The modern Employee Assistance Program (EAP) has evolvedbeyond its grassroots peer-driven beginnings into a complex globalbenefit implemented by the majority of employers.

Accompanying this growth are the challenges of the benefitmarketplace, but also an opportunity for benefit brokers to deliveran effective and high impact product that also enhances theirclients’ overall satisfaction.

There is ample evidence validating the positive effect that aquality EAP has on lowered absenteeism, presenteeism and workplace distress, improved work engagementand life satisfaction.

This is fortunate news for employers, who can buy a low costsolution for some of the most expensive and vexing workplaceproblems. However, downward price pressures are creating a problemfor the EAP industry, grasping at straws for a profitmargin, and brokers trying to sell EAP products and ensure clientsatisfaction.

EAP fit is crucial

As health care costs continue increasing, the cost of an EAP hasremained flat and even in some cases, decreased. Outsourcing,commoditized pricing, and administration simplification all impactthe EAP industry and perpetuate a common, misplaced goal: find theeasiest and cheapest way to address some of the biggest workplacerisks.

As prices of EAPs stagnate, vendors are forced to cut cornersand deliver less. Employers get less for their shrinking benefitdollar, often in areas where their needs are the highest. Brokersare at risk of losing valued customers. Everyone loses over whatare essentially pennies of the benefit dollar.

This presents a paradox for benefits brokers and consultants.Their energy is easily drawn toward the more familiar, complex andcostly benefit products, leaving them prone to inadvertentlymarginalize the EAP products and perpetuate the race to thebottom.

In an upcoming trends report published by Chestnut GlobalPartners entitled, “The Increasing Role of Procurement in EAPPurchasing Decisions” Tom Shjerven highlights some of theproblematic trends that are also described below.

As benefit products, EAPs purchases are commonly driven byprice. Brokers often do not possess detailed knowledge of EAP andstruggle to makes the case for price realization and differentiatebetween programs worth a premium and those worthy of beingpositioned as a “loss leader freebie.”

The net result, as Shjerven writes, is that EAPs are rarelypurchased with significant thought to whether the product “is agood fit for the organization.”

Which begs the question, what is the most effective EAP for agiven organization? How can brokers best evaluate the needs oftheir customers and make the case for best quality and best fit,within an acceptable cost-benefit ratio?

Adding value by design

Attentive EAP stakeholders recognize when an EAP is addingvalue. So these questions become quite relevant as brokerswork to capitalize on sales opportunities and deepen customerrelationships.

There are essentially three ways to build and implement an EAP,all of which have shown similar, positive workplace outcomes:

1. an internal program staffed and run by company employees

2. an external model delivered offsite by a vendor

3. the “hybrid” EAP that offers a customized blend of both

What isn’t well understood, however, is which of these fits bestfor which employer setting to ensure EAP purchasers reap theworkplace benefits that quality EAPs are documented toprovide.

Since all three EAP models demonstrate some positive outcomes,brokers have multiple EAP options to choose from.

Given that EAPs function most effectively when they are hightouch and well-integrated into the workplace, finding the best fitfor an organization becomes important to both sell the EAP at acredible price point while also ensuring customers the programmingthey need.

Recently, the authors conducted a research study where they interviewed 29 internal EAP managers, half from currentprograms and half from programs that have been downsized,outsourced or eliminated.

The intent was to better understand these front line EAPmanagers’ experiences and the circumstances where their programsthrived and where they faltered. The study found consistencies thatlend valuable insights into what EAP may be best fit for anorganization.

Low cost, embedded and “free” EAPs are the easy choice, butagain, may be detrimental to the overall deliverable of a brokerand the client relationship. Based on the research, here are 10questions that can help ensure you have the best fit EAP model:

1. What is the size of the organization? Internal and hybrid EAPs fit well in mid-sized and largerorganizations where there is internal HR, benefits, legal andsecurity infrastructure.

2. How stable is the organization and itsstructure? Internal and hybrid EAPs are a best fitwhen they can become part of the fabric of an organization and workclosely within highly invested HR and Benefits organizationalleaders. This takes time. Internal EAPs are oftenviewed as easy cost targets during periods of austerity andchange.

3. What is the leadership culture? Organizations should consider internal and hybrid programs when theorganizational leadership understands the risks of employeepersonal problems and has a sincere interest in the health andwell-being of the workforce.

4. What is the benefits procurement strategy?Organizations purchasing off-the-shelf benefit plans with minimalcustomization and administrative burden should consider lessexpensive and purely external programs. While internal andhybrid EAPs don’t have to be more expensive, they do requireinternal administrative expertise for procurement and ongoingadministration.

5. What is the expectation for ROI? While bothinternal and external EAPs can deliver EAP outcome metrics,internal EAPs often thrive when they are in a culture ofinsourcing, perceived value and part of an team of “peopleleaders.”

6. What is the investment in Organizational Development andLearning? An often overlooked value of EAP is the impactto workplace culture, climate, leadership and a learningenvironment. Internal and hybrid models are more likely thanexternal programs to compliment and fill gaps deliveringorganizational development interventions, leadership consultationand training.

7. Howcomplicated are the drug testing and personnelmanagement policies? Internal programs are a bestfit when EAP involvement is written into workplace policy. Insuch cases internal EAPs can effectively fill gaps in an HRorganization’s areas of drug testing administration, performanceimprovement and violence prevention.

8. How effectively does the organization communicate withthe employees? Internal EAPs thrive in organizationsthat are high-touch with robust communication, rather than theone-and-done benefits communications that often come during annualenrollment.

9. How flexible are the organization’s HR and benefitsmanagers? Internal EAP managers can effectively wear manyhats. Today’s EAP managers are often skilled in HRmanagement, benefit plan administration, wellness and occupationalhealth. Internal programs thrive when there is a niche internal EAProle. But EAP professionals can also do double duty acrossthe HR and Benefits spectrum.

10. Does the organization have a health and wellnessstrategy? Emotional and social health should have an equalseat at the health stable. To the degree the organization isinvesting in employee health and well-being, EAPs should be builtto match that commitment.

Where the EAP should live within an organization does not seemto make a big difference, as our research found that successfulEAPs existed in HR, Benefits, and Medical departments. The mostcritical factor predicting success is how well the EAP isintegrated into the broader workplace culture.

Additionally, price need not be the determining factor, whichcontradicts the trend toward outsourcing to the lowest costvendor. Purchasers purely interested in checking a box to say“Yes, we offer an EAP” are best suited to purchase a standardlow-cost EAP offering.

But for those willing to make even moderate investments in anEAP, well-crafted internal and hybrid EAPs are not necessarily moreexpensive and usually will pay for themselves in both hard and softreturns.

One size EAP does not fit all

Clearly no one size fits all, which is a cautionary tale to anybroker, consultant or benefit purchasers drawn to only consideringlow cost, marginalized EAP benefit products.

Sometimes you get what you pay for. And purchasinganything without careful consideration of the needs of the end userbrings risk to the investment and the broker-clientrelationship.

Caveat emptor. Given the employer risk associated withemployee mental health and social problems, benefit brokers,consultants and purchasers are advised to learn about designoptions of the modern EAP and the best practices for articulatingmeasureable workplace outcomes.

Just because EAPs are low cost in the context of total benefitspend does not mean a poor decision will be low impact. Takethe time to understand the organization and consider all theoptions to ensure the EAP is a best fit.