We like our insurance carriers to be risk-averse. So it should come as no surprise they are often last to innovate. Insurers need to feel very comfortable with their risk predictions before making a change. Well, machine learning is writing a new chapter in the old insurance book. There are three key reasons why this is happening now:

1. New insurtech players are grabbing market share and setting new standards. Traditional carriers have no choice but to follow suit.
2. Customers are expecting Netflix/Spotify-like personalization, and have no problem changing providers — this trend is expected to grow as we see more millennials maturing out of their parents’ policies.
3. Getting started with machine learning is becoming VERY easy because of open source frameworks, accelerated hardware, pre-trained models available via APIs, validated algorithms and an explosion of online training.

As with any innovation, it only takes two things for widespread adoption:

1. Potential to improve business goals.
2. Ease of establishing pilots.

With time, we see that successful pilots become products. Teams are hired/trained, resources are allocated, business goals gain more "appetite" and models are tweaked. For P&C carriers. we see the opportunity for improving business goals and easily pilot machine learning in the following areas: Risk Modeling Given the complex and behavioral nature of risk factors, machine learning is ideal for predicting risk. The challenge lies in regulatory oversight and the fact that most historic data is still unstructured. This is why we often see machine learning applied to new products such as those using data from IoT sensors in cars (telematics) and home (connected home). But innovative carriers are not limited. They use pre-trained machine learning models to structure their piles of unstructured data: APIs to transcribe coupled with natural language understanding (NLU) extract features from recorded call center calls, handwriting and NLP/NLU tools for written records, leading toward identifying new risk factors using unsupervised learning models. See also: 4 Ways Machine Learning Can Help   Underwriting Carriers can get an actuarial lift even without designing and filing new actuarial models. Using machine learning to better predict risk factors in existing (filed) models. For example, a carrier may have already filed a mileage-based rate-plan for auto insurance but rely on user-reported or less accurate estimates to determine mileage. Machine learning can help predict mileage driven, in a less biased and more accurate way. Similarly, APIs to pre-trained chatbots using lifelike speech and translators can turn website underwriting forms into more engaging and personalized chats that have a good chance to reduce soft fraud. Claims Handling Claims handling is a time-intensive task often involving manual labor by claims adjusters onsite. Innovative carriers already have policy holders take pictures and videos of their damaged assets (home, car…) and compare with baseline or similar assets. Carriers could easily leverage existing APIs for image processing, coupled with bot APIs to build a high-precision model, even at the expense of low recall. Compared with having 100% of the book handled manually, a triage bot that automates even a mere 20% of the claims (with high precision) can enable carriers to start with a low-risk service that’s on par with new insurtech players and improve ratios over time. Such a tool can even be leveraged by adjusters, reducing their time and cost. Coverages While personalized pricing may be regulator-challenged, personalizing the insurance product offering is expected in this Netflix/Spotify age. As basic coverage is commoditizing, carriers differentiate their products based on riders and value-added services, not to mention full product offerings based on life events. Carriers can (with consent, of course) leverage social media data to tailor and personalize the offering. Similarly, marketing departments can use readily available recommendation algorithms to match and promote content about the benefits of certain riders/value-adds to relevant customers at the relevant time. Distribution The world of insurance distribution is growing in complexity. Carriers are struggling with the growing power of intermediaries, and agents are having hard time optimizing their efforts due to lack of predictability of loss commissions. Point-of-sale and affiliation programs are growing, and with them the need for new distribution incentive models. Both traditional and new distribution channels could benefit from machine learning. Brokers, point-of-sale partners and carriers can leverage readily available machine learning models and algorithms designed for retail, to forecast channel premiums. Carriers can grow direct channels without growing headcount, using pre-trained chatbots, NLU and lifelike speech APIs. See also: Machine Learning: A New Force   Machine learning is part of our everyday lives. Innovative insurers are now jumping on the ML wagon with an ever-growing ease; which carriers will be left behind?

