The Real Gap in Benefits Navigation

The Number the Industry Has Learned to Live With

Across the benefits category, average member engagement sits at 8–10%. That figure shows up often enough, in vendor decks, in industry benchmarking, in the quiet acknowledgment benefits consultants make to each other after the open enrollment rush, that it has stopped registering as a problem. It's treated as the ceiling.

Medefy's own population runs 40–70% engagement with its members, the same plan designs, and the same employee populations that produce 8–10% everywhere else. That's not a marginal improvement. It's a different category of outcome, and it's worth sitting with why the gap is that wide, because the answer isn't better benefits. It's what happens, or doesn't happen, between the moment a benefit is offered and the moment someone actually uses it.

Where the Plan Actually Breaks

Most benefits programs are built and evaluated on the wrong end of the process. Plan design gets negotiated for months. Enrollment materials get proofread line by line. Then the plan goes live, and the employee is left to figure out, alone, what a navigation benefit or a second opinion service or a virtual care option is actually for and when to use it.

That's the gap. Not the plan. The absence of anything that helps a real person, at the moment they need it, find the right, most affordable, next step and take it.

This is why point solutions keep multiplying inside benefits packages. Each new tool solves a narrow problem well, in isolation, but it also adds another resource employees have to know exists, recognize as relevant to their situation, and figure out how to use. Stack five or six of those tools on top of each other and you haven't built a benefits program. You've built five or six separate onboarding problems, none of which anyone has time to solve.

Health benefits navigation is supposed to be the layer that fixes this, the connective tissue between what's available and what to actually do. When that layer is missing, engagement doesn't fail because employees are apathetic. It fails because nobody built the on-ramp.

Three Moments Where Navigation Actually Fails

The gap isn't one failure. It's three smaller ones stacked on top of each other, and most benefits programs only ever address the first.

Awareness

Does the employee know the benefit exists at all. This is the one HR teams spend the most energy on, and it's genuinely the easiest to solve, an email, a flyer, a benefits fair table. It's also the least important of the three, because knowing a benefit exists doesn't tell you when to use it.

Relevance

Does the employee know this benefit applies to their situation, right now, today. A directory listing twelve services doesn't answer that. A person with a new diagnosis, a confusing bill, or a sick kid at 9 p.m. isn't going to cross-reference a benefits guide. They're going to do whatever feels fastest, which can easily mean a higher-cost option.

Follow-Through

Once someone is pointed at the right resource, does anything make it easy to actually complete the next step, instead of one more login screen or phone tree standing between them and help. This is where most well-intentioned point solutions lose people entirely.

Every benefits program handles the first moment. Almost none handle all three. Navigation, done correctly, is the discipline of designing for all three at once, not only publishing what's available, but routing someone to the right option, at the right moment, with a completable next step at the end of it.

Why This Shows Up as a Cost Problem Later

Under-engagement doesn't stay a soft metric for long. An employee who doesn't know their plan includes a navigation service or a virtual-first option is more likely to land on the most expensive, least efficient path available: the ER instead of a nurse line, a specialist referral instead of a covered second opinion, a plan change request instead of a five-minute answer that would have kept them where they already were.

This is where the engagement number and the cost number connect. A member who never gets routed to the right option, the in-network specialist instead of an urgent-care visit, the covered second opinion instead of a duplicate procedure, doesn't stop needing care. They default to whichever option is closest or most familiar, which is rarely the lower-cost one. Navigation closes that gap, not by changing the plan design, but by making sure members actually reach the option the plan design already made available to them.

Multiply that across a workforce and the math is straightforward: engagement and cost aren't two separate line items. They're the same line item, viewed from two different departments. HR sees it as a utilization report. Finance sees it as a trend. Both are looking at the same gap, which is exactly why this conversation can't stay siloed inside HR. The CFO evaluating next year's renewal is reading the same underlying number, only with a dollar sign in front of it.

This is also why the fix isn't communicate more or redesign the portal. Employers have tried both repeatedly, yet low engagement remains a persistent problem. More emails about a benefit nobody has been shown how to use only produce more unread emails. The problem was never volume. It was the absence of the middle layer connecting information to action.

What This Means for HR Teams

If you're accountable for benefits ROI, the 8–10% number should be uncomfortable. Better than average in this category still means most of your workforce isn't using what you're paying for.

The practical question worth asking heading into open enrollment isn't did we communicate the plan clearly. It's narrower and harder to dodge: when an employee has a healthcare decision to make, is there anything in your program that actually tells them what to do next, or does the plan hand them a directory or a portal page and call it support? If the honest answer is the latter, the fix isn't a bigger open enrollment push this fall. It's a navigation layer that's still doing its job in March, when nobody's paying attention and the decisions are happening anyway. See what this looks like for HR leaders.

What This Means for Benefits Consultants

For benefits consultants, the navigation gap is an opportunity, not only a risk. A consultant's value has always rested on more than plan design and renewal negotiation. A strong benefits strategy isn't only about what's available, it's about whether employees can actually use it. Being able to point to 40–70% engagement instead of the category norm gives a consultant a concrete way to demonstrate that the program they recommended is actually working, not only competitively priced. Take things a step further and back up the engagement number with the savings those engagements produced.

That's also a more durable form of differentiation than most of what a renewal conversation runs on. Plan design and pricing get matched by the next consultant with the same carrier relationships. Engagement data tied to your recommendation is harder to replicate, because it isn't about access to the same products. It's about whether the navigation layer around them actually works. See what this looks like for benefits consultants.

Open Enrollment Is Where This Gets Tested

Open enrollment is the point in the year when benefits decisions are put directly in front of nearly every employee. That raises the stakes on the navigation gap. Employees are actively evaluating and selecting benefits, which means the moment they need a clear next step is also the moment it's hardest to fake having one.

That makes this the right moment to ask a more specific question than is our benefits program good: does anything in it actually move someone from confused to covered, correctly, on their own? If the honest answer is no, that's the gap. And unlike most of what shows up in a renewal conversation, it's a fixable one, not by adding another point solution, but by building the layer that makes the ones you already have worth using.

The gap between 8–10% and 40–70% isn't a mystery. It's the layer most benefits programs never build. If you're heading into open enrollment without a clear answer for what happens after a plan is chosen, that's worth a conversation. Book a demo to see what navigation actually looks like running inside a program like yours.

Keep Reading

Why your benefits plan isn't the problem, your engagement strategy is