It’s not hard to see how drivers with histories of driving violations pose a higher risk to insurers. However, there may be another side to the story that isn’t immediately captured: A considerable portion of major driving offenses are dismissed or downgraded in the U.S. court system. Today, 80% of drivers have access to programs that dismiss or downgrade their violations, which can obscure their driving history and mask dangerous behaviors. This means it’s important for insurers to stay abreast of new ways to help mitigate this risk and ensure they are providing customers with accurate quotes that capture the full risk profile. Downgraded or dismissed? What does it mean? Downgrades and dismissals can happen when courts make certain programs available. These programs are intended to ease the burden of costly tickets and ultimately help drivers stay licensed, insured and on the road. They can also take pressure off courtrooms and judges that are often backed up with cases. Unfortunately, as a result, people’s real driving violation histories may be disguised. In fact, according to TransUnion’s DriverRisk analysis, 57% of original major offenses, such as DUIs, are actually unobservable by insurers due to dismissals or downgrades. In the states evaluated, 27% of traffic tickets are outright dismissed. See also: Smart Home = Smart Insurer!  For example, in New Jersey, drivers can pay $250 to $350 to downgrade certain types of moving violations. A few states have programs for drivers facing a first-time DUI charge to have their case dismissed. For the cases not dismissed, these programs may add delays to the charge appearing on a state-issued driving record. Additionally, there are driving school programs available to drivers to dismiss or downgrade traffic tickets, or to remove points. There are also deferral or probation programs that can eliminate a violation from the state driving record. So, while drivers benefit from fewer points on their license, insurers are potentially mispricing the policies for drivers whose original violations may have been obscured. When insurers aren’t presented with the full picture, this can compromise how well premiums align with actual risks. To make things even worse, the DriverRisk study found that the more serious the violation is, the more likely it is to be dismissed or downgraded. The findings show that 41% of DUIs are likely to be dismissed, and distracted driving violations are dismissed 10% of the time. Without visibility into each driver’s actual behavior, insurers tend to spread the premium needed to pay losses associated with these risks across all policies. This means the base rate for the average driver typically ends up being higher, effectively subsidizing the premium for the drivers with downgraded and dismissed violations. Drivers with dismissed or downgraded violations are more likely to have a loss and a higher loss cost than drivers found guilty of the violation they were ticketed for. Details of Driving Violations It is possible and very important for insurers to gain deeper insight into original violation information for prospective and current customers, in addition to the final disposition decisions. Insurers should seek information that includes court record data so they can provide more accurate quotes and improve adhering to their underwriting guidelines. Implementing court record violation data solutions can enable insurers to capture valuable insight into: convictions from a prior state (which may be associated with a previous driver’s license number), regardless of a change in name or address; convictions while driving outside of the resident state; tickets with dispositions other than guilty; and tickets and violations that are still active (not yet adjudicated). See also: 5 Steps to Understand Distracted Driving   Court record violation data is an essential tool for insurers to develop accurate pricing and underwriting strategies. By understanding a fuller picture of violation history, insurers will be able to more effectively assess the risk of each driver and implement programs to capture the appropriate amount of premium dollars for riskier drivers while providing more affordable premiums to cleaner drivers. For additional information about TransUnion’s study findings and DriverRisk, please click here.

The personal lines segment of the insurance industry is quite active today, with many initiatives and projects underway across the value chain. For many, the objective goes beyond incremental improvements to positioning the company for fundamental transformation. The many projects planned or in progress fall into three categories: Digital Enablement, Core Transformation and Data/Analytics. A newly published SMA research report, Foundational Technologies in Personal Lines Insurance, details the projects and initiatives underway in 2019 and beyond. One of the major challenges we observe in personal lines is the struggle to balance the need to establish a modern, competitive foundation with incorporating new technologies to position for the future. Most insurers have very long lists of projects for things like enhancing portals; replacing or upgrading policy, billing or claim systems; and modernizing business intelligence solutions. These are the types of projects that SMA terms “foundational,” precisely because modern solutions in these areas are table stakes for success today. Incorporating innovative solutions from insurtechs and incumbent tech providers that leverage machine learning, the IoT, wearables, virtual payment technologies and more are highly desirable but difficult to build into operational plans. These advanced types of solutions are what SMA calls “transformational technologies” and will be the subject of a SMA research study and report. See also: Emerging Technology in Personal Lines   All the excitement and visibility tend to center on the transformational technologies, and there’s no question that there is tremendous potential for innovation that can create competitive advantage. Yet the No. 1 task for insurers today regarding technology is to ensure that the foundational technologies are in place to provide the levels of efficiency and effectiveness needed to compete while establishing a flexible base to build on. This is not to imply that insurers should wait to engage in any activity related to transformational technologies. On the contrary, it is imperative that insurers monitor, learn and experiment with new technologies that are most relevant for their business. Thus, the challenges of finding the right balance! One other aspect of technology strategy and plans should be explored: the need to implement foundational technology solutions that already have some embedded transformational tech. Policy systems can leverage chatbots and AI. Billing solutions can begin to accommodate more advanced payment methods. Claim systems should already be leveraging solutions that use machine learning for fraud. Many other examples could be cited, as well. Over time, the various transformational technologies will become foundational as many in the industry begin to incorporate them into their organizations. One by one, the advanced technologies will become table stakes, only to be replaced by a new set of transformational technologies, or at least by new, more sophisticated levels of the existing technologies. See also: Insurtech and Personal Lines   There are a wide variety of strategic choices that senior leadership teams must make today. Allocating scarce resources and budget dollars is as difficult as it ever has been, if not more so. However, the successful personal lines insurers in the digital age will be those that find the right blend of technologies of all manner to create flexible, responsive organizations. For more information, see the SMA research report, Foundational Technologies in Personal Lines: Investment, Adoption, and Business Areas.