As the foothold of innovation across industries grows stronger by the day, insurers are witnessing the advent of tech-based economies, and with them a fundamental shift in the very definition of risk. Every advancement stands to revolutionize how property, businesses and employees will be insured. Consider automated cars and workplace automation tools, such as Amazon warehouse robots, or the emergence of shared ownership business models, like Lyft and AirBnB. Traditional risk calculation models need to evolve to keep up with rapid change. How shall insurers prepare for this shift? According to Valen Analytics’ 2019 Outlook Report, a key part of the answer lies in the need to weave data and predictive analytics into the fabric of their business strategies. The report, which employs third-party and proprietary data to identify key trends, revealed: Insurers Are Heavily Relying on Advanced Use of Data and Analytics to Fuel Growth Valen’s Underwriting Analytics study found that 77% of insurers are incorporating predictive analytics into their underwriting strategy. This marked an increase compared with the steady 60% of insurers during the past three years, demonstrating a clear emphasis by the industry on data-driven decisions. While many factors have fueled the demand for sophisticated data and analytics solutions, one stands out. Insurers have a growing desire to reap a share of the underserved small commercial market, which represents over $100 billion of direct written premiums. Data analytics tools enable insurers to reduce the number of application questions, verify necessary information and ascertain risk much more quickly and accurately. This is particularly important in creating effective business models that align with the needs of small business owners. The rise in insurers looking to employ advanced data analytics techniques has also resulted in the growth of data aggregation services and consortiums. With new primary customer data sources emerging, insurers have access to better insights on consumer risk and behavior. This has contributed to insurers’ appreciation of the predictive horsepower that large pools of data offer. In fact, Valen’s proprietary research found that the synthetic variables appended with consortium data are as much as 13 times more predictive than policy-only data. Synthetic variables are built from computations of more than one variable, made possible by leveraging large and diverse datasets. See also: Understanding New Generations of Data   Regulation and Innovation Must Go Hand-in-Hand With a rise in advanced predictive analytics and robotic process automation in insurance, regulators are paying close attention to the industry. To ensure this oversight doesn’t stifle innovation, it is important that insurers build and document their analytics initiatives so they can be explained and understood by regulators. Being collaborative and responsive will help ensure that regulators can discern the small percentage of use cases that need to be reviewed for consumer fairness protection. In doing so, insurers have the opportunity to take the industry to Insurance 2.0 -- the next phase in technology adoption and innovation. Talent and Infrastructure Challenges While insurers are looking to integrate data and predictive analytics into their business strategies, what will truly determine their success is their ability to hire and nurture the right talent. Unfortunately, the industry continues to suffer from a lack of the talent needed to support fast-paced innovation. Seventy-three percent of insurers surveyed indicate moderate to extreme difficulty in finding data and analytics talent, and the reasons haven’t changed over the years. While geographic location of the job is the primary reason cited by the survey respondents, more and more prospects are either looking for better compensation packages, are simply not interested in an insurance career or opt for opportunities in tech startups or data-driven companies in other fields. Another roadblock for insurers is their dated IT infrastructures, which cause massive backlogs. While most insurers suffer backlogs of two years or more, others cannot identify how long their IT backlogs are. See also: Insurance and Fourth Industrial Revolution   Both of these problems go hand in hand. Clearly, there is a need to foster an innovation mindset, and, to do so, the industry needs a mix of new thinking and engaging work culture. Insurers should follow the footsteps of leading tech companies and cultivate a culture that appeals to high-level talent. By making small changes, such as embracing diversity and a remote workforce, insurers can make themselves attractive to the talent they need. This will build a workforce capable of overcoming IT infrastructural issues. In short, to maintain a competitive advantage, insurers must not only put data and analytics at the forefront of their businesses, but also make strategic decisions on how best to employ them to enhance all aspects of their businesses, from customer service and information handling to risk calculations and claims processing.

