New Challenges require a New Mindset for Insurance

New Challenges require a New Mindset for Insurance
Celent conducted another successful Peer Networking Event (PNE), this time in Atlanta, Georgia. The event was well attended by insurers from around the area and even had representation from a bank. The PNEs are designed to bring together insurers to discuss topics that they find of interest, either due to immediate concerns or future direction. The structure of the forum allows for open and candid discussions between the participants.

The two topics that were discussed during this PNE were emerging technologies and the architecture concerns to incorporate and integrate these new technologies into the existing environment with which carriers must deal today. Celent provided its perspective and insight into these areas and the group engaged in a lot of interactive dialog. Carriers were interested in what others are doing with respect to telematics, customer sentiment and the use of external data. There was a growing concern expressed about how to deal with the large amounts of varying data and how to incorporate that information into the business decisioning process. For example, one carrier wanted to know if anyone had experience with data aggregators to help deal with the Big Data challenge that is beginning to hit the insurance industry.

Another concern expressed is how to maximize the user experience for policy holders, agents, and CSRs (Customer Service Representatives). The insurers said they face a challenge with their ability to integrate across their systems to provide the level of experience that users have come to expect with Google, Facebook and Amazon. They also discussed the significant advantages available to specialty insurers by leveraging more customer data to better underwrite risks.

There was a high value discussion regarding the need for IT to educate the business on the art of the possible. Regarding emerging technologies, IT needs to better understand the business and take a seat at the table to help drive the business and help them understand what is truly possible; what is still just a concept; and the true impact to the business of the emerging technologies that are so hot in the press.

Celent proposed that in the future insurance IT landscape, all that carriers will own is the architecture and the information. This generated good debate around the role of enterprise architect and the role of the business architect. Only three of the carriers in attendance have a formal, mature business architect practice. Others described their business architects as really business SMEs (subject matter experts). The insurers also observed that IT architects and insurers rarely talk about human capital. Carriers need to develop an IT human capital plan related to IT architecture skills. A central theme of the day was that the role of the insurance IT architect is definitely changing as we move forward.

One carrier presented their EA (Enterprise Architecture) journey. They have been moving away from business siloed architectures to a true enterprise architecture, responsible for the enterprise, not just a single line of business. They created an EA roadmap and established an EA governance group that was quite effective. The surprising aspect of their efforts was the speed (six months) in which they established and matured their EA governance group. Some of the key reasons for this are that the EA governance committee consists of senior executives from IT and business and all projects must go through a practical EA review. The governance process enhances the project deliverables and has not become a bottleneck for project delivery. Their focus is on their value proposition and how they can help drive their company to achieve the business goals.

In the afternoon, another carrier presented their system modernization efforts and the journey that they have come over the last couple of years. As with most carriers, they have a myriad of systems and had a lot of manual processes. They found it took longer than expected to get the first line of business up, but new lines now only take 5-9 months (reduced from 18 months previously). They have rationalized many of their systems and continue moving forward on improving the back end and introducing portals and improved customer experience on the front end. A key lesson learned was to fix underwriting first and then focus on the back end process systems, such as Claims and finance. Other lessons learned included:

o Need 100% commitment from the business

o Change/fix the process, not the system

o Define your requirements based on the new business process

o Decide what you want to do, then pick the tool (not vice versa)

o Define reqs up front before selecting an implementation partner

o Be realistic about data conversion time and effort

o Dedicate a Project Manager from underwriting full time

o Do not convert policy data! Convert policies at time of renewal.

o Allow projects to fail

o Define your requirements well before working with a vendor; otherwise, they cannot understand what you want

The PNE confirmed to all the carriers in the room that they are all struggling with variations of the same issues. It also confirmed that you cannot face these new challenges with the old Insurance mindset or culture and provided practical steps that have been taken to make the needed transitions.

The next PNE is scheduled for October 26, at RSA Canada in Toronto. The two topics for discussion will be Insurance innovation and Big Data in insurance. The event is open to all carriers. Check the Celent site (www.celent.com) soon for event and registration details. Based on the last several PNEs, you won’t want to miss it!

