Traditionally, the language used in HR letters is often frightening, anxiety-provoking, and not empathetic to the person recovering from illness. There is a focus on ‘policy triggers’, dismissal, and legal language implicitly designed to scare the employee back to work. The Innovation Lab’s approach was human-centered and put the employee experience of illness and recovery at the heart of the letters. In addition, HR had not used a behavioural science approach to absence management before, and this approach allowed a concrete understanding of the behaviours required of the employee in order to return to work as well as all of the factors that could influence that behaviour. Behavioural Insights had also never been used in the HR letters. The Lab made use a many insights in the new letters (as described above).

The programme is in Implementation and Evaluation stages. The letters are being used in a couple of Departments so far and will be rolled out to all Departments by the end of 2019. Line managers have already given great feedback during workshops with HR – they have said that the letters set the tone that they try to achieve with staff which makes it easier to have those conversations with them. In addition, we are planning on analysing the sickness absence data over the course of the next few years to see if there has been any impact on return to work times. It will be difficult to isolate direct effects about the impact of the letters alone, however, because there have been other small changes to the absence management process like increased line management responsibility. But hopefully it will be possible to draw some conclusions when there is further data.

The Lab worked very closely with Human Resource Professionals in the Civil Service who have expert knowledge of the absence policies and procedures which was vital to the success of the project. They also got feedback staff and staff who have line management responsibility in order to get feedback on the letters. The Lab also worked with Solicitors, Trade Union Staff and Employee Relations Staff to get feedback on the legalities of the process.

With clear, concise, and empathetic communications, employees better understand what is asked of them and feel supported in taking those actions. Line managers can feel confident that the letters sent to their staff better represent their views and their relationship with their staff will be less likely to be adversely affected. The organisation as a whole benefits from reduced absenteeism if staff face fewer barriers when returning to work and are able to return when they are ready.

To evaluate the impact of the letters before sickness absence data was available, the Lab ran a “lab experiment” with staff in the NICS in order to understand the clarity of the letters as well as to try to gauge the emotional response to the letter. During the experiment, organisers asked staff to read a scenario and imagine themselves in it. The Lab then gave some staff the standard letter, some the revised letter, and asked everyone to complete some surveys. They found that staff who read the new letter felt significantly more empowered and supported and less guilty than staff who read the standard letters (t-test; p<0.5). Though not all differences in emotions were statistically significant, all negative emotions were rated lower and positive emotions were rated higher for the new letter compared to the standard letter. Also staff found the new letters clearer to understand and felt more empathy from HR about their 'situation'.

1. Initial acceptability: the Innovation Lab pushed the project onto HR staff, trying to convince them there were things we could improve to create a better experience for employees when they were off sick. The initial pitches did not go well and we struggled to get buy-in. Only after they did a prototype of a brand-new letter, and found someone who was willing and keen to work with them, did they start to gain traction. Now the head of HR loves the work they have done.
2. Complexity of policy: the absence management policies in the civil service are complex and the wording had to be exactly right. The Lab were reliant on policy experts to help with the intricacies.
3. Needs of different groups: Trade Unions, Solicitors, and Employee Relations staff all had different priorities that we had to account for. The Lab had to make compromises between, for example, wanting to reduce the length and complexity of letters and including enough legal/policy info to satisfy everyone.

1. Existing structures: the infrastructure allowed us to modify the letters without too much hassle
2. Leadership buy-in: Senior-level support is vital and means the innovation won’t be shut down at a later stage.
3. Right level of control: It is crucial to work closely with the project manager who can make decisions and is responsible for rolling out the new approach.
4. Good working relationships: as above, so much is about the people you are working with and the positive working relationships that are developed.
5. Excellent policy knowledge: you need to have someone on board who knows the subject area inside and out.
6. Personal values: The project team had a deep desire to improve the experience for staff who go off sick. They had years of experience under the previous system and wanted to do as much as possible to bring a fresh, empathetic approach to the absence management process.

The format and thinking behind the letters has been replicated into other HR forms, done by HR themselves. In the Innovation Lab, we have used the same principles and the same behavioural science approach to redesign other letters for other agencies for different purposes: for example, we redesigned a letter to prompt people who had gone into arrears to make a payment. The letter generated over 1.2m in recovered arrears payments.

A ‘behavioural’ approach allows complex problems to be broken down into manageable chunks – in other words, by focusing on an individual’s behaviour (“What do you want them to do next?”), the communications you use with that person become more straightforward.

Finding the right people to work with is critical. You need people who have direct responsibility for the work area and who can make the required changes.

There is a significant amount of work required in redesigning a suite of letters. Almost every single line in each letter had to be considered from the legal and policy perspective. Do not underestimate the time required in a ‘simple’ letter!

It’s vital to speak to the people directly affected by the letter or policy that you are trying to improve. Put yourself in their shoes and try to understand their pain points and barriers to action.

Changing letters is a step towards changing culture. By changing the tone and messaging your company delivers, you change how people engage with you and how your staff engage with each other. Letters are also a physical artefact of a policy – and because it may be the only physical representation of that process it’s important to get it right.