It can be challenging for commercial insurers to gain a competitive edge in today’s insurance market while still maintaining profitability. However, small business continues to grow, with 30 million small businesses currently employing 48% of U.S. workers. This creates an opportunity for commercial insurers to increase the volume of small businesses in their book of business. So the question becomes, how can insurers best service their current small business customers to ensure strong retention while furthering the growth of that revenue stream? To gain a competitive advantage, it is crucial that insurers provide elite service, efficiency and innovation that meets the high expectations of their small business customers, especially given how technologically advanced today’s small businesses are. According to a new study by LexisNexis Risk Solutions, there are five key areas identified as opportunities to do so: Expand and implement more automation For small businesses, automation is an efficiency driver in all aspects of their daily operations, including those with their insurer. Likewise, embracing automation can increase the speed and efficiency of insurers’ workflows, reduce human error and help address changing business needs and demands. As is, the level of automation used in small commercial underwriting has not improved over the past two years. See also: Why Start-Ups Win on Small Business   The underutilization of automation remains a great pain point for small commercial insurers. 89% of those small commercial insurers who participated in the study reported the need to manually re-evaluate insurance applications. However, for insurers looking to set themselves apart, it is important to take advantage of these automation opportunities to reduce the risk of incomplete or error-ridden applications, alleviate labor-intensive busywork for underwriters and improve the overall customer experience. Without these efforts, carriers risk losing money and weakening their competitive position. Identify the best data assets and leverage them to their full potential Commercial insurers, like most small businesses today, are no strangers to using data for more informed business decisions. However, the majority of commercial insurers surveyed reported that they relied mostly on public records data, and data retrieved from internet search results. These insurers also cited consumer credit data and commercial credit data as providing the most valuable competitive advantage. Data assets are not being used consistently across the insurance workflow, but insurers that reset their workflow and spend their time analyzing the right data and utilizing credit and other data sources to their full potential will most likely see improved profitability in their small commercial book of business. Use predictive modeling consistently The majority of carriers (81%) believe predictive modeling is important for commercial underwriting, pricing and rating, and it has proven to help insurers evaluate loss propensity and make more informed decisions based on their risk appetite. Carriers that use predictive modeling also report at least moderate success. However, only one-third of respondents said they use predictive modeling consistently. Small predictive modeling can help insurers new to modeling gain a better understanding of how score-based decision-making can benefit their business, and how to build on that knowledge to adopt it as a consistent business practice. Put customer experience first The study found that the three most important factors to the customer experience were faster turnaround times, improved accuracy of customer data and playing a consultative role. However, these three areas were also reported as needing the most improvement. In the era of instant gratification, commercial carriers should focus on enhancing their online digital platforms by deploying new automation technologies – such as data prefill – to improve accuracy and make the turnaround time and overall process faster. As a result, agents will be able to spend more time being consultative with new and existing customers rather than having to spend it filling out basic information. Embrace market trends Seventy percent of the insurance professionals surveyed for the study believe that emerging market trends are important to their business strategy, but less than half are actively making strategic changes in response to them. To stay ahead of the competition, commercial insurers will need to prove that they’re cutting-edge by identifying new trends early and responding quickly. The current key market trends identified, in the study, as having the biggest opportunities for business strategy include telematics, Internet of Things and direct-to-consumer. On the flip side, data breaches, artificial intelligence (AI) and direct-to-consumer are seen as bringing the biggest threats to business. As these emerging market trends continue to become mainstream, embracing the changes will be the only way to keep from being left behind. See also: Taking Care of Small-Medium Business   Find the gap, make the opportunity While insurers are well aware of these trends and their importance to business performance, few are taking the appropriate actions needed to keep up. For every missed opportunity, the insurer risks falling further behind changing market demands and evolving customer expectations and is less likely to appeal to current and prospective small business customers. Commercial carriers who remain complacent will not only risk losing their current small business clients but could also miss out on the opportunity to optimize and grow their small commercial business. It’s still anyone’s game to become the go-to insurer for small businesses, so even those that take small steps to better target and service this market can yield big results. The small business community does business via relationships and recommendations, so those who provide best-in-class service to their current small business customers are sure to gain market validation and perhaps even recommendations that can help them organically grow their business.

Insurance is a business sector where predictive analytics software has some of the most straightforward applications, also with a high return on investment (ROI). Predictive analytics is already offering companies significant savings, and it is expected to grow exponentially in the next few years. Most likely, it will become the standard practice for insurance and risk management. The advantage is that the data lake used for predictive analytics can collect both internal and external data and correlate it to identify patterns and create almost real-time reports. In turn, this would prevent fraud and help to analyze behaviors. The results can be used in various areas of the business, which include risk assessment, pricing policies, claim processing, fraud management and trend analysis. Here are a few of the ways predictive analytics is reshaping the insurance sector: Pricing This is one of the first applications of predictive analytics in the insurance sector because it offers a high ROI. As sources become more diverse and precise, results will be more actionable. Although there are relevant security and privacy issues involved, insurance companies are collecting and analyzing data from sources that, for example, 10 years ago were not available or considered relevant, like social media. The good news is that now data is no longer an average of a cluster, but, after the general profile is created, the machine can measure how each person scores against the grid. Market Trends and Risk Assessment Identifying market trends is all about detecting the right patterns in data and anticipating their further development. Fortunately, AI is perfect for doing just that, regardless of the volume or complexity of the input data. Recently, both the U.S. government and the E.U. ruling organs have adopted an “open data” policy, making available lots of census data related to population statistics, education, safety and more. These new sets offer insurance companies new opportunities regarding macro risk assessment. See also: 3 Ways to Optimize Predictive Analytics   Correlating these sets of data within the right algorithm can help insurance companies to create clusters of customers grouped according to their profitability. For example, such analysis can provide the answers to questions like the probability of a person being involved in a car accident in a certain town, or the likelihood of default for a mortgage for a specific educational profile. The next step is to extrapolate the results and make predictions for the following periods to stay ahead of the market. Fraud Detection and Prevention Insurance is a very vulnerable sector for fraud. People are tempted to pay for an insurance policy and “make it look like an accident” to collect the value of the insurance. Although over the years insurance inspectors have become well aware of classic schemes, new tools are needed because the insured risks become more diverse and linked to digital activity. The Coalition of Insurance Fraud estimates that over $80 billion is lost due to fraud. The same studies show that one in 10 claims is fraudulent. Therefore, insurers are ready to go to any lengths necessary to prevent such actions. The advantage of predictive analytics is that it can signal potential fraud before it happens. The machine would identify specific patterns associated with fraud, usually by means of dots that don’t connect. Tailor-Made Services Most companies, from utilities to retail and especially e-commerce, strive to offer customers a very personalized experience. The insurance sector needs to be at the forefront of this practice, too, as products have few real differentiators apart from the price. In this business, predictive analytics can look at customers’ profiles and predict needs, create bundles of services and help these customers meet their personal goals. Depending on a customer's profile, such purposes can include increased safety, budget management, saved time or significant risk hedging. These systems also offer the opportunity to prioritize claims and serve customers not only in their arriving order but also by evaluating their lifetime value, to avoid losing important ones who need their cases sorted faster. Customer Retention Learning from the world of retail and even HR, the insurance business can benefit significantly from identifying those customers who are about to cancel their policy. Usually, by giving these some extra attention, they can be kept onboard for another year or more. In this case, data insights and customer behavior analysis can help insurance companies identify those who are already looking for solutions from competitors. Focus on the Extraordinary Not all odd claims are frauds, but unexpected and expensive claims can hurt an insurance company’s profit margins. In this case, the role of predictive analysis is to identify potential risks and warn the customer to take all necessary preventive measures. Although such outliers are harder to detect due to the lack of previous relevant data for training, the advantage of using machine learning is that it can put together several distinct pieces of information to identify potential risk. See also: 3 Key Steps for Predictive Analytics   Privacy Concerns As in all matters related to the use of personal data, some people could have three categories of concerns, as stated by the report of the Geneva Association. To wrap up this discussion of data-centric insurance, let’s look at them:

