Reference no: EM132869982

CASE STUDY: And Now They Want Our Blood!

Companies are increasingly asking employees to take on-site blood tests. Because forcing employees to do so would invade their privacy, companies must persuade them to volunteer. Why bother?

Blood tests are part of health-risk assessment. Such assessment is considered the first step toward controlling chronic and expensive health problems such as diabetes, obesity, and tobacco addiction. According to American Healthways, employers using blood tests have seen between a $300 and $1,440 decrease in health care costs per participant, depending on what kind of incentive they offer to participants.

Snap-on, a well-known manufacturer of power and hand tools, began offering blood tests as part of a health-assessment program a year ago. Although the first-year sign-up was slow, Snap-on saw a 50 percent increase in sign-ups the following year as employees became familiar with the plan. Employees filled out questionnaires on which they self-assessed their health risks. Then they received results so that they could see how their blood work compared with their own assessments. Snap-on assured employees that the company would never see the results. The blood tests, conducted by American Healthways, screened for cholesterol, diabetes, hypertension, body fat, liver function, and nicotine. Employers receive only combined data about their employees.

Even though employees were the benefactors of these blood tests, Snap-on had to offer an incentive to urge them to participate. Employees received a $20 monthly discount on health care premiums for agreeing to the full assessment process, including the blood test.

However, another company found that the penalty approach was more effective in encouraging employee participation. Westell Technologies, which makes broadband communication equipment, charged employees 10 percent higher health care premiums if they refused to take the blood tests. This penalty program brought 80 percent participation. Regardless of the method used to encourage participation, any on-site blood testing must be voluntary.

Assume you are part of a group of interns at software developer Matrix International, which employs 900 people. The director of interns, Christine Davis, is also vice president of Human Resources. One day she calls your group together and says, "I've got this terrific idea! Matrix needs employees to take these blood tests and fill out health-risk assessment forms. We know it will be a hard sell, but we think it's the right thing to do-not only for employees but also for the company because it will lower our skyrocketing health-care costs. So here's what I want you interns to do as a training exercise. Get together and decide what you think is the best way for us to persuade employees to participate. Should we offer incentives or threaten penalties? "

Seeing the blank expressions on your faces, she said, "Oh, you can assume that the company will back whatever decision you make-so long as it's not out of line with what other companies are doing. Once you decide what to do, I want you to prepare a message to employees. I'll let you decide when to offer the program and how to sign up. You might even come up with a name for the project. Blood tests will be given by American Healthways at our company offices."

Your Task. Prepare two messages. Address one to Christine Davis. Explain what your group decided and justify the rationale for your decisions. Address the second message to Matrix employees for the signature of Ms. Davis. Persuade employees to participate in the program. Remember to anticipate objections to your request. How can these objections be overcome? Should you emphasize benefits to the reader or to the company? What direct and indirect benefits can you name? What is the best communication channel for this message? How can you make it easy for receivers to respond?