With August approaching, football training camps (American football) are opening, and I can't wait. I am reminded of a conversation I recently had with a sports agent about what makes some coaches consistently successful. 

My conversation with Bruce Tollner, a founder of Rep 1 Sports who works with college and professional coaches, focused on the fact that most teams rise and fall on the strength of their leadership, and that's just as true of companies in the insurance industry. It's especially true when it comes to innovation. A.M. Best has made leadership a key component of its proposed innovation assessment process for insurers.

Many coaches will tell you that better players make them better coaches, and talent is certainly a huge part of any organization's success. Acquiring and maintaining talent is a challenge for leaders, and it's important on and off the field to have the right people in the right roles.

But, just as a winning basketball coach might not also be a strong football coach, not just anyone can effectively lead insurance innovation efforts. Subject matter expertise is crucial, not only to understand the game but also to apply perspective. A problem we observe is that sometimes the entrepreneurs, VCs and people whom incumbents hire for their innovation efforts have little to no insurance industry knowledge. The lack of experience and insight to assess technologies and generally connect the dots can limit results.

There is a big difference between people who hold leadership positions and those who are leaders. Leadership flows from the impact that leaders have on the organization, from their passion and how they inspire their teams.

What else makes a good leader?

A mantra of mine is that respect must run downhill before trust will run uphill. The point is that leaders who care about and value input from their teams will engender trust, resulting in a better-run, more-successful organization. Most great leaders listen and develop strategy based on a variety of inputs.

Great leaders then communicate strategy effectively, provide the resources to get the job done and grant authority to individuals to do the job. That last part is important, because assistant coaches and innovation leader can't constantly be glancing over their shoulders to see if the head coach or CEO is going to second guess them, override their decision or fire them.

Another leadership quality is resiliency. Bruce said coaches rarely find themselves in optimal conditions. Elements are always lacking or could be better. The best coaches still find ways to position themselves to succeed, through a consistent and continual process.

My wife is a coach at the college athletics level, and she says that passion for the job, a sense of service to others, commitment to the team and support from the organization are all critical.

When people in positions of leadership don't demonstrate a commitment to innovation, when they simply do innovation to check a box or delegate it to someone else and aren't personally invested, the results are usually disappointing.

In its draft innovation assessment process, A.M. Best emphasized how important leadership is to success. The score for a company depends on setting and communicating strategy, supporting the troops, providing resources and creating a structure and process for success. Best stated that "an enterprise is unlikely to have a high culture assessment if it does not have strong leadership."

I love sports. I love the competition. I love that there's always another game or another season, another opportunity to prove yourself. I like the sports analogy between winning coaches and successful insurance leadership because innovation is a never-ending game. Companies need to position the right talent, have an effective process and show commitment by senior leaders to succeed over the long term, not just in a single instance. Success must be nurtured and maintained; there's no quitting after one unsuccessful play, game or season.

Here's to football season, and here's to the insurance industry's innovation efforts. Wishing your team all the success they earn.

Cheers,

Wayne Allen
CEO

The opioid epidemic is a moral hazard of existential proportions. A test of the moral health of the insurance industry in which the question is, Will insurers acknowledge the severity of this threat by subsidizing better ways to treat this threat? Will insurers accept what patients concede and even cynics confess, that specific treatments for opioid addiction outside the U.S. are more effective than the many but mostly unsuccessful treatment options in the U.S.? Will insurers admit that it is more expensive to cover what does not work than it is to underwrite what returns people—healthy and strong—to the workforce? To ask these questions is to know that it is smarter to insure domestic tranquility by experiencing it abroad, that it is easier to promote the general welfare by supporting programs that lessen dependency on welfare, not because these programs are wrong, but because it is wrong to abandon tens of millions of people—including mothers and military veterans—to short, nasty and brutish lives of addiction. The answers to these questions are available to all. See also: Alternatives to Opioids for Pain Management   The answers, thanks to my correspondence with staffers at Clear Sky Recovery, raise the ultimate question of whether we will exist half-slave or half-free, whether we will succumb to the ravages of opioid addiction or avoid this descent altogether, whether we will cause our health to worsen or rally to the cause of health and wellness. What I ask of insurers is no different than what insurers should ask of themselves: help. Let us be unafraid to seek help. Let us also be aware that help is achievable, that help is available, that help is accessible. Let us free ourselves from the false promises of what is a racket rather than a legitimate means of rehabilitation, what with the bombardment of ads and commercials, what with the inundation of junk mail and junk science—an audiovisual overdose of empty words and meaningless slogans. Let us wake up to the reality of this situation, that we face a do-or-die decision; a dire choice, indeed. Either we do what is necessary, either we do what is right, or we plead guilty to the fast death of minds and the slow loss of bodies: a sight too painful to witness but too profound to ignore, a sight too traumatic to forget but sometimes too awful to recall. Either we unite against opioid addiction, or we allow our divisions to destroy us. Either we encourage patients to get treatment abroad, or we stop demanding that insurers pay for treatment whose efficacy is questionable and whose rate of failure is so high as to be unquestionable. We must choose what is just, in lieu of what is popular or convenient. See also: Is There an Answer to Opioid Crisis?   That standard should determine not only treatment for opioid addiction but how insurers treat all matters of health and wellness. With truth as our guide, we can stop the advance of opioid addiction. With insurers on our side, we can win this war.