• Privacy and data protection concerns. These are mostly related to the fear of discrimination based on profiling. The other problem in this category is intrusiveness in the right of self-determination, especially when customers can’t afford the prime for their risk class, thus restricting their lifestyle options.
• The individualism of insurance problems. The problem of exclusion should be at the forefront of insurance companies’ internal regulations. Excluding certain high-risk categories can lead to social pressure and the need to find alternative solutions such as state funding.
• Implications of big data and AI for competition. The fourth technological revolution is already causing disruption and changing markets. By implementing these tools, we can expect that some jobs will disappear or reorganize. This will also happen to companies that will not adopt the new standards.

To address the life insurance gap and create more financial security, the industry needs to quickly move from low-tech working practices to a connected value chain of front-end engagement, streamlined routes to market, enriched data for reaching a wider audience and lower overhead costs. We hear so much about digital transformation and the picky buying habits of millennials – it’s easy to stop listening. There are, however, some fundamental truths for the insurance industry that we can no longer ignore:

1. They shop differently than the industry sells.
2. They expect service levels that the industry doesn’t provide.
3. They want to transact easily, wherever and whenever they want.

Of course, these observations about “the industry” are highly generalized. Carriers, distribution organizations and advisers recognize the need to modernize and are making progress with digitization initiatives, but the opportunity to bring financial security to millions while adding new revenue streams remains massive. Let’s dig in. Life insurance uptake in North America is on the decline according to LIMRA, which reported a drop of nearly 30%, with remaining policyholders believing they do not have enough coverage. Moreover, millennials self-reported a 78% shortfall in life insurance coverage, according to a recent study by New York Life. This leaves a huge hole in the market: Accenture estimates it to be around $12 trillion in missing coverage potential and $12 billion in revenue to be gained by serving it – just in the U.S. How did we get here? The distribution of individual insurance products in North America remains largely unchanged since the industry’s inception nearly a century ago. Typically, life insurance coverage has been aimed at individuals with higher net worth, where higher premiums result in higher sales commissions. The sales lifecycle for reaching consumers, evaluating applications and determining levels of coverage takes the same amount time (typically months from lead to conversion) for both the younger, middle-income customer and the high-income customer in an older risk bracket – so brokers and carriers tend to focus where profit margins are more generous. Yet, consumer shopping habits and expectations have changed dramatically, creating a big disconnect between insurance buyers and sellers. Millennials shop differently than the industry sells A recent report from Morgan Stanley and the Boston Consulting Group cited a lack of efficiency as a major challenge for the industry, noting that “sales processes remain ‘old-school,’ cumbersome and inconsistent with the fast-evolving customer expectations that are now being set by digital leaders.” See also: Making Life Insurance Personal   Consumers tend to think about life insurance when moving through key life events such as having a first child or buying a home – this is when we are most receptive. And while digital marketing provides an opportunity for industry players to be visible at these times, lead conversion continues to suffer from a sub-par customer experience: paper-based, manual processes that take a couple of weeks to close. In addition, millennials don’t trust the insurance industry and its advisers: according to LIMRA,  about 38% of consumers rate the honesty and ethical standards of the insurance salesperson as very low or low. They do trust peers and social media: [caption id="attachment_35259" align="alignnone" width="484"] Source: LIMRA 2018 Insurance Barometer[/caption] Millennials expect service levels that the industry doesn’t provide In today’s on-demand world, consumers want to research and compare products online, whenever and wherever they want. In fact, consumers are even willing to share data in return for products and services that make our lives easier, according to Accenture’s recent Global Financial Services Consumer Study. Millennials also want simpler, more intuitive solutions rather than the traditional, overly complex product suites, which the Morgan Stanley and the Boston Consulting Group report finds are not resonating with today’s consumers. The insurance industry now has a tremendous opportunity to deliver customer-centric, personalized service levels to today’s savvy consumers. The prevalence of available online data underscores the opportunity insurers have to use data end to end – from engagement and lead gen through distribution and pre-approved “buy-up” options. In addition, emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence can be employed to improve workflows and other operational efficiencies, so insurers have more bandwidth to meet the growing demands of this market. Millennials want to transact easily, wherever and whenever they want Millennials typically don’t want brokers coming to their homes or requiring multiple appointments that have to be scheduled during work hours or when taking care of families. Millennials expect to be able to transact digitally and to get confirmation in near real time. This is not to say that human-to-human insurance distribution isn’t valuable.. It absolutely is. But the experience of transacting must ultimately be easy, or the buying experience can become tainted. Transforming insurance distribution for the 21st century There is no doubt that the transformation is happening. The insurance industry is redefining how products are delivered while ensuring they are driven by customer requirements and not outdated processes and products. On the front end, user engagement is critical. Consumers want to research and find real answers at their convenience. Carriers, brokers and agents want to be visible when consumers are interested in insurance products. Yet simply reaching a new audience with a good marketing strategy is not enough. Truly enabling potential customers to maneuver seamlessly through personalized information and the application process is where successful client acquisition occurs. See also: Digital Distribution in Life Insurance   Advanced analytics can help insurers optimize the buyer’s journey by providing data on where in the conversion process people may drop off or disengage, so changes can be made to improve outcomes. In addition, the right data also can help insurers find upsell opportunities within the existing customer base by understanding the details of current coverage, where they might be lacking and how to upgrade policies quickly and easily. Analytics are also important to the underwriting process by recognizing customer demographics and the associated policy characteristics, for example. On the back end, seamless communication and functionality between carriers, brokers and consumers is critical in shaping the customer experience. Deloitte’s 2019 Insurance Industry Outlook notes that the ability to manage all tiers of the insurer, broker and prospective customer transaction in real time, with direct access to core underwriting metrics, has increased conversion from 70% to 90% in North America. Today’s consumer is willing to share experiences and has extremely high expectations when dealing with businesses providing a service. When consumers are making important financial decisions such as committing to a life insurance policy, it’s important that all aspects of engagement and interactions get it right the first time, so the industry can reach underserved markets, secure new revenue streams and deliver financial security to more people around the world.

