3 ms·

I'm beginning to think that "corporate and consumer well-being and productivity" might be the next big thing, and it's already here. There are incredible opport

I'm beginning to think that "corporate and consumer well-being and productivity" might be the next big thing, and it's already here. There are incredible opportunities in this space, like biohacking, supplements, self-testing (blood, brain function, etc), computer-assisted learning and meditation, diets and just plain old food a level beyond "organic" (i.e. known origin, local, glyphosate free soil, "grass fed" etc).

robg 10y ago
The biggest question is always: Who pays? It's in a company's interest to pay for a sleep coach for any worker with sleep difficulties. But sadly health is not yet seen as part of operations/productivity, even in the most modern companies. That's changing, and with incentives from Obamacare, but we're looking at a complete re-thinking of benefits and human resources. I'm excited in this thread because Huffington is exactly the person to help.
6stringmerc 10y ago
In my experience, having worked in corporate "Wellness" related business objectives, I think there are two mentalities to approaching improving well-being and productivity, 1) The Carrot, and 2) The Stick. In scenario 1) the company provides resources (time, opportunities for exercise, dietary advantages like coupons) and hopes for a good outcome. They offer incentives. In scenario 2) the company jacks up everybody's rates and offers "Discounts" to people who willingly submit to having their biological markers reviewed and stored in a database, and to be "under the thumb" of "Coaches" who call to "check in" on progress. The only incentive is fiscal, and the company gets to off-load a bit more of its financial obligation...and, in the US where wages are stagnant, it punishes working class folks. There's a lot of feel-good talk about option 1) but in my experience Top-Down leadership highly prefers option 2) and that bothers me. Mostly because BMI is often bullshit and sharing PHI is also bullshit to get around some HIPAA protections. Now with lots of cancer survivors on the books, insurance companies want to recoup the actuarial risk by increasing premiums on the corporate employer, and the corporate employer wants to find ways to kick the cost downward so, you know, shareholders will be happy. I do sincerely believe this is the way it works in the US. I do not like it.
pjc50 10y ago
"Corporate well-being and productivity" is the kind of thing that can very easily turn into a zero-privacy dystopia where the employer demands continuous access to a mandatory FitBit as a condition of employment. It would make occasional random drug testing look positively genteel. It also potentially turns into an environment where you have to "perform wellness" to keep your job. As soon as there are hints of unhappiness or dissent your job is at risk. Not only do you have to turn up at the office when you have minor flu-like symptoms, you have to try your best to hide them.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
splawn 10y ago
Awesome, In that case, I will start breeding snakes for their oil.
- swalsh 10y ago
  I hear snake oil is the new coconut oil.

robg 10y ago

The biggest question is always: Who pays? It's in a company's interest to pay for a sleep coach for any worker with sleep difficulties. But sadly health is not yet seen as part of operations/productivity, even in the most modern companies. That's changing, and with incentives from Obamacare, but we're looking at a complete re-thinking of benefits and human resources. I'm excited in this thread because Huffington is exactly the person to help.

6stringmerc 10y ago

In my experience, having worked in corporate "Wellness" related business objectives, I think there are two mentalities to approaching improving well-being and productivity, 1) The Carrot, and 2) The Stick. In scenario 1) the company provides resources (time, opportunities for exercise, dietary advantages like coupons) and hopes for a good outcome. They offer incentives. In scenario 2) the company jacks up everybody's rates and offers "Discounts" to people who willingly submit to having their biological markers reviewed and stored in a database, and to be "under the thumb" of "Coaches" who call to "check in" on progress. The only incentive is fiscal, and the company gets to off-load a bit more of its financial obligation...and, in the US where wages are stagnant, it punishes working class folks. There's a lot of feel-good talk about option 1) but in my experience Top-Down leadership highly prefers option 2) and that bothers me. Mostly because BMI is often bullshit and sharing PHI is also bullshit to get around some HIPAA protections. Now with lots of cancer survivors on the books, insurance companies want to recoup the actuarial risk by increasing premiums on the corporate employer, and the corporate employer wants to find ways to kick the cost downward so, you know, shareholders will be happy. I do sincerely believe this is the way it works in the US. I do not like it.

pjc50 10y ago

"Corporate well-being and productivity" is the kind of thing that can very easily turn into a zero-privacy dystopia where the employer demands continuous access to a mandatory FitBit as a condition of employment. It would make occasional random drug testing look positively genteel. It also potentially turns into an environment where you have to "perform wellness" to keep your job. As soon as there are hints of unhappiness or dissent your job is at risk. Not only do you have to turn up at the office when you have minor flu-like symptoms, you have to try your best to hide them.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

splawn 10y ago

Awesome, In that case, I will start breeding snakes for their oil.

swalsh 10y ago
I hear snake oil is the new coconut oil.