Question & Answer: Celent Insurance Webinar: Emerging Insurance Technologies: Life, Annuities, and Pensions Industry Edition

Question & Answer: Celent Insurance Webinar: Emerging Insurance Technologies: Life, Annuities, and Pensions Industry Edition
Jamie MacGregor, Nicolas Michellod and I presented a webinar, Emerging Insurance Technologies: Life, Annuities, and Pensions Industry Edition, on May 31st. The webinar had an active Q&A session at the end and, as a result, Nicolas, Jamie and I did not have time to answer all the questions. The blog will provide our answers to all the questions asked and answered as well as asked but not answered during the webinar.

Q: How are Insurers leveraging Social Media & Mobility in their business model and what are some of the major challenges faced in this area?

This was asked during the webinar.

A: From the European perspective, there are different ways to leverage social media and social media data in the insurance business. For life insurers, the most popular is to use it as a marketing tool: digging, mining social media data, and trying to shape the reputation and using it to communicate information about products. This has been used by life insurers more often so we can say it’s becoming common. What we are seeing more and more is life insurers trying to use the existing data on social media platforms to refine or better detect insurance fraud or better assess underwriting risks. This could be done using specific mining tools, but now the difficulty for insurers is to be sure that they can turn the data into appropriate information for their business use. It is coming.

On the mobile side, from the research we have done in North America. From the consumer side there has not been as much demand from life insurance policyholders as in, say, P&C. But consumers would like transactional capabilities such as paying their billing or at least knowing their bill is due or there is a potential for lapse. They would like communication with or from an insurer company. On the producer side, insurance companies are making the move to offer capabilities to their producers. It’s not highly prevalent, but it is increasing. From Celent research in 2011, we found that of the top 100 life insurance companies, only 12 were offering producers some functionality on mobile technology. Most of that was marketing or informational capabilities, not transactional. However, doing a quick review this past week, we found that many more insurers now offer producers mobile capabilities; still many are marketing oriented, but transactional functionalities like illustrations, quotes, needs analysis, even eApplications are increasingly being seen. Celent’s yearly CIO research also shows that insurers look to mobile capabilities for producers as a need to have in the short term.

Regulatory changes are also causing insurers beginning to investigate bold steps in both the mobile and social media space.

Q: What are the main drivers of technology adoption in Asia and what emerging technologies they are mostly adopting? Does this geography show same behavior as US and Europe or are there any differences?

This was asked during the webinar.

A: Geographies do not show the same behavior in terms of technology adoption. Our report provides our view on the level of adoption of emerging technologies for each region that we cover: North America, EMEA, Asia and Latin America. The report can be found on the Celent website: http://www.celent.com/reports/emerging-insurance-technologies-life-annuities-and-pensions-industry-edition-2012. We suggest you read the report and see if it makes sense for you and if you have any further questions, let us know and we can set up a call.

It depends on the technologies that affect specific lines of business. For example, we talked about hedging technologies, the tools that allow for better hedging of the financial position for variable annuities. We know that the market that is most developed in variable annuities is the US market, so in the US these technologies have a higher adoption rate. In Europe, the UK has a more mature variable annuity market than say continental Europe where the products are not so popular, so there is a varying level of adoption of the technologies in Europe.

Looking particularly at Asia Pacific, emerging technology that tend to get traction are the following:

– Mobile technology: Asia Pacific is the largest Mobile market in the world, and the growth is still strong. Access to the Internet through a mobile device is increasing fast. Many Asia Pacific insurance companies are currently working on providing mobility solution to agents, and some of them are also planning to provide mobile solution to policyholders to conduct self-service, and to prospects to purchase simple insurance products.

– Virtualization: insurers in developed markets already have clear strategies in place for virtualization and have deployments in place for the proportion of their estates able to take advantage. In some emerging markets, strategies are less well developed, although many will be reviewing their options currently.

– Business Rules Management: Many Asia Pacific insurance companies have adopted business rules management in recent years, and many other companies that currently doesn’t have a BRM in place are thinking to implement BRM solution within the next three years, in order to realize automation to some degree, to increase efficiency and to reduce headcount cost. The driver behind this is the increasing cost of insurance professionals, such as underwriters, and the growth of business amount.