In my 20 or so years’ experience in the insurance industry I have seen many companies struggle to successfully invest in technology. For those of you who remember Y2K, that was a time of change where critical functionality had to be added to legacy policy administration systems (PAS) to support the new millennium. Many insurers tried to solve two problems with one solution, by implementing new PAS platforms. In many cases, this strategy failed, and insurers found they still had to update their old legacy platforms. After this debacle, many insurers were leery about new technology platforms, which has led to an extensive period of stagnation in the system replacement business. I was reading a Novarica study recently and was interested to see that large life and annuity insurers plan to invest over 50% of their IT budgets on "grow" and "transform" projects in 2019. Even more interestingly, a significant portion of this effort will be assigned to digital and data analytics projects. To give this some context, Novarica defines "grow" initiatives as significant changes, new product or process introductions or an extension of current system capabilities, without significantly altering the system architecture. "Transform" initiatives involve a significant investment such as legacy system modernization or introducing completely new capabilities. I recently talked to an insurer about its annual budget and was told me that it spends 80% of the IT budget just standing still; that does not leave a lot for new initiatives. I was beginning to wonder if insurers are concerned about how these types of technological advancements will affect their claim departments. It’s human nature to fear change, and we’ve certainly seen this while engaging with teams on claims transformation projects. This is relatively unknown territory, and only a small number of global insurers have implemented these initiatives and seen significant results. See also: Machine Vision Usage in Insurance   One of the problems insurers have to face is current infrastructure, where data is in silos and there is a lot of baling twine holding systems together. The infrastructure is like a house built in quicksand, probably not the best foundation! Machines in Action I am always curious to see how big initiatives pay off – as a product company, we’re always trying to see how these technological initiatives are being applied in real-life scenarios. Here are two examples that I think are worth sharing. They are from different areas of the insurance industry; one from P&C and one from L&A. Safe-guard, a motor insurance company, has partnered with Kofax, an RPA provider, to move their claims process from being paper-heavy to a more streamlined, automated process. Paper documents are now scanned and uploaded to a central system where pertinent data is extracted from the documents and stored in the system. This "grow" project has increased productivity by 30% and has contributed to a 15% increase in customer satisfaction. MLC, an Australian life insurance company invested $300m AUSD on a digital transformation project to replace its seven legacy systems over two years. We were just one of the vendors; our software introduced an automated claim management tool into the ecosystem. Oracle Cloud Suite was brought in for its financials cloud and Taleo cloud solutions, while MLC built a new customer relationship portal to improve the customer experience, extending the portal to benefit policyholders and advisers. Both projects have resulted in significant results for both MLC and Safe-guard, and neither company has been taken over by machines. Instead, the technology they have implemented has helped both companies make significant process improvements, which has resulted in better customer experience, improved efficiency and increased market share. What About My Claims Department? These investments have paid off, and one thing is for sure; machines have not taken over, they have just improved the human element of the claims process. Safe-guard implemented RPA so the claims teams could provide better customer service with quicker turn-around times. MLC has transformed its claims process and is currently in the top three life insurance companies in Australia, with a market share of 12%. As a second phase, MLC is now looking to further invest in insurtech, offering life insurance discounts based on a policyholder’s health data, leveraging the data that can now be collected and analyzed. See also: How Robotics Will Transform Claims   So, although technology may be changing the environment around us, machines are merely helping us to meet the demands of these changes, which includes both employee and customer expectations, as well as bottom-line pressures. The bottom line is that machines are not coming to take over. They will make businesses more productive and efficient, providing employees with the tools to make their jobs easier and to gain more insights into claimants and policyholders to optimize product offerings, to meet the on-demand needs of today’s customers.