In today’s insurance marketplace, the benefits of technology cannot be overstated; however, the dark side of technology—namely ransomware attacks—is now infiltrating self-insured municipalities. Ransomware attacks occur when criminals find a way into the organization, encrypt as much data as possible and then extort money from you to get your own data back. If the ransom is not paid, the criminals may delete your data altogether. There have been more than 170 ransomware attacks on U.S. state and local governments since November 2013, notes the technology security company Recorded Future. The costs to remedy these attacks are growing, and the belief that “it won’t happen to us” needs to be discarded. In March 2018, the city of Atlanta had more than a third of its systems paralyzed by a ransomware attack. Recovery took more than a year, with costs estimated at $17 million. Baltimore, after refusing to pay an $80,000 ransom at the advice of law enforcement, recently approved $10 million in emergency funding to recover from a similar attack that immobilized some of the city’s systems, and services such as water billing are still offline, according to reports. Smaller cities, such as Lake City, FL, are also not immune: Recently, city administrators paid hackers a ransom of 42 bitcoins, or roughly $426,000. See also: The Growing Problem of Ransomware   Self-insured groups and public entities such as municipalities are among groups that particularly vulnerable, because they:

• Operate within a significant regulatory environment;
• Have data that others could steal and monetize (personally identifiable information such as Social Security numbers, HIPAA-related information and credit card numbers;
• Have data that is critical and necessary to conduct business.

For captive insurers, property and casualty and workers’ comp carriers, lapses in cybersecurity can even affect mergers and acquisitions. According to security firm Forescout Technologies Inc., 53% of more than 2,700 global businesses surveyed report a critical cybersecurity issue putting an M&A deal in jeopardy. “Unfortunately, it happens again and again to municipal systems that don’t have all the latest software, the latest protections or the highest-paid IT staffs,” Lee McKnight, an associate professor at Syracuse University’s School of Information Studies and an expert on cybersecurity, told USA Today. I believe McKnight’s comment minimizes the essence of how self-insured groups and public entities such as municipalities actually work, because it’s not all about the latest software or highest-paid IT staffers. And protecting your organization from a ransomware attack does not necessarily require expensive next-generation firewalls, intrusion prevention systems or “security as a service” systems. What it does require is common-sense due diligence, a clear line of responsibility for technology systems, a plan that holds all partners and vendors to the same security requirements, a secure cloud platform and, should the worst possible case occur, an incident response system. Even with those elements in place, it’s still important to assess your actual risk against a ransomware attack. Actual risk includes more than just data housed on a server; it includes reputational/brand risk and the impact of losing trust from partners/vendors and members/customers as a result of an attack. To assess your relative risk to a ransomware attack, consider your organization’s size, the number of cities and counties with which you do business and the cybersecurity measures your currently employ. Assess your own risk tolerance—the potential damage to your organization that hackers could inflict… and assess the cybersecurity countermeasures you currently have in place. When viewing your organization’s vulnerabilities in this way, it becomes clear that inaction is no longer an adequate response. See also: Ransomware Threat Growing for Phones   By creating a culture of alert self-monitoring, a plan that makes employee safety training and security safeguards a priority and a strategy that involves all stakeholders, including technology solution providers, you diminish your chances of being vulnerable to a ransomware attack.

We are all aware of numerous, infamous attempts to defraud galleries with forged paintings. We attend conferences and pay attention to this sort of a story because it is remarkable to think that anyone could trust, and breach trust, to that magnitude. Sadly, it happens every day. Every day, there is a crate of an artwork that is sold and not reviewed for condition first. Every day, there is reliance on condition of an artwork by review of the crate alone. Every day, there is a consignment that takes place without written confirmation and transparency. This is the nature of the beast. See also: The Globalization of Risk Management   If you have provided insurance services to the art community for a long enough time, you will receive what is loosely referred to as a “Friday phone call.” These are the time-pressured, high-valued, too-good-to-be-true risks that absolutely, positively have to be placed by the end of the week. This is a more practical example of something that an insurance broker should be aware of as something that can affect their day-to-day life. For example, who could forget the Caravaggio in the crate that could not move until it was insured? Or the ever popular Michelangelo that came with tons of gold star stickers on the non-USPAP-compliant appraisal. With every incoming risk, regardless of demanding time constraints, there is the need to review provided information and follow a process. It is important for brokers to take their time to examine the integrity of the information to uncover anything suspect in the submission. Some guidelines to consider when it comes to risk and art fraud related to fine art insurance submissions, include:

• Respond logically and practically in an unemotional manner to “pressure placements”
• Require proof that the artwork exists
• Require proof that the artwork is authentic
• Require proof of the value of the artwork from a credible source
• Follow required compliance rules related to disclosure of the named insured
• Review the credentials of the experts involved in the process as well as the credibility of the parties insured

See also: Natural Disasters and Risk Management   Do not be dazzled or blinded by the majesty of the incoming opportunity. Our role as professionals is to pre-qualify risks for the underwriting insurance company partners with which we work. Our role as brokers is to represent the interests of an insured, and the careful selection of those parties is integral to the success of your firm. This article is provided for general informational purposes only and is not intended to provide individualized business, risk management or legal advice

