out more about their attitude and motivation regarding
benefits in wellbeing improvement. Questions also touched topics of orientation and enrollment with benefits. At last, we discussed their preferred communication methods and the need for financial advisory.
During the analysis, of the interviews four categories were marked (DiCicco-Bloom &
Crabtree, 2006). Categories were first defined as opinions, tasks, past experiences, and times when things went wrong, and switched with more representative labels later on. The research continued with affinity mapping to find recurring themes. Finally, the results were cross-checked with the completed literature review to find relations between the global and local benefit conditions.
3.2. Ideation, feature selection and prioritisation
A design workshop was organised based on the gained insights from the interviews. The aim was to ideate around “How might we solve the inconvenience and inefficiencies of benefits programs by transforming them into a digital product?”. As the question implies, the workshop used the ‘how might we’ technique to turn the found problems into opportunities (Ideo). The ideas were constructed for each stage of an employee’s organisational journey (Gallup, 2018) to facilitate a design that supports employees in most upcoming situations.
The emerging ideas were once again grouped with affinity mapping, then structured to comparably display the current and proposed benefit practices. By combining the ideas with stakeholder requirements and legal restrictions, they were formed into features. The collected features were stored and organised in a product backlog (Schwaber & Beedle, 2002). The backlog contains every feature that the product will have to include in the first iteration or a future version. The backlog might be updated when new needs come up.
The backlog in itself does not help the product development process, because it cannot define an order between the features. The required order and timeline is called a product roadmap and it is essential from both a business and project management perspective (Schwaber & Beedle, 2002). The product roadmap shows a long-term picture of when a team has to work on a feature.
To build the product roadmap, the importance of features has to be defined with
prioritisation. There are multiple methods for prioritising features. In this case, a simple
technique by Ergománia was used (Ergománia, 2020). For every feature, an execution
complexity was calculated according to the required design, tech and business development efforts. A similar metric was defined to show the created value for the business and users.
In each case the metrics were assigned on a 1 - 5 scale, therefore even if they were not completely accurate, they were correct relative to each other. Finally, the priority was calculated by dividing the created value of a feature with its complexity.
3.3. User journey mapping and prototyping
The features of the first product iteration were selected based on the prioritisation. As a next step user journeys were mapped out for each feature (Howard, 2014). User journey maps help to understand how the users interact with the product through touch-points and activities. User journeys also have an important role in prototyping because they can visualise complex processes in smaller steps. Essentially, the content of these steps can be turned into screen designs later on.
The product prototype was created with Sketch .
1Sketch is a cloud-based software for designing screens, building interactive prototypes and sharing these prototypes for presentation and testing.
The UI design was built with the design system of the company. A design system contains the look & feel, and also the behaviour of every graphical component used throughout multiple products. Using components from a design system can produce consistent results between multiple collaborators and match the company’s brand.
Utilising a design system is also able to speed up the design process. This single library contains every low-level component such as buttons, inputs or typography. Using these components is equally quick as using wireframe placeholder elements. However, the result would be much closer to a high-fidelity design thus saving the efforts to create the wireframe in-between. High-fidelity designs also yield more reliable results in user testing, because it requires less imagination from the participants (Dexter, 2019).
With the content of the user journey maps and the components of the design system, product screens were designed in high-fidelity and combined into a clickable prototype.
The finished prototype was reviewed with expert evaluation by the company’s UX designer. The evaluation used the heuristic guidelines and severity ratings of Nielsen (Nielsen, 1994a, 1994b). The found violations were collected into a spreadsheet with the
https://www.sketch.com
1
problem’s location, description, violated heuristic and severity rating. The evaluation was then used to improve the usability of the prototype.
3.4. Evaluation
Iterative evaluation and continuous improvements are essential parts of product development. Because the designed product is aimed to be launched to a large number of users, through regional collaborations, it was important to get near real-time picture of performance and usability, under operational conditions. An evaluation framework was designed to help these efforts.