With levees breaking and floods covering much of the Midwest, and with record snow in the Sierra Nevadas soon to start melting and rushing into California's waterways, let's look at where we stand on the renewal of the National Flood Insurance Program. There is reason for optimism about the NFIP, currently set to expire May 31, but there are also significant caveats.

The optimism stems from the fact that the NFIP is finally moving into the 21st century in terms of technology.

Established by Congress in 1968, the program was designed to ensure that affordable flood insurance is available to property owners in vulnerable areas, while requiring that all those in participating communities buy insurance if any financing is in place on the property. But the decisions on vulnerability have been crude. Basically, someone pulls out a paper map, and if it says "flood plain" then you have to buy insurance. If not, not, no matter whether you're on top of a hill in that flood plain or in a low area in a location not generally deemed vulnerable. 

Now, the easy availability of cameras, drones and more sophisticated mapping tools makes it possible to incorporate precise measurements of elevation and determine vulnerability by individual property, not through some decision that three or four square miles constitute a flood plain. In this podcast I recorded with Nick Lamparelli, cofounder and chief underwriting officer of reThought Insurance, he says it's actually possible to take the precision far further: You can, for instance, price flood insurance based not just on how high above ground expensive possessions, such as computer servers, are in a building but on whether they are on a vulnerable side of the building or in a more protected area. Even in today's dysfunctional Washington, the advances in technology are finding their way into the hearings on the NFIP.

Getting the NFIP to deal with models far closer to reality could help with pricing, which has failed to keep up with claims for 15 years. In 2017, for instance, the NFIP took in $3.6 billion in premiums and paid $8.7 billion in claims—not exactly a sustainable situation. Congress forgave $16 billion of NFIP debt in 2016, but the program still is more than $20 billion in the hole. Having prices reflect the actual risk would eliminate the deficits (which have essentially become subsidies by taxpayers for those in vulnerable areas).

But here is where the caveats begin.

Roughly half of those in the NFIP in 2009 have dropped out because they found the prices to be too high. Now imagine that prices rise for the vast majority of people.

I can tell you one thing that will happen: People will complain. And they will find advocates to take up their cause, whether in media or in the halls of government. Already, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has sounded the alarm on behalf of constituents on Long Island. (Those who benefit from price reductions will quietly pocket their gains.)

Although the NFIP renewal effort has been solidly bipartisan thus far, it's easy to see how divisions might arise. Better understanding of risk will make it clear just what areas have been getting subsidies, and, while both parties might rally behind subsidies for a purple state like Florida, what about a red state like Texas or a blue state like New York? In addition, there is talk of subsidizing insurance for those below a certain income level -- not always an area of common ground for Republicans and Democrats. And don't look now, but the House committee responsible for NFIP legislation is currently run by Maxine Waters, a frequent target of the president's Twitter-ing thumbs.

Even if the NFIP is finally renewed for good, after repeated extensions since 2017, the work won't be done. Climate change will cause new vulnerabilities that will force flood insurance to continue to adapt. 

So, rays of sunshine are breaking through the clouds, but we'll certainly face another storm when a new NFIP pricing model takes effect, and that may be just one of many we still have to outlast. 

Cheers,

Paul Carroll
Editor-in-Chief

Smart devices have become a popular topic in the P&C insurance world. Tools like smart thermostats, smoke detectors and water sensors offer the potential to halt property damage before it starts, protecting insurance customers from injury, property loss or both. Yet these devices come with risks.

Smart devices often represent the most vulnerable point on any given network, exposing customers and insurers alike to potential risks. Insurance companies that understand these risks are better-poised to protect both customers and themselves.