In January 1993, I began preaching the Gospel of Change – its management and architecture. One of my first presentations was to a very successful community bank’s senior management team. I said, “Today, General Motors, Sears and IBM are kings of their respective jungles. I believe in my lifetime (I was 46 at the time) one of these companies will go bankrupt!” The audience rolled their collective eyes! In 16 years, I was vindicated. GM filed for Chapter 11 reorganization in the Manhattan New York federal bankruptcy court on June 1, 2009. The filing reported $82.29 billion in assets and $172.81 billion in debt. Then, Sears filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Oct. 15, 2018, with $6.9 billion of assets and $11.3 billion of debts, after a decade-plus as a train wreck in slow motion. See also: How to Earn Consumers’ Trust   Today, I’m not going to scare you into change – I’ll merely shine a spot light on the changes that are already occurring in the world and you decide if these innovations are friends or foes. Don’t ask what threats these changes mean for you. Ask instead what these changes mean to the marketplace – to each of us as consumers. The consumer is king, and now consumers shop in a global marketplace – when, where and how they want. Below are five transformational changes that are affecting the world for your clients and you--and a word of hope. Generational Change: Many of us grew up in a "Father Knows Best" world. Today, the universe is more similar to a “Modern Family.” Look at the demographics. The youngest members of the Greatest or Silent generation are nearing 75. The youngest members of the Baby Boomers are in their mid-50s. The youngest Gen Xers are in their mid-30s. And the youngest millennials are already 15. As Paul Harvey said often, “We’re not one world.” He was so right. In terms of marketing reality – One size does not fit all. Big Data and Artificial Intelligence: Yesterday, I opened an e-mail offering me a “deal” on a new Toyota. Within an hour, I had received similar e-mails from most other brands that I might be interested in. Big Brother (or Big Sister) is watching everything we do. Now, sophisticated sellers can anticipate your needs and be first to market with a solution for each need. Can you do this? Global Marketplace/Virtual Marketplace: As a consumer, you can buy anything you want, wherever you want. As a seller, your competitors are not down the street – they are everywhere. Language/Diversity: Robert Young as Jim Anderson in "Father Knows Best" was an insurance agent and also an OWGIC (Old White Guy in Charge). Today, ours is a much more diverse and multilingual world. Everyone can be in charge of their own world. Do you speak enough languages to serve this marketplace? Who is/will be your marketplace (Hispanic, Laotian, Muslim, etc.)? Remember that many "youn-'uns" communicate very differently. If you don’t believe me, call a teen and see she answers. Text, and she will. Innovation of Products/Services/Competitors: What, where and how you sell has no meaning. What, where and how people buy is all that matters. Remember social media, robotic surgery, driverless cars, Amazon, Expedia, Uber, Google, AirBnB: Innovations change options and in some cases bankrupt organizations and industries that are fat, dumb and happy. See also: Why More Don’t Go Direct-to-Consumer   Your Hope/Opportunity: John Naisbitt developed the concept of high tech, high touch in his 1982 bestseller "Megatrends." He theorized that, in a world of technology, people long for personal, human contact. He was so right. Become client-defined and client-driven. Develop client intimacy. Be engaged with the people and markets you serve. Don’t sell them; facilitate their buying. Be a concierge, a friend, a shoulder to cry on and voice of encouragement. Build intimacy - be a professional, expert, trusted resource.

This is the fourth article in a four-part series. You can find the first part of this series here, the second here and the third here.  I've worked in the insurance industry for more than 35 years, and I’ve never been more energized about the possibilities before us than right now. Working in both personal and commercial lines, including excess property, I’ve seen how technology has enabled the practices of exposure management, underwriting and claims to evolve from manual processes and “pins on a map” to complex, computer-driven workflows that enhance an insurer’s ability to provide superior products and services to their customers. At SpatialKey, we’ve been working diligently with several of our insurance clients to develop an automated event response solution that addresses key challenges:

1. Meeting growing customer demands in a highly competitive insurance landscape.
2. Driving cost-savings and increased profitability through more efficient event response and claims processes.
3. Anticipating and preparing for more frequent and extreme peril events, particularly in parts of the U.S. that are more susceptible to climate change.

Some of the event response challenges I’ve heard directly from insurers, brokers and MGAs include:

• “I need to know what happened when I was sleeping, traveling or working on something else—without having to jump through hoops to find out.”
• “We’re dealing with time-sensitive situations, but the manual nature of exposure data collection, event monitoring, as well as data research and procurement, delays our ability to respond to events expeditiously.”
• “I need a solution that not only focuses on events that I need to be concerned about but also allows me to filter out the noise from events that I don’t care about.”

These comments point to the pressing challenges insurers face during catastrophes—specifically around speed, efficiency, accuracy and how an automated solution can help to solve them. See also: Moving Toward Prevention, With IoT   Insurers are in a squeeze play to find places where they can drive operational efficiency and reduce expenses. Event response and claims automation is a great place to start. It doesn’t require large financial commitments or heavy investments in time and IT resources, and, better yet, the impact is immediate. I know first-hand that event response automation is on the “transformation radar” for many of the organizations I work with. They simply have to make it a priority to automate pieces of the event response process to meet growing business and customer demands. So, the question isn’t whether you should automate your event response operations. But rather...What are the key requirements of an automated solution? And, can a solution meet my specific business needs by delivering on criteria that will set my team up for success? 7 key questions an automated event response solution should answer for you, include:

1. What are my current exposures? You can’t have an accurate understanding of an event’s impact without the most recent exposure data. A data import API ensures your data is updated regularly, and that you’ll always have a current snapshot of exposures to work from.
2. What expert data is available? Streamlined and centralized access to trusted third-party hazard data as it becomes available is imperative. You shouldn’t have to procure and process expert data yourself. Likewise, you should be readily informed of new data sources as they become available.
3. What happened? You should be the first-to-know about an event and its impact to your portfolio—so, when management looks to you for answers, you can be confident in your preliminary assessment. To achieve this, you need an automated system pushing you results so you don’t have to pull reports and analytics yourself. By clicking a single link in an email, you should be informed of the geography and severity of an event. This means analyses are executed automatically based on your latest exposure, as well as your predetermined financial and peril-specific thresholds.
4. Do I need to care? Relevance is a critical asset because it prevents information overload during a time-sensitive process like event response. A custom approach to event notifications enables you to operationalize peril and exposure specific thresholds based on your company’s exposure knowledge and claims experience (e.g. $10 million in limit affected by hail that is two inches or greater). This filters out the noise by enabling you to define what’s important and then act expediently.
5. What’s my financial impact? Instead of scrambling to manually pull information together for stakeholders, a pre-packaged report should be automatically generated for you. The ability to quickly assess financial impact, provide input on capital expectations and manage stakeholder expectations are all critical to your company’s preparedness and requires a financial modeling engine that delivers results that matter most.
6. Where do I need to focus my outreach and service to affected insureds? To differentiate your business, customer outreach is imperative. By quickly pinpointing exact locations and accounts affected, you can serve your insureds—whether that means picking up the phone or putting boots on the ground. An event response solution should provide you with actionable information along with advanced analytics that enable you to further plan and communicate your strategic claims response.
7. How can I dive deeper into the event? Because automation has saved you so much time answering the last six questions, now you can dig even deeper into the event. This requires an advanced analytics solution like SpatialKey that enables you to ask more questions of your data, analyze the event progression, pull in claims history and rate/premium information and average annual losses, etc.

You can think of the seven questions I’ve answered here as requirements for success in the new competitive landscape of P&C. Insurance organizations are facing greater scrutiny as catastrophic events become increasingly volatile. As such, how effectively you prepare for and respond to these events can either be an asset to your business or a detriment. It’s time to move from “react and respond” to “prepare and serve” A company’s ability to follow through on its commitments and service is a competitive differentiator. If your event response processes run more smoothly—if they're built for performance—this translates to a more satisfactory customer experience. As one of my clients recently noted, “We’re not the cheapest coverage out there. So when it comes to shopping for insurance at renewal time, our service is what makes the decision to renew a no-brainer.” See also: Natural Disasters and Risk Management A solution like SpatialKey can modernize your event response operations without disruption or heavy investment, creating both operational efficiency and customer satisfaction. By moving from "react and respond" to "prepare and serve," you are modernizing your processes to meet the growing demands and expectations of your customers and shareholders. Technology will always be a moving target, and you may feel like you’ll never get ahead of the curve. But when you're pursuing transformation initiatives, it's important to consider your total investment. Automating your data and analytic operations shouldn't require major service disruptions or heavy hardware spending.

