False Negatives create uncertainty, and drive companies away from proactive programs.
False Negatives happen when a program seems to fail, because individuals need care, take the program, but are not helped. However some of these members were never motivated to make lifestyle changes in the first place — like someone who just will never, ever, give up smoking, take up exercise, eat right, etc.
This failure to improve behaviors wasn’t about your program, it was about the motivation level of the people you reached out to. The responsibility is still on you, but not for the reason we typically think.
If you don’t manage this negative outcome, clients will naturally shy away from proactive solutions, and for good reason.
It’s understandable that this is adds huge risk to taking on these programs. Without knowing who will actually make healthy lifestyle changes, it is impossible to understand the return on investment (ROI).
How many people are you paying for, who have zero intention of making changes?
To reduce this level of uncertainty, you must apply a “motivation to change” index. If you have this, you can see who to prioritize for engagement. It can also inform highly-targeted messaging for those who are ready to change, other outreach for those who are on the cusp, and still other outreach for those who are completely resistant.
This allows organizations to have greater confidence that their proactive program will be as effective as it can be.
Importantly, the index must be quantitative and based on data, rather than self-reported or based upon interviewer’s subjective impressions.
Quantitative models for motivation to change alleviate risk for employers. They provide an added layer of certainty that the proactive program is reaching those who will actually make the changes needed to live healthier lives.
Link to Full Article in the Journal of Compensation and Benefits:
https://wp.me/p9kBci-in