The Rising Trend of Smart Device Use

Smart home devices were a wildly popular gift during the 2018 holiday season. Amazon broke records for sales of its Echo and Alexa devices, Voicebot’s Bret Kinsella says. Sales of smart sensors, security systems, wearable devices and smart toys were also strong.

Currently, the most common smart devices used in private homes are televisions and digital set-top boxes, says Gartner research director Peter Middleton. Initially more popular among businesses, tools like smart electric meters and security cameras are becoming more popular among homeowners.

As more people use smart devices, insuring these devices becomes more important. Even Amazon has announced an interest in offering homeowners insurance to complement its smart devices like Alexa speakers and Ring Alarm systems, says Julie Jacobson at CEPro.

Growing Security Concerns for the Internet of Things

As reports of data theft, hacking and other malfeasance reach the news, concerns about security and privacy in the smart device realm grow. For instance, a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack in 2016 incapacitated websites for internet users across the East Coast of the U.S. The attack was launched from an army of smart devices conscripted by malware, says Lisa R. Lifshitz, who works in internet law and cybersecurity. In this attack, many of the device’s owners didn’t even know they were involved.

These events have raised concerns about device security among both government regulators and private device owners. Insurers seeking to offer smart devices to customers can play a role, as well.

See also: Smart Home = Smart Insurer! 

Laws and Regulations Address Smart Device Security

Most laws and regulations to address smart device security are still in their infancy. Although the U.K. introduced guidelines for improving IoT security in 2018, the guidelines remain voluntary. This means that not all manufacturers will adhere to them, says Rory Cellan-Jones, a technology correspondent for the BBC.

In September 2018, California became the first U.S. state to pass a law addressing smart device security. The bill sets minimum security requirements for smart device manufacturers selling their devices in California. It takes effect Jan. 1, 2020.

Rather than listing specific requirements, the California law sets a standard for determining whether security is reasonable. For instance, the security features must be appropriate to the device’s nature and function. They must also be designed to protect the device and its information from unauthorized access, modification or other forms of tampering, say Jennifer R. Martin and Kyle Kessler at Orrick.

Customer Interest in Security Has Increased

As smart devices become more popular, so do demands for greater security and privacy regulations. A 2018 study by Market Strategies International found that people who use smart devices at home or at work are twice as likely to believe that governments should regulate the devices.

“We believe that these workers have already seen the massive potential of the IoT and recognize that the risks - data security, privacy and environmental - are very real,” explains Erin Leedy, a senior vice president at Market Strategies.

With a sense of both the potential and the risks, smart device users become more interested in stronger regulations to protect privacy. A 2017 study by digital platform security firm Irdeto polled 7,882 smart device users in six different countries worldwide. Researchers found that 90% of those polled believe that smart devices need built-in security. Yet, respondents also said they too had a role to play in keeping themselves secure: 56% said that users and manufacturers share responsibility to prevent their devices from being hacked, security director Mark Hearn says.

Consumers understand that their devices can pose risks, and they’re willing to join the fight to protect their privacy and data security. Insurance companies can help them do so by providing the information they need to make smart decisions with smart devices.

Who Controls Your Customers’ Devices?

When today’s smart home devices were designed, the main goal was to simplify tasks and make life more efficient. Security took a backseat to functionality, Fortinet’s Steve Mulhearn says.

To function well, smart home devices must integrate seamlessly with other devices — meaning they’re often the weakest security point on a network. Hackers have noticed these weaknesses and are taking advantage of them. In August 2018, the Federal Bureau of Investigation issued a public service announcement warning that IoT devices could be hacked, conscripting them into malicious or illegal online activities.

“Everything from routers and NAS devices to DVRs, Raspberry Pis and even smart garage door openers could be at risk,” says Phil Muncaster at Infosecurity Magazine. While some devices are at higher risk than others, no smart device is totally safe from attempts to use it for ills like click fraud, spam emailing and botnet attacks.

Helping Customers Understand and Address Smart Device Risks

Most smart device users want to play a role in preventing privacy and security breaches. Yet, they don’t always know how to participate effectively. Helpnet Security managing editor Zeljka Zorz recommends that homeowners adopt smart devices only after asking and answering two questions:

• Will the device improve the quality of my life/fill a need I have?
• Am I satisfied with the level of security and privacy the manufacturer provides users?

Insurers seeking to incorporate smart devices into their business and their customers’ lives can help by providing answers to both questions. As Steve Touhill explains on the Resonate blog, demonstrating the usefulness of smart devices can help insurers attract new customers. Smart device owners are 42% more likely to change insurance companies in the coming year. They’re also more open to embracing insurers that offer smart device discounts or support.

Insurers can help customers protect themselves by providing information on privacy and security issues. Options include comparisons of security options for various devices, information on changing usernames and passwords, how-to guides for installing regular updates and checklists for spotting signs of cyber tampering.

When presented as best practices for using smart home devices, these steps can help homeowners and insurers address security risks without raising undue alarm. Property and casualty insurers that encourage smart device use play an important role in influencing how customers use their devices. While this relationship can be beneficial for both insurers and customers, insurers that enter it face further privacy and security complications.