“The workplace is the last crucible of sustained human contact for many of the 30,000 people who kill themselves each year in the United States. A co-worker’s suicide has a deep, disturbing impact on work mates. For managers, such tragedies pose challenges no one covered in management school.”  ~Sue Shellenbarger (2001), Impact of Colleague’s Suicide Is Strongly Felt in Workplace, Wall Street Journal Overview The majority of people who die by suicide are of working age, and almost all of them are employed, previously employed or a family member of someone employed at the time of death; however, workplaces are often ill-equipped to provide grief and trauma support after such a tragedy. Many workplaces, if they provide grief support at all, do not usually take into account the complexities or duration often needed to cope in the aftermath of suicide. “Postvention” is psychological first aid after a suicide crisis. In the workplace, like many other systems in communities, this response is about both providing hope and community and mitigating the impact of suicide grief and trauma. For this article, 13 people were interviewed about how their employers handled their suicide loss experiences. Here is a case study to demonstrate what happens when postvention is inadequate. Case Study Going through the motions - when suicide postvention is superficial   A federal agency of almost 1,000 people experienced a suicide of a high-level, well-liked, well-known and visible leader. Close to the time of his death, he was seen escorted out of the building among gossip of scandal and failed management. In the absence of information from the executive staff, speculation about contributing factors ensued, and rumors ran rampant. Employees looked to senior management to provide direction during the crisis; the leaders appeared guarded and unwilling to talk about the fact that it was a suicide. In the days that followed, the response seemed like “giving lip service” to the confused and grieving employees. As one said, “We went through the motions but didn’t do the work. People didn’t want to face the fact that a suicide could happen. Shame prevented us from talking about it at all.” The organization attempted to move back to business-as-usual quickly. No plan was created on how to manage roles the deceased person played; the vacuum created led to more speculation, distrust, anger and a lack of closure.  Trauma and Grief after Suicide at Work Given that the majority of people who die by suicide are working-age adults, most of whom are employed, hundreds of thousands of workplaces around the globe are affected by the suicide death of an employee each year (World Health Organization, 2014; Lytle, 2015; Milner et al, 2014; Paul & Spencer-Thomas, 2012; Spencer-Thomas, 2012). Furthermore, knowing that job loss can be a contributing factor, suicide deaths of recently terminated employees can still have a profound effect on their previous places of employment (Milner et al, 2014; Spencer-Thomas, 2014). When leaders within an organization take their lives, the chaos and trauma resulting from this loss can be immense (Spencer-Thomas, 2011). In addition, suicide deaths of family members of employees, vendors, clients and associates all can take a toll on employees; the number of workplaces affected is very high. Suicide grief support in the workplace often involves two scenarios: suicide of a work colleague or a suicide death outside the work environment.   Unfortunately, most workplaces do not anticipate needing to respond to suicide. Many find themselves reacting in crisis mode, often making decisions that do more harm than good. Models and protocols of how to understand grief, trauma and the impact of exposure to suicide are integral to understanding the way workplaces respond to suicide death. This article creates a framework for understanding and providing effective suicide postvention, provides insight into the way that grief and loss affect workplaces and offers concrete strategies for an effective postvention response at work. [For a full chapter on this topic, please read Spencer-Thomas, S. & Stohlmann-Rainey, J. (2017). Workplaces and the aftermath of suicide. In Andriessen, K., Krysinska, K. & Grad, O. (Eds). Postvention in Action. Hogrefe: Boston, MA.] See also: 15 Top Apps for Mental Health   Trauma reactions and grief are often at odds with each other. According to the American Psychological Association, “trauma is an emotional response to a terrible event…. Immediately after the event, shock and denial are typical. Longer-term reactions include unpredictable emotions, flashbacks, strained relationships and even physical symptoms like headaches or nausea.” (APA, n.d.). On one hand, the trauma can often result in survivors of loss constantly replaying the events surrounding the suicide in their minds. That is, survivors of suicide loss can’t stop thinking about the death scene (even when they are dreaming), and disturbing images may flash before the mind’s eye when they least expect it. The horror can be overwhelming, and the natural impulse is to stay away from anything that reminds them of the trauma. Sometimes, survivors of suicide loss develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in the aftermath of a violent or unexpected death (Young, et al, 2012).   By contrast, the grief journey for survivors of suicide loss is often a “moving toward” experience. As they come to accept the reality of the loss, the tendency is to move toward things that remind them of the deceased, holding close memories, places and mementos that help preserve and honor the life lived. Thus, for coworkers left behind there is often simultaneously a desire to mourn and openly embrace the memory of the deceased and a desire to suppress the thoughts about the deceased because they are too disturbing, such as the often horrifying notion that someone they cared about died in isolation and despair, often in a violent manner. Organizations are often ill-equipped and ill-informed to handle grieving employees; this is particularly true for the suicide-bereaved, who experience the double silencing of workplaces ill-equipped to cope with grieving employees and stigma related to the type of loss.  One of the people interviewed for this article was a mother whose son died by suicide the day after he was discharged from his military service. She shared, “I had only been at my present position for 90 days, my probation period. I was given some money, they had collected. Other than that, nothing. I was hurting very much. When the holidays came, I put a candy cane and a note asking for prayers in everyone's mailbox. Nothing. No words, no notes, no nothing. One day I was walking down some steps, and I just wanted to let go of the railing [and fall to my death]. I talked to my supervisor and asked if I could just come in a little later on the Saturday mornings. I said I would stay late and be the last one to leave. She said to me, ‘I thought you were already over that.’ I wanted to ask her which one of her three sons she would ‘be over’ in less than two years.” Sometimes, bereaved employees believe they can return to their previous level of functioning at work and do not want to take time off because work provides structure, social support and a sense of purpose. Thoughtful employers help their grieving staff members find creative ways to balance these competing demands. One interviewee who was a teacher at the time of her teenage daughter’s suicide shared, “The principal called me into his office [the day after the suicide]. The two assistant principals glared at me as I walked in. The principal told me that they did not want me to come to school the next day or when school began. I was very insulted. I argued and told them that I had shown up every day, I had done my job and I needed to be in the classroom for the children. They just listened stone-faced. Finally, one of the assistance principals told me that no one could bear to look at me because the pain in my face and eyes was so terrible. That shocked me. I had no idea that my grief showed. (I guess I had not really looked in the mirror). So then I gave in, and I told them I would stay home for one week. They assured me they would get a professional retired teacher for my class and to stay home as long as I needed. I assured them I would be back in one week. I left school then and drove home very upset. After I got home, though, I suddenly felt a great relief, and I ended up staying home for seven weeks. It turned out that they knew best after all. After I returned to work, there were days I could not make it, so I called in sick. They never complained about me staying home too much. There were a few times I'd look at a little girl in class who reminded me of [my daughter], and I'd break down. If I sent word to the office, they immediately sent a substitute teacher down so I could go home.”  