Why a harder sign-up could get more employees using their benefits

Where to add friction, and where to remove it Sorting a client’s benefits package by decision type and enrollment type DECISION TYPE Opt-in / voluntary ↑ Default / opt-out ↓ ENROLLMENT TYPE ← One-time election Ongoing habit → ADD A SMALL STEP Employee assistance programs Wellness & fitness apps Financial coaching Telehealth & mental health benefits Chronic condition management apps Buy-in effect applies here SIMPLIFY, BUT EDUCATE Supplemental life & AD&D election Critical illness / accident election Legal & identity theft plans Pet insurance election REMOVE FRICTION Retirement contribution auto-enrollment Default beneficiary designation Required compliance notices (CHIP, ACA) UNCOMMON GROUND Auto-enrolled wellness nudges Default-in preventive screenings Rarely both default and ongoing Framework derived from Dykstra, O’Flaherty & Whillans, “The Buy-In Effect,” Management Science (forthcoming). Category placements are editorial judgment, not findings of the study.


The researchers are specific about when the effect applies: when the target behavior requires ongoing follow-through rather than a one-time action, when both the sign-up effort and the behavior itself are voluntary, and when the extra step feels connected to the benefit rather than arbitrary paperwork. Those three conditions describe a lot of the voluntary and wellbeing benefits brokers place today: an employee assistance program, a diabetes management app, a financial coaching subscription, a fitness or mental health benefit bundled into a group plan. Employees enroll in each of these once, and then the benefit only delivers value through repeated use, both to the employee and to the employer’s utilization numbers.

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply