This year's broker survey offered a unique opportunity. The polling period spanned the month of January, creating an opportunity to look at responses before and after the Massachusetts senatorial election. Some 1,024 respondents took the survey pre-election, when it appeared that Congress would soon pass reform, and 244 post-election, when there was much less certainty. While many answers were similar, some interesting areas of difference emerged:
- Pain: Brokers who responded after the Massachusetts election were actually somewhat more negative about the implications of reform for their customers. Why more negativity when the prospect of reform is fading? One strong possibility is that brokers were envisioning a new approach to reform -- a more fragmentary approach lacking mandates, subsidies, and other system stabilizers.
- Targeting: Pre-election, some larger brokers said they were considering moving down market -- presumably to take advantage of technologies and scale to play in the exchange-based market. Post-election this trend completely vanished.
- Wellness: This topic showed considerable variation by segment. Small-group brokers saw reform as the death knell for wellness among their clients, while large-group brokers believe they will play a role in wellness. Post-election, there was an uptick in brokers saying they needed to play a greater role in wellness.
- Service offerings: Many respondents indicated that reform would have led to an expansion in their service offerings (administrative services, employee assistance programs, etc.) Pre-election, 42 percent said their firms would increase their service offerings at least somewhat. Post-election, there was an uptick in focus on service offerings, especially in the middle market related to human resources outsourcing and third party administrator services. Administrative services are likely to become a big issue -- interviews indicate that staff reductions by insurers are having a significant impact on service levels.