Two additional points, for Latin America and Asia, when looking at the technology coming from there. Typically because the less mature markets don’t have the older legacy technologies seen in the older markets of the world, some of the new technologies are being adopted wrapped as part of greater the policy administration systems. The general difference is that the more mature markets tend to focus or concentrate on component based solutions from the outset rather than the out of the box solution, whereas the fresher, new markets have the luxury of taking more from a single source because of the greenfield nature of their businesses.

Q: Most of the emerging technologies seem to be in the efficiency and expense control quadrant. There are no proven/high priority technologies in the 4th quadarant (U/W). Why? How about business rules, don’t they qualify?

This was asked during the webinar.

A: It’s a concern for the insurer to work towards efficiency and cost expense control. The insurer is trying to balance revenues that are down with trying to make sure the cost structure allows for strong profits. When it comes to the liability management quadrant, Celent distinguishes liability management from broader efficiencies and cost savings because these technologies are quite specific to managing the risk presented by underwriting business. Technologies that identify and apply claims data to improve actuarial tables and underwriting rules, that identify potential ways to protect an insurer from fraud, or support the identification of high risk groups are often large endeavors with highly unstructured data or highly manual processes. As a result, the data available is difficult to apply to the business processes and for many insurers an area that has been in discussion for a while, but not implemented. Automated underwriting is a prime example.

In the case of the business rules, we have that as a technology in the efficiency and expense control quadrant. For the various geographies, adoption is varied. Insurers are using modern business rules management systems to capture, management, and parameterize business rules. Not many insurers have succeeded in fully externalizing business rules, providing a mechanism for reuse, and managing them separately from core code, but they are trying by implementing BRM tools with their core system upgrades. We feel it is an efficiency and expense control technology because it allows for the effiency of reuse of process rules across the enterprise.

Q: Are their legal/ regulatory complications of using data from social media for U/W, Claims? How authentic is the data available on social media platform and what are the privacy issues when Insurers are trying to access personal data of insured.

This was asked during the webinar.

In Europe, we are not aware of any restrictions on using data people have offered voluntarily on social media sites, forums, or blogs, etc. We think it might be a concern for the future, but currently it means that anyone can access to the data and can use it the way they want, people are adults and responsible for their own actions. They do it under their own choice; whether it affects their relationship with companies or insurance companies is a another question.

For the authenticity of the data on the social media platform, this is very important. And what are the privacy issues related to insurers trying to access the data. We see more and more insurance companies trying to lauch specific innovative products like AXA in Europe that launched a reputation protection products in France. The idea is that if there information about a person on a social media platform that is wrong, then AXA will try to force the social network or forum owner to erase the data about the client on the platform. If the company refuses, then AXA will flood the internet with only positive information about the insured. It means that it is still in the infancy stage as to whether one can trust the information on the internet; sometimes to rely on only data that we are sure is accurate.

Q: What level of savings can a Tier 2 insurer expect from upgrading to a modern PAS?

A: First of all let us clarify what Celent defines a Tier 2 insurer using our five Tier definition:

Tier 5: Insurers under US$100 million in premium

Tier 4: Insurers with US$100 million to US$499 million in premium

Tier 3: Insurers with US$500 million to US$999 million in premium

Tier 2: Insurers with US$1 billion to US$4.9 billion in premium

Tier 1: Insurers US$5 billion in premium and more

In general – at least in Europe – a majority of Tier 2 life insurers are companies having a presence in different countries. Therefore they have had to adapt to market changes when expanding cross-border either via acquisitions or organically. This has led them to run complex IT infrastructure and application landscape. While some of them are trying to find some ways towards simplification of their IT infrastructure, it remains difficult to:

– Quantify the intangible benefits of a modern PAS especially around speed-to-market and automation,

– Determine what part of the savings is derived from which budget position as in general life insurers lack of advanced management accounting capabilities.

In other words, while insurers understand that investment in modern core systems such as PAS including state-of-the-art product configuration tools will allow them to improve many aspects of their business, they often face issues to apply hard dollar benefits to them. On the other hand, if the replacement of a PAS legacy also implies a transformation of the infrastructure they are generally able to quantify the indirect saving linked to the overall information system changes. In conclusion, the level of savings a Tier 2 insurer can expect from upgrading to a modern PAS depends on the existing information system, the objective it tries to achieve with the new PAS (serve a single line of business or various ones, replace multiple systems and share specific components across geographies, etc.) and the type of transformation project accompanying the PAS implementation.