Another interviewee shared how his son’s suicide affected his work performance, “I returned to work one week after [my son’s suicide]. I was under the illusion that I could suppress my pain and go on with my life as if nothing happened. The day I was placed on involuntary leave, I was facilitating a class of about 100 people. Someone interrupted me with an off-topic question. Rather than gently deflect and move on, I went into an uncontrollable rage, comparing that person’s inane question to my pain over my son’s suicide. I was replaced in the classroom immediately. When I went to the corporate offices, they acknowledged my loss; however I was told to take a month off and see if I could return to full performance. Oddly, now that I've ‘cleaned up my act,’ there is a bit of empathy from management.” Because grieving will happen in the workplace, it is important that the culture in the workplace is supportive of reintegrating bereaved people with compassion and flexibility. In the case of an employee who is bereaved by suicide, all of the same recommendations apply. One of the major pitfalls in organizations is to treat an employee bereaved by suicide differently from other bereaved employees. For example, when an employee dies from cancer, a workplace’s common practice may be to circulate a sympathy card and attend the memorial service, but, when someone dies by suicide, the grief support is often neglected. Consequently, the person bereaved by suicide who would likely need additional support coping with grief, trauma, guilt and shame that may accompany this taboo form of loss will actually get less support. NAMI New Hampshire (2006), a U.S. leader in suicide postvention indicates that although suicide postvention includes principles of critical incident response and stress debriefing, it has a larger scope with a narrower focus. While critical incident response and critical incident stress debriefing is designed to support workplaces in managing the crisis phase of a workplace incident, suicide postvention is a long-term strategy that addresses the needs of the workplace as a system. Elaine DeMello of NAMI New Hampshire shared (personal communication August 15, 2015) after responding to many workplace postvention cases, “[Because of the intensity, complexity and duration of the grief and trauma reactions] loss survivors are at risk for losing job; what helps is an advocate or conduit who can pave the way for the person to come back to work.” Tensions in Postvention in the Workplace The goals of suicide postvention in the workplace is really not that different than other crisis responses (Carson J Spencer Foundation et al, 2013), i.e., to support people through the trauma and help restore functioning to a disrupted system (Suicide Prevention Resource Center, 2010). The process is about managing the inherent balance of needs and safety components that can sometimes be at odd with one another. On one hand, workplaces acknowledge something really significant happened, while on the other hand leaders are pressured to get back to business as usual. On one hand, grieving employees need to share stories to grieve and honor a life that was lived, while on the other hand workplaces practice safe messaging seek to minimize glorification of the deceased and the divulgence of too many details about the death. On one hand, employees need information that is quick and accurate, while, on the other hand, privacy and investigation concerns can slow the process. A complicating issue for workplace suicide postvention is that getting fired, laid off, humiliated or disciplined at work can be a precipitating event for some suicidal employees. When this occurs, residual bitterness, anger and mistrust for leadership can have a profound effect on the intensity and duration of the employee’s response.  One interviewee shared this story, “My husband, an employee for 18 years, and supervisor for the last 15, was let go from his position the day before he died by suicide. While this was the third suicide with the company, there was no crisis plan in place. Employees were notified when his death was posted on the lunchroom TV. Management chose not to attend the visitations or funeral to ‘keep the peace,’ but quite frankly I would have preferred to see them there. There was a lot of hostility because he was let go from his position as a supervisor, and, when word of his death got out, there was more hostility from the people who worked with him in the plant. Management let the dust settle over time with no comments.” Few workplaces plan for a suicide by having access to a postvention guide like the Manager’s Guide to Suicide Postvention, because too often the daunting nature of suicide throws people into reactive or avoidance mode. As a first step, managers benefit from reflecting on the question, “What do you usually do when there has been a trauma or death in this workplace?” Usually, there are already cultural norms and policies in place to address grief and trauma, and any deviation from this cultural standard is likely to cause confusion and additional hardship. Case Study When an Employee Loses a Family Member to Suicide "I am a pharmacist at a grocery store and had been there eight years when my teenage son died by suicide. I knew all my customers by name, and many of them knew my son. When word reached the store, my store manager called everyone together to break the news. With tears streaming down his face, he explained that my son was dead. Work was suspended, people were allowed to go home or take the time they needed to pull themselves together. For a grocery store, this is huge, as we are all about customer service in a community where the competition is fierce. By the afternoon, I had cards, a gift basket and messages from so many of my workplace family. Many of the staff were able to take the day off to attend my son’s memorial, and the store was generous in their contributions. Since my return to work, I have been given free rein to cry when I need to, hug when I need to and talk with others when I need to. My store management and fellow staff continue to be a source of support and comfort. The Suicide Postvention Process Postvention is psychological first aid, crisis intervention and other support offered after a suicide to affected individuals or the workplace as a whole to alleviate possible negative effects of the event (Smith, Romero, & Cimini, 2010). In the center of the response are often managers who are guiding bereavement support, trauma reactions and a transition back to work. Effective managers in these circumstances communicate empathy and respect and offer permission for people to take care of themselves. They offer a range of support options and know not everyone will need the same types of resources in the same timeframe. Many managers find themselves in the middle of complex and competing factors. Just like other employees, leaders are often affected by the tragic loss and in need of support, but sometimes become targets of anger and blame by other employees. Leaders may feel overwhelmed and immobilized by the shock, and yet they are charged with returning the workplace to health and productivity.  “A Manager’s Guide to Suicide Postvention in the Workplace: 10 Action Steps for Dealing with the Aftermath of Suicide” organizes recommendations to guide employers in the immediate aftermath of a suicide death, in the short-term, and in the long-term, sometimes over months and years. The duration of these recommendations was intentional because, in many workplaces, immediate needs may be considered, but, often within just a couple of weeks, bereavement support drops off. For example, one of the interviewees for this article reported, “… there was no ‘return to work plan’ that I know of…The employee assistance program I found worthless. I contacted them one evening very stressed and received a lukewarm response. There has been no follow-up contact from them at all to see how, or if, I am managing.” Immediate: Acute phase