HEART framework by Google was used to find suitable metrics. (Rodden, Hutchinson, &
Fu, 2010). This framework helps to determine user-centred metrics for web applications based on large-scale behavioural data, which can be used to measure progress towards key goals and drive product decisions. The HEART system builds up from the following components:
- Happiness: subjective aspects of user experience, like satisfaction, visual appeal, likelihood to recommend, and perceived ease of use.
- Engagement: user’s level of involvement with a product, usually frequency, intensity, or depth of interaction over some time.
- Adoption: how many new users start using a product during a given time period.
- Retention: how many of the users from a given time period are still present in some later time.
- Task success: encompasses several traditional behavioural metrics of user experience, such as efficiency, effectiveness and error rate.
For each component, the framework defines three phases: articulating the goals of a product, identifying signals that indicate the achievement of these goals, and finding specific metrics to visualise progress on a timeline.
To form evaluation criteria, I reviewed the expected outcomes of stakeholders and the
company. I assigned goals to the expected outcomes using the HEART framework. I also
analysed how users will interact with the platform and which interactions might be able to
unveil usability issues. Following these ‘interesting’ interactions, I defined the signals and
metrics for each goal.
4. A design for digitalisation
The upcoming sections present the result of research and consequently made design decisions.
4.1. Stakeholder and user expectations
4.1.1. Employee – the user
Good benefits are matching the life situation of employees
All employees saw benefits programs highly motivating during job selection, however, salary and friendly work environment remained a more important consideration for them.
Three participants said that they find the benefits program engaging if it relates to their current life situation. A life situation might be an everyday event like buying new glasses, or a significant occasion as marriage, childbirth or purchasing a new house.
“When I accidentally broke my glasses, it was great I had a discount for replacing them.” (E1)
According to two of the employees, simple access to a wide a range of benefits can offer a feeling of competence and control to them. Five employees trust that the benefits program has been built up by the employer in their best interest and that the included services are suitable for them.
Multiple tasks required to access benefits
It was a shared view between participants that they have to collect information on available benefits and how they can use them. Using a benefit might mean enrolling into group insurance or purchasing individual insurance. In the case of insurance, it is also possible to claim the service. Claiming could be either applying for compensation of a loss or applying to use the service e.g. as a medical examination.
“I know that I have benefits available at my workplace, but I am not entirely sure about what are those and how can I access them.” (E4)
Four employees said that they need to get additional advice before using complex
insurance benefits because they lack financial literacy and experience with these services.
Three participants agreed that the benefits program can be improved if they can give feedback on the services they like and dislike.
“I often write reviews about the things I buy online, but at my workplace, I can only give feedback through my manager.” (E3)
Unsatisfactory orientation around benefits programs
For all six participants, the main source of information (beyond traditional workplace communication) were in-person discussions and conversations with HR or co-workers.
“I once told my co-workers about the appointment I had with the dermatologist and if somebody mentions a health problem, I just recommend the same private healthcare for them.” (E2)
Three of them participated in orientation events before, where a benefit was presented.
Five employees who can use online software to manage their cafeteria plans found this solution helpful, however, three of them encountered usability issues. Accessibility is also a major problem because these pieces of software are only available in the company’s intranet.
“I have to use this corporate looking website to allocate my cafeteria expenses every January. It can nicely calculate the before and after taxes sums, but it is really hard to track my available funds or make changes later.” (E5)
Three employees discuss financial services with relatives or friends before using them.
‘Mothers’ tend to possess the ground truth in such questions, and they are often asked for their opinion. Google search and looking up information online are additional ways of gaining knowledge.
A benefit might fail to fulfil its purpose due to the lack of knowledge
Four employees said that they have little information on a benefit if they were not present during its introduction. Access to reliable information is usually difficult because there is no single source where all the available opportunities are collected.
A case was also unveiled where the lack of information caused serious problems.
“I did not know about the private healthcare policy I was eligible at my
workplace. When my leg was injured in an accident, I had to find out about
the available medical services from my co-workers. Even after, I had troubles with applying to an appointment and giving feedback on the quality of the service.” (E6)
4.1.2. Employer – the trusted source
Recruiting and employer branding drive benefits programs
HR managers agreed that attracting and retaining the workforce is the most important reason for offering competitive benefits programs.