For more on the subject, Celent has published two research reports that indirectly try to answer part of the question:

Capturing the Strategic Value of IT: A Review of IT Investment Evaluation Methods

The Business Case for Modern Policy Administration Systems

Q: COTS product adoption vs. customized solution – what is the latest trend? any specific business process to highlight ? e.g. Policy Admin may have matured more over a period of time and we can see more Insurance carriers to adopt more COTS products in PAS

A: Celent has published a report reviewing the main trends in terms of the build vs. buy approach in the P/C sector last year (The Build Vs. Buy Debate: An Update from the Insurance System Landscape) and we think the trend in the life insurance space has followed the same path. However it is important to mention that there are differences across geographies. Indeed, while North America and UK based life insurers tend to prioritize COTS, continental European insurers still think that bespoke systems (internal development or development with an external partner) remain the best approach although the preferences are slowly changing toward a best-of-breed approach (assembling different components purchased from IT vendors on the market).

Q: What are the emerging technology solutions to enable insurers to provide unique customer experience for improved retention & up-sell / cross-sell.

A: These can be found in the Growth & Retention quadrant. Increasingly, we are having conversations with insurers about how to improve the customer experience. Although adoption of these technologies is not high currently, ‘next best action’ for improving product take-up and ‘top-ups’, and sentiment analysis for better understanding the likelihood of surrender are two of the technologies being considered seriously by some insurers. However, classic issues in our industry such as the current capacity to execute, legacy landscapes and intermediation creating a communication barrier between the insurer and consumer are impacting the pace of their adoption.

Q: Would you say the agent mobile support is based on market problems versus what the carriers are able to offer? If an agent could use a mobile device for more would they or do they just want it for marketing support?

A: As stated above, insurers are offering producers a mix of marketing support and transactional capabilities in their mobile applications today. Celent hears from insurers regularly that producers are asking for expanded mobile capabilities because of market dynamics. The iPad is increasingly being looked at as a ‘must have’ item in the sales process. Even older traditional insurers who have agents who do not use laptops are hearing that their agents want to do more and more on a tablet. It might start out with marketing or training materials, but the requests extend to CRM, illustrations, needs analyses, and access to policy holder data. The access to more transactional capabilities is occuring most often through the browser so that the application is platform agnostic. For many insurers, however, their back office technology is the larger challenge than getting a producer to use the technology if offered. For example, a desktop illustration system cannot be used on a mobile device. If the insurer does not find an answer to that problem soon, the market will quickly move past that insurer and it will lose sales to the insurer who can offer mobile illustration capabilities.

We hope we captured all of the questions. Thank you and we look forward to your being on our webinars in the future!

Emerging Technologies in General Insurance

Emerging Technologies in General Insurance

The Celent webinar yesterday, Emerging Technologies in General Insurance, was very well attended and there were more questions than time allowed. Thank you to everyone who was able to attend and who contributed. If you didn’t get a chance to join us, the recording is posted at http://www.celent.com/node/29767

Below are the answers to the questions that were still outstanding at the end of the session:

Q: Is there such a thing as an Insurance Carrier Fraud Maturity Model?

· No, but great idea and don’t be surprised if you see one in the upcoming Celent report on fighting insurance fraud!

Q: For consuming telematics data, is this something that a carrier should do standalone or are there industry schemas such as IBM’s IIW that add value in this regard?

· We have observed a difference of approach between US carriers and insurers in the UK. Typically in the US larger carriers are building out the infrastructure and model themselves to capture, analyse, keep and use customer telematics data. In the UK the preference is to use partners or the vendors of the devices to gather the data and do the analysis on their behalf – sharing the results of the analysis for use by the insurer. It’s worth noting there are already efforts underway in the UK and German associations of insurers to discuss a common format for this data to allow the information to be shared between vendors at time of renewal, although I don’t believe they’re reviewing industry warehouse models such as IIW. There is no one size fits all approach and insurers using various approaches are meeting with success although Celent expects some common standards to emerge for sharing this data between insurers, agents, brokers and even customers should they request it.

Q: What carriers are best-in-class when it comes to Big Data? What technologies do they use?

· Big Data is still more of a buzz word for carriers than reality today. The larger insurers have Big Data programs/pilots underway due to the amount of data that they have. Smaller carriers are considering Cloud options and mid-size carriers for the most part are watching the results of the other two.

