Causation is an elusive event in almost any walk of life. Being able to demonstrate that the actions we take have an impact on our desired outcome is the holy grail of performance in our roles, in work and even at home.
If we reflect on that for a moment, it goes to show how different concepts like culture and benefits are. Culture is a relatively abstract phenomenon – we struggle to define it and to measure it, but we know it when we see it. As such, it is very difficult to know what combination of actions drive it over time.
By comparison, employee benefits are absolute and tangible – they are insurance contracts, services, technologies and other products we can see and touch. In the main, we can identify that the action we take such as paying higher pension contributions can lead to our desired outcome such as a better retirement. But what of the relationship between them.
Does culture drive benefits or do benefits drive culture? And why is the answer to that question so important? To quote a very famous person, especially for those of us frequently on LinkedIn, “always start with the ‘why’”. It’s Simon Sinek, and he means “why do we want to do something?”
That is the difference between culture and benefits – our culture defines who we want to be as a company and allows us to shape the discussion about “why” we want to offer benefits to our people. Debating culture, however nebulous it is, is the action that creates the causation to an effective benefits strategy.
Why do we offer benefits? Because as an employer, we believe we owe a duty to our people to support their wellbeing, beyond paying them for the job they perform.” If that is not a statement of culture, then I don’t know what is. That is important, because we should not be asking how business culture needs to adapt to benefits, but how benefits need to adapt to changing business culture. The causation is clearly unidirectional.
And so, how has culture been shifting over the recent past and how has the pandemic changed or accelerated that trajectory? First, most employers have grown in compassion and understanding for each of their people’s personal circumstances and the need for these to be taken into consideration in allowing that person to
flourish in their role and perform at their best. A respect for diversity and understanding that the personal life can bleed into the professional, just as the professional too often spills over into the personal is how culture has changed.
Accepting the blurring of lines between these two spheres of life and that employers play a greater role in supporting an individual’s wellbeing, whether it is being impacted from work or home or both, is the cultural shift that has caused the shift in mindset with regards to benefits design. Second, the pandemic has accelerated, rather than altered this trajectory. With remote-working, home-schooling, new health concerns and exacerbated mental and financial wellbeing challenges, employers need to act to provide employees with the new tools, products and
services to help them face these challenges.
This is where benefits need to change and are changing. The safety net that is the “big” insurances, designed as a back stop when the worst happens, are still of vital importance. But they are focused on the cure, not prevention. The support and intervention employers must take must be much earlier in the care pathway.
The good news is that the market is rapidly responding to this demand, providing more value- add benefits within the traditional insurances, from mindfulness apps, to nutritional and sleep webinars and programmes. In addition the new entrants to the market have been creating more robust technologies to ensure that engaging a remote workforce with these issues and how to handle them is easier than ever.
A challenge like Covid causes a review of workplace culture, which in turn causes a review of benefits. But this isn’t where the process ends. The truth is, ahead of the pandemic, companies were already moving to agile and networked working methodologies. That mindset has changed our definition of cause and effect – it is no longer in one direction, over a long period of time – it is now a short and cyclical process of constant learning and adaption.
So, perhaps we should re-frame the view to “culture impacts benefits, but then benefits impact culture, little and often, for as long as the company has people to support”. Causation is not as elusive as one may think.