“There is a huge competition for the best labour, and benefits can provide us with competitive advantage.” (HR2)
Three of them expressed that they aim to make the benefits program suitable for every employee segment and this might demand a wider range of benefits. Four of the managers said that benefits help to build a caring and supportive workplace, that can improve the wellbeing of employees and increase performance.
HR administrators have to manage all aspects of benefits programs
Three HR managers said that they are working on offering up-to-date and relevant benefits to their employees, in order to keep them engaged. These programs have to be communicated to the employees, with additional support if required. All HR managers shared a view that they are not educated to give advisory with financial benefits, but two of them were already visited with such issues.
Employee registration for insurance-related benefits is required when hired by the company. Similarly, employees will be removed from benefits when leaving the workforce.
Four managers are looking to address the needs of employees by listening to their feedback and opinion.
“We are a middle-size company so I meet with our employees daily. I often
ask them about how they feel and what could be improved. Benefits are not
something I consciously bring up, but they are regularly mentioned.” (HR1)
No integrated platform to manage benefits programs
According to the participants, benefit programs are either managed manually or through corporate HR systems. Three of them expressed that these fail to efficiently support their work and automate repetitive processes.
“We offer a around hundred different benefits to our employees. They are
2collected in a four pages long Word document and sent to employees during onboarding.” (HR3)
Communicating benefits on intranets is not effective. Four employers also try to communicate via emails or similar channels (e.g. Google Groups, Skype, etc.) to solve this issue, but in-person discussions and offline materials like posters are still required.
“I see that company emails are often ignored. Therefore communication has to happen through multiple channels to make it effective and to reach as many employees as possible.” (HR5)
“Our intranet has an online message board where we can share new information, but follow up, in-person discussions are usually required as well.
However, it is still not possible to reach everybody, so we organise orientation events for the managers and ask them to share the information with their team.” (HR1)
Communication barriers and monitoring caused a bad experience
Five participants mentioned that communication and administration of benefits were listed as the most inhibiting factors for offering a more comprehensive benefit solution. They lack both time and technology to effectively communicate benefits programs for employees.
“The more benefits we have, the more work for us to keep them up-to-date and communicate them to employees.” (HR4)
A significant problem for three HR managers was that they cannot track the usage of
benefits. They usually find out the preferences of employees by word of mouth or from
occasional reports of benefit providers. When a benefit is financed by the employer it is
also not possible to get a clear picture of the return on this investment.
“We take a closer look at our benefits and salary offer when we see bigger movement in the workforce. In these cases, we usually ask our employees for their opinion.” (HR1)
“Tracking how many employees used a benefit is currently not possible at our company.” (HR3)
4.1.3. Intermediary – the owner of domain knowledge and experience
Worksite benefits is a new business opportunity
Both managers agreed that benefit programs offer a significant business opportunity for intermediaries. They are looking for a new source of revenues, due to the decrease in corporate insurance sales and premiums. Benefit programs are an efficient way to reach a large pool of customers through employers, avoiding the high costs of mass marketing and human salesforce.
“I cannot think of any model that is more cost-effective for us than worksite benefits programs. We gain access to tens of thousands of potential customers basically free of charge.” (I2)
Traditional tasks of intermediaries
The first participant explained that the main job of intermediaries are to find suitable offers for the customers, guide them in financial procedures and provide them with advisory when needed.
“To provide guidance and advisory we need a direct communication channel where we can pro-actively advise customers and customers are able to reach us with questions.” (I1)
The participant also mentioned that finding the best offer requires an intermediary to work with the full range of financial services. This often means multiple underlying insurance companies or external partners. From a legal perspective, this has to happen as a pre- broked process .
3Both managers elaborated that any software they use for distribution and access to insurance services has to comply with the regulations of the Central Bank of Hungary. For
In a pre-broked insurance offer intermediaries can make a single recommendation to customers by picking the best alternative
3
beforehand in a tender between insurance companies.
