During the course of my work I have the opportunity to talk to many people. I talk to CEOs, presidents, general managers, HR directors, and many other people who hold responsible positions in their companies.

All of these people know what they are doing. Many of them are very good at what they do. Their companies make money. The employees of these companies are satisfied with the way their companies treat them.   Their customers continue to do business with them and many of these companies continue to grow.

So when someone comes along and suggests that they change something about how they do business that person wants to upset the status quo. This is not an easy thing to convince successful people to do.   If it is not broken why fix it? This is a very common attitude in business.  I agree that change for the sake of change is not worthwhile. So the question is, will the effort required to institute Trusted Source Marketing be a worthwhile change?

Since I am a proponent of this change everyone will rightly guess my answer.  So let me list some of the advantages that come from this change.

• reduced expenses related to too many information meetings
• improved understanding of benefits increases use and appreciation
• increased participation in voluntary benefits helps retain employees
• encouraging feedback, including complaints, exposes the good and the bad
• timely responses to complaints indicates respect and increases morale
• more communication between employees and employers is a good thing

There are many more advantages that accrue to everyone involved.  What do you think?