Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) is pushing McKinsey & Company to release the methodology behind the firm's survey that found 30 percent of employers will stop offering health insurance after 2014.
Highlights of the survey were published in the June 2011 McKinsey Quarterly [see McKinsey: One-third of employers will drop health coverage], but the firm has refused to release the data to the public, despite repeated requests from lawmakers and media.
Baucus sent a letter on June 16 to McKinsey Consulting Company Managing Director Dominic Barton, asking for a number of details about the survey and explanations as to how the firm made its conclusions.
Recommended For You
"Honest public discourse requires a standard level of transparency — one McKinsey simply has not met," Baucus says. "The conclusions McKinsey reached differ sharply from results of other reputable, transparent research on the subject. McKinsey's findings also counter what actually happened in Massachusetts when similar policies increased employer-sponsored health insurance. We all want the most accurate information and the ability to evaluate its integrity, which is why McKinsey should answer these basic questions."
[Read "McKinsey's story starts to crumble."]
Baucus listed more than a dozen questions in his letter to Barton, telling him "I expect you to be able to answer completely."
Baucus questioned the wording of McKinsey's survey questions, how the interviews were conducted, the order of the questions, the size of employers who were asked and their geography, among others. He also demanded to know about the survey's funding.
A McKinsey spokesperson told BenefitsPro June 14 that McKinsey funded the research itself.
The Baucus letter is found below:
June 16, 2011
Via Electronic Transmission
Dominic Barton Global Managing Director McKinsey & Company No. 1 Jermyn Street London SW1Y4UH United Kingdom
Dear Mr. Barton:
I am writing to express my concern that McKinsey & Company has thus far declined to publicly release the methodology behind the June 2011 McKinsey Quarterly article titled, "How US health care reform will affect employee benefits." I understand that after repeated requests to meet with the staff of the Senate Finance Committee to discuss the methodology behind this survey, yesterday, McKinsey finally agreed to a meeting. We would like this meeting to be fruitful, so below is a list of questions I expect you to be able to answer completely.
The American Association for Public Opinion Research Disclosure Standards make clear that it is standard professional practice to release essential information on the methodology of publicly disclosed surveys. I urge McKinsey & Company to publicly disclose the methodology behind its survey consistent with these standards.
In order to evaluate your survey's conclusions, I request a full disclosure of the survey and its supporting materials, as well as answers to the following questions tomorrow:
1. Who funded the survey? If McKinsey & Company sponsored the survey, what account did the funding come from? Who are your biggest clients? Do you expect McKinsey & Company to benefit financially from the results of this survey?
2. Have the results of the study been featured in any presentations, whether written or oral, to potential new clients? Have they been featured in presentations to existing clients considering additional consulting work for McKinsey?
3. What was your sampling design?
4. Were the results statistically significant?
5. What was the breakout of the survey responses by:
1. industry 2. geography 3. employer size 4. the type of benefits the employer offers, and 5. the percentage of low-wage workers at the company?
6. Were there any oversamples, and if there were, how did you account for this? What was the margin of sampling error?
7. How were participants chosen? What methods were used to recruit the participants? What percentage of participants were McKinsey clients?
8. Did you use eligibility criteria or screening procedures? What was the participation rate? How were interviewees selected?
9. What position did the interviewees hold within their respective companies?
10. How were the interviews conducted? What script was used to "educate respondents" before asking questions? Could the script used to "educate respondents," the wording of the questions, or the order of the questions have influenced the interviewees' responses?
11. What questions were asked, including their exact wording? What was the order of the questions?
12. What was your internal review process for questionnaire? Did any outside experts review the survey and its results? What procedures were taken to verify the data?
13. Deciding not to offer health benefits is a major business decision that will be made by more than one person, how did you account for this?
Determining your methodology is particularly important because the conclusions drawn in this study are counter to the findings of a number of other reputable studies on this topic for which the methodology was disclosed. And your findings are counter to what actually happened in Massachusetts when similar policies took effect and employer-provided health insurance coverage actually increased. Providing the public and policymakers with the necessary information to evaluate the integrity of publicly released survey conclusions is essential to honest public discourse.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Max Baucus Chairman
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
