Editorial & Advertiser Disclosure Global Banking And Finance Review is an independent publisher which offers News, information, Analysis, Opinion, Press Releases, Reviews, Research reports covering various economies, industries, products, services and companies. The content available on globalbankingandfinance.com is sourced by a mixture of different methods which is not limited to content produced and supplied by various staff writers, journalists, freelancers, individuals, organizations, companies, PR agencies etc. The information available on this website is purely for educational and informational purposes only. We cannot guarantee the accuracy or applicability of any of the information provided at globalbankingandfinance.com with respect to your individual or personal circumstances. Please seek professional advice from a qualified professional before making any financial decisions. Globalbankingandfinance.com also links to various third party websites and we cannot guarantee the accuracy or applicability of the information provided by third party websites.
Links from various articles on our site to third party websites are a mixture of non-sponsored links and sponsored links. Only a very small fraction of the links which point to external websites are affiliate links. Some of the links which you may click on our website may link to various products and services from our partners who may compensate us if you buy a service or product or fill a form or install an app. This will not incur additional cost to you. For avoidance of any doubts and to make it easier, you may consider any links to external websites as sponsored links. Please note that some of the services or products which we talk about carry a high level of risk and may not be suitable for everyone. These may be complex services or products and we request the readers to consider this purely from an educational standpoint. The information provided on this website is general in nature. Global Banking & Finance Review expressly disclaims any liability without any limitation which may arise directly or indirectly from the use of such information.


  • 20% are unclear what to benchmark against
  • Data from Aon’s The Benefits Score

Aon Employee Benefits, the UK health and benefits business of Aon plc (NYSE:AON), has said that new data from The Benefits Score, Aon’s new strategic benchmarking tool, shows that just 20% of medium to large companies are measuring the return on investment (ROI) of their benefits programmes. The data also shows that although 80% of organisations say benchmarking is key, 20% are unclear about what sector they want to benchmark against. While employee engagement remains the top objective of benefits strategies, with 66% of employers citing it as the number one priority, it is unclear how engagement is defined in the businesses.

Data from The Aon Benefits Score, which is a strategic score benefits benchmarking programme launched today, shows that the first companies to use it are typically lacking a clear strategy for their benefits programmes, such as setting appropriate objectives, linking them to business goals and supporting the business case. It is also clear from the data that ROI is typically overlooked, often in terms of direct savings, but also for elements like recruitment, retention and other savings.

Jeff Fox, principal at Aon Employee Benefits, said:

“It is normal for many organisations to say they need positive ROI from their benefits programmes, especially when it comes to tax efficiency. We understand that HR is managing a complex process to attract and retain skilled employees in a highly competitive labour market while keeping costs under control, but, when we ask if they know what their ROI is, the answer is usually no, or that they don’t know how to measure it.

“Financial savings come in many ways besides tax efficiencies, so The Benefits Score is designed to highlight all key information, looking at the entire business case as well as helping employees to engage, and provide best steps to improve benefits provision and increase their benefit score. We also show how their benefits programme compares to their competitors and to the market.”

Jeff Fox continued:

“The data also shows that while organisations believe they want benchmarking, when asked to clarify their sector and comparators, there is general confusion. The need to benchmark is usually a demand from senior management to find out what other similar companies are doing. But in reality the most important benchmark appears to be the organisation itself, what matters to them and how they define strategy.”

Over 20 medium to large employers wanted to participate in The Benefits Score before its official launch. Their sectors include finance and insurance; technology and communications; professional services; energy, utilities and mining; healthcare and transportation. The score rates benefits strategies out of 100 with the highest overall score so far at 78 and the lowest at 22, with each company aspiring to achieve exceptional scores and the knowledge to improve their programmes. The businesses range in size from 250 to 5,000+ employees. The Benefits Score helps employers to drive benefits strategy, to achieve benefits objectives, to benchmark against other companies, to improve benefits programmes and to differentiate from competitive employers.

So far, of the employers that have participated in The Benefits Score, 75% have said that having a benefit accreditation achieved from scoring highly on The Benefits Score would be of value to the organisation, as there is currently a gap in the industry for this service.