By Jane R. Elgass
By the end of this month, more than 1,900 members of the University community will have provided input on issues related to a flexible benefits plan through participation in 195 focus group sessions that began in September and were held on various Ann Arbor campuses, at the Medical Center, and at Dearborn and Flint.
Focus groups are widely used in business and industry, and have been successfully used by several U-M units, to determine individuals’ feelings on specific issues and solicit their opinions on how something might best be handled or improved.
Preliminary results of some of the focus group sessions “show that they are going very well,” says Chandler W. Matthews, associate vice president for finance and co-chair of the Flexible Benefits Advisory Committee.
A number of themes have been emerging from discussions in the focus groups and other activities being used to get input from employees.
“The people who have expressed an interest in and attended the focus groups have asked very good questions, about flexible benefits generally and, in some cases, how such a program might affect them as individuals.
“We’re not trying to sell flexible benefits through these groups, but rather find out what people think, and this has been successful,” he adds.
Matthews notes that the committee all along has felt that it is absolutely essential that everyone thoroughly understand their benefits, and this has been borne out through the focus groups.
“We have learned that we need to do a good deal of education just to bring people up to date, and that this education has to be continuous.”
Each of the flexible benefits groups has focused on one of four issues and related specific topics, and results of those discussions will be reported later. The topics are:
—Preliminary objectives for a flexible benefits program: individuals’ reactions to the concept of a flexible benefit program, what it means to them, concerns and issues that need to be addressed.
—General issues related to the design of a flexible benefits program: strengths and weaknesses of current benefits, potential strengths and weaknesses of a flexible benefits program, achieving equity in the financial aspects of benefits, the need for core coverage in some areas, interest in benefits, services or other options that are not currently offered.
—Specific issues related to paid time off: strengths and weaknesses of current benefits, potential strengths and weaknesses of possible alternatives (for example, combined time off, buying and selling vacation time), interest in possible alternatives, achieving equity in this area.
—Communication: understanding of benefits from current communications and effectiveness of these communications; needs of future benefits communication, with or without a flexible benefits plan; media and delivery preferences; ideas to improve future benefits communications.
The committee also has gathered ideas and opinions in a number of other ways including hosting briefing sessions and open forums, speaking at departmental and faculty governance meetings and through the use of written questionnaires. These activities will continue through the next several months.
Written questionnaires have paralleled the focus groups and briefings. They include one on general knowledge of current benefits used in the sessions on preliminary objectives, an exit survey on benefit preferences and needs used in the general-design and paid-time-off groups, and a communication questionnaire designed to determine satisfaction with current communication channels and ideas for future approaches.
Advisory committee co-chair David J. Anderson, professor of electrical engineering and computer science, notes that several themes are beginning to emerge from discussions with faculty and staff.
Among them:
—Perception that the University already has decided to offer flexible benefits.
—Concern that such an approach is a “mask” for cost-shifting.
—Fear that if a flexible benefits plan is implemented there will be further cost-shifting.
—”Don’t fix what isn’t broken” attitude.
—Concern about internal equity among various groups of employees.
Anderson notes that concerns expressed by others are shared by the committee, and that he and others address these concerns when speaking with various campus groups.
Cost-shifting and the perception that a flexible benefits plan is a done deal are the most frequently raised concerns, Anderson says, adding that “it doesn’t become real until the executive officers say it is.
“We have hired a consultant to help us explore the issues of flexible benefits plans in general and to help us address the concerns of faculty and staff. We are not changing anything yet, but rather are addressing everything we think could happen.
“This is a major challenge for the committee,” Anderson adds. “The issues are very complex and require a great deal of explanation.”
In addition to the focus groups and other presentations, information is being gathered through a survey mailed to all faculty and non-bargained-for staff about the value individuals place on current benefits and other possible benefits and services.
Because of the special nature and circumstances of the retirees and survivors community, it is likely that these groups would not be included in the initial flexible plan implementation. Participation by staff members represented by unions will be subject to collective bargaining with each union.
Among the units that have so far participated in briefing sessions, open forums and regular meetings are the Commission for Women; the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs; Dearborn’s College of Arts, Sciences and Letters; Senate Assembly, the deans of the schools and colleges; a number of faculty and staff groups at the Medical Center; the Committee on the Economic Status of the Faculty; and the Academic Affairs Advisory Council.
Members of the advisory committee welcome comments by members of the University community. Please see the Sept. 27 issue of the Record for a list of all members with their addresses and phone numbers.