Q: Isn’t expense control closely associated with underwriting efficiency? What do you see adoption of emerging technologies wrt to underwriting?

· Expense control covers all insurance functions and processes, as well as the technologies that support/automate these solutions. Analytics have been used by a lot of carriers to create more effective and efficient UW decisions. We expect the use of social data to play a great role over the next 1-3 years with respect to UW, as well as the continued use and maturity of analytics in the UW process and decisioning.

Q: Why hasn’t the notion of insurance focused open source taken off?

· Open source has taken off in many carriers and is in use in varying degrees and levels (operating systems, libraries, ESBs, portals; and to a lesser extent applications). Analysts do not typically include open source solutions in their reports (as separate from other non-open source vendor solutions) for several reasons. First, the analyst process of evaluating solutions starts with a vendor, their profile, their implementations, customer references, etc. Second, vendors often use open source as a component or even a core of their applications that are included in most vendor reports.

· Many carriers prefer working with a vendor rather than developing solutions internally and thus select a vendor solution over open source.

Q: Many of the new data sources create privacy “surprises” when consumers intuit that a commercial organization knows what it knows and puts it to use, even if it benefits the consumer. Policy is of course lagging technologies but it will evolve unpredictably. California has limits on telematics data use, for example. How the insurance industry implements emerging technologies has a public relations component and potential for igniting a very fragmented state-by-state way that data can be used. What does Celent see as far as some uses being especially dangerous from a brand perspective and liable to be shut down by regulation?

· Pricing and eligibility decision rules must be filed with the states. Whether file-and-use or preapproval jurisdictions, all regulators expect that insurers declare these parameters with their organizations. Using any non-approved data source to price or determine eligibility should be strictly off limits.

Technology, innovation and insight in insurance

Technology, innovation and insight in insurance
Last week we held the innovation and insight event in Boston where we discussed creative disruption and emerging technologies and their effects on the insurance industry. Since coming back to the UK a few press releases and blog posts have caught my eye that feed well into this discussion. The first is from Robert Scoble, among other things a technology commentator and blogger. His post, 2012 brings a pause in the disruption sounds contradictory to our view but a quick read of his post provides a great view of the level of change we’ve seen in the last 8 years. Think back 8 years, to the phone you had, the way you interacted with the Internet – with the TV even. In the last 8 short years we’ve seen the birth of the social web, the rise of the smart phone, of apps (and their stores and markets), of gesture based interactions (the Wii and then Kinect were launched in this timescale) and now the IPO of facebook which launched in 2004. The pause in disruption points to a lack of jaw-dropping disruptive technology at the start of 2012 and a consolidation in the industry, a refining of these hugely disruptive themes into concrete business models and a maturing therein. I have to agree. CES 2012 saw bigger TV’s, TV’s with gesture control and further merging of mobile, tablet and laptop devices. Even Apple, the great innovator, presented the iPhone 4S as something they could ship in huge numbers rather than go for massive change. One technology I would watch is 3D printers, which are still gaining ground slowly but mostly in geek and maker communities – given another decade and cheaper prices I think this will seriously disrupt insurance and retail models. For now, we may be waving phones to make payments and having screens we can bend and see through – but consumer electronic developments in the last 12 months lack the technological disruption of past years. This pause is good news for the insurance industry in that makes this the perfect time to step back, take a look at the opportunities and possibilities these great waves of change have on our business models, our products and the way we interact with customers. Insurers across the globe have already made great strides in interacting with customers through social networks and understanding how to leverage them. Insurers are also experimenting with apps, mobile and connected devices. Telematics looks set to enter the mainstream in many markets, where the question is less how should we do it but now which method. It was interesting also to see these articles regarding AXA, repositioning it’s brand as innovative within the UK, making use of social technology and games to educate businesses on the value of insurance. Perhaps not the first insurer, but the articles are indicative of recent and continued investment in this theme from the insurance industry. The recent past – whether you call that 8 years, a decade, two decades – this short time has been an incredible period of change, insurers are already disrupting their industry and Celent contends there is no better time to review how the industry can leverage adoption of emerging technologies to creatively disrupt not only their internal perceptions and process, but the entire market.