• Coordinate: Having the right point person coordinating the efforts around suicide postvention. This person should be decisive and compassionate, knowledgeable about crisis response and suicide grief and able to juggle many high-stress demands at once.
• Notify: Communication after a suicide is difficult. On one hand, those left behind have a strong desire for facts, so quick and accurate communication regarding, “here is what we know, here is what we don’t know and here is what is going to happen moving forward,” can do much to quell anxiety and damaging speculation. On the other hand, workplaces must be mindful to protect and respect the privacy rights of the deceased employee and the loved ones during death notification.
• Communicate: As communication regarding the suicide is disseminated, spokespeople should be mindful of the safe and effective messaging guidelines (National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention, n.d.) to reduce the risk that people who are already vulnerable to suicide might become more at risk for suicide contagion.
• Support: In the immediate aftermath, most people do not benefit from counseling in its traditional format. Instead, what is often needed more is practical assistance. Many grieving families can benefit from the practical support of transportation, food and everyday life tasks.

Short-term: Recovery phase

• Link: After the initial intensity of the crisis has passed, a smaller group of affected individuals usually surfaces. Workplace managers need strategies to identify and link these employees to additional support resources and refer those most affected to professional mental health services.
• Comfort: Usually, what most people need during the short-term phase of suicide postvention is support, comfort and an environment that promotes healthy grieving. This can be done within the workplace through professionally facilitated debriefing sessions, or managers can find community resources for employees in the form of suicide grief counselors or suicide loss peer support groups.
• Restore: While providing support, managers also must restore equilibrium and optimal functioning in the workplace. Returning to the familiar schedule can be healing for some, but the timing needs to be sensitive to individuals who may not have the capacity to perform their jobs at the levels they did before the tragedy.
• Lead: Leadership messaging is critical during both the immediate and short-term phases of suicide postvention at work. Effective leaders build and sustain trust and confidence in organizational leadership by acknowledging the impact of suicide – on the company, and on them personally, by offering compassion to employees and by helping the team move from an immobilization state to a state that returns to or even supersedes previous levels of functioning. Effective leaders are “visible, vocal and visionary” during this time and are able to successfully pull people together to draw upon the collective resilience of the work team culture (Spencer-Thomas, 2014).

Workplace postvention practices should also take into account the fact that leaders need support, too. One interviewee who worked at a large school where there were multiple suicide losses reported, “The top leadership went from being ‘Principal of the Year’ to not coming to work because of trauma and depressed [after the cluster of suicides]. She was not able to get out of bed and go to work. Our crisis team leader couldn’t quit crying and was told, ‘If you can’t get yourself together, we’re going to have to reassign you.’” See also: Top 10 Ways to Nurture Mental Health   Longer-term: Reconstructing phase

• Honor: With many deaths, the honoring rituals that usually happen at the funeral or memorial service help provide structure as people mourn. For suicide, this intense period of grief and trauma is often protracted (Jordan & McIntosh, 2010), and workplaces are advised to prepare for anniversary reactions and other milestone dates. For example, milestone dates might include when a work team completes a major project in which the deceased played a role. Again, this level of response may be just for a handful of employees most affected, but managers are better off preparing for these days than reacting without a plan. Honoring practices for suicide loss are best if they are integrated into the company’s overall grief practices. One interviewee shared how this experience was successful in bringing together family members and employees most affected by a suicide death of a long-term employee: “While she was working for this company, she had started a plant exchange. On her birthday they dedicated a memorial garden and built a beautiful deck for all employees who had died. Her plaque added to others who had died at this company. The family was invited, and together with the employees they shared memories and the importance of workplace friendships at the dedication service. The project gave employees a sense that they could do something. The process helped turn a negative into a positive event. Now, every year the workplace conducts a butterfly release in September. The company president says a few words for people (employees and family members) who we have lost. New butterfly bushes are planted to attract new butterflies in honor of those who have died.” A large mental health provider in Canada reported on an annual “Celebration of Life” ritual to honor the grief process of clinicians whose clients had died – from all causes -- over the previous year, “We celebrate the life that was lived and the work we provided to help them. We walk along individuals in their journey, practice rituals of remembrance, sing inspirational songs and pray together.”
• Sustain:  Finally, managers are charged with providing guidance in moving the workforce from a postvention state to suicide prevention. Sometimes, in an acute grief reaction, employees might want to put together an awareness event or start a suicide prevention training. Thoughtful managers navigate this need to “do something” with encouragement to create space to move through the oscillating experiences of grief. When an appropriate time has past, and the workforce is less reactive and more reflective, managers can help them build a comprehensive and sustained strategy to make suicide prevention a health and safety priority.

Case Study When Postvention in the Workplace Works In contrast to the opening story of a leadership response of “shutting down,” in the aftermath of a leader’s suicide, the following story of an insurance company of over 50,000 employees demonstrated a far more compassionate response.  Like in the opening example, the suicide death was of a senior-level manager – a man running a 500-700-person division of company. In the weeks leading up to his death, he became distraught and reclusive. “Leaders didn’t say much, but they lived every word,” one employee said. “Their response was value-driven, not just checking a box.” Immediately after the death, executives pulled together all of the managers and briefed them on concrete information about what happened and said that the first priority in the aftermath was to insure the health of all staff. They then assigned Employee Assistance Program staff to specific managers to support all managers and make sure they had what they needed to follow up to provide resources to the employees. The leaders communicated through a press release that was straightforward and honoring of the man who died, using words like “long and distinguished career” and “provided excellent service to customers.” “They didn’t glorify suicide, but they didn’t diminish person,” one employee recalled. “This organization was a family, and we became closer through this experience. It was a teachable moment on how we support one another.” Conclusion Workplaces are often not well-prepared to respond with a compassionate, long-term strategy of grief and trauma support to employees and surviving family members in the aftermath of a suicide affecting the workforce. New practices and policies are needed to give employers a better plan so the survivors of loss can better manage the oscillating grief and restoration processes that are frequently disruptive to work performance demands and overall health.