Protecting Customer Privacy

Insurance companies will need to consider how to protect customer privacy while still gathering relevant data from smart home devices. This is because smart devices offer the potential to provide more data to insurance companies, changing everything from policy recommendations to underwriting accuracy, Mobiquity’s Sydney Fenkell says.

See also: How Smart Is a ‘Smart’ Home, Really?

Gathering this data requires insurance companies to be smart about protecting the privacy of customers and the security of the information received.

“It is not a matter of if but when these systems will be compromised, and the consequences could be much more severe than lost Social Security numbers,” says Dimitri Stiliadis, chief technology officer at Aporeto.

Moreover, P&C insurers will also need to protect their internal networks when communication with these devices presents a weak point.

Being Smart About Smart Device Data Use

The use of smart device data was recently brought to light by an announcement from the insurance company John Hancock. It made public the company’s intention to incorporate information from fitness wearables like the Garmin or FitBit into calculations of life insurance premiums. This raised a number of concerns with customers, says Chris Boyd, a MalwareBytes senior threat researcher who goes by the pseudonym paperghost. Boyd notes that these devices often have weak security, which means that a user’s personal data could be altered — affecting  insurance premiums.

Similar concerns arise for users seeking to link smart devices with their auto, homeowners or renters insurance. A hacked or malfunctioning device that reports multiple loss events, or that fails to report events that did happen, could affect customers’ insurance rates. Unless, however, human intervention in the system verified the event.

For insurers, one of the best early principles to adopt may be one of transparency, says Chris Middleton at Internet of Business. When consumers know what information their smart home device collects and transmits, and under what security protocols or safeguards, they are better-equipped to understand and use the device in a way that benefits both their interests and those of their insurer.

2018 saw unprecedented advances in the investment and deployment of artificial intelligence capabilities within the insurance industry, and 2019 promises to be no different. With the Insurance AI and Analytics USA Summit kicking off in Chicago, May 2-3, we spoke to some of our speakers to gauge their thoughts on the challenges that insurance carriers face in implementing AI. “AI is impacting insurance at an unprecedented pace,” says Bilal Parviz, vice president of product development at Arch Mortgage Insurance. Eugene Wen, Manulife VP of group advanced analytics, adds that, "With innovative new players entering the industry and the traditional players trying to catch up, the industry is going to experience further significant change.” William Dubyak, VP of analytics for product development and Innovation at USAA, says: “It’s impossible to open a magazine without seeing hype about analytics changing every aspect of your life." Although good progress has been made to date, there is a definite sense that we are only at the tip of the AI-iceberg. In the eyes of Chuck Gomez, Novarica VP of research consulting: “Each year, the topic of AI gets more interesting as emerging technology evolves and adoption rates go up, indicating that more can be accomplished with progress. While the subject of analytics has been around insurers for a while…there’s still a lot to learn about analytics centered around underwriting, claims and customer service.” See also: Future of Insurance Looks Very Different   Insurance AI and Analytics USA will address distinct applications of AI, and Thomas Sheffield, SVP, specialty claims, at QBE, who will speak on the claims track, says: “From a claims perspective, our next 10 or 20 years will be defined by how well we embrace technology, artificial intelligence and the nearly boundless opportunities that arise from those advancements.” Still, in conducting our research for the Insurance AI and Analytics USA agenda, it was striking how many carriers cited difficulties in actually embedding the technology they recognize as so integral to their future success.

With the E.U. having approved the deal, only one question remains: Just how much of a train wreck will the Marsh/JLT merger be? Before answering that question, however, it is first worth understanding the circumstances that led to the deal happening in the first place. Let’s clear one thing up straight away. The one thing this deal wasn’t, despite all carefully crafted protestations to the contrary, was strategic. JLT did not in my view sell because it believes that the combined business will be a better or faster-growing one or because it had run out of road -- the 5% organic revenue growth, 25% growth in underlying trading profit and 18% improvement in the underlying trading margin contained in the last set of results would certainly suggest otherwise! Rather, JLT's hand was forced because Jardine Matheson decided it wanted out, and management decided that a sale to Marsh was the least worst option. At least, that’s the rather convenient line that I'm sure is being peddled internally. Of course, there would be an element of truth to this: The changing of the senior guard at JM over recent years -- in particular, the untimely death of Rodney Leach -- would inevitably lead to an internal re-evaluation of the wisdom of JM holding such a significant investment outside of its core Asian markets. But there were other factors at play, too. First, JLT’s bold U.S. retail strategy was unlikely to meet the commitments made when its plans were announced in September 2014 ”that the business will start to contribute to profits in 2018 and then generate an accelerated return thereafter,” despite the huge progress that had been made. Selling out now avoided some very awkward questions from increasingly impatient investors. Second, JLT had signally failed to put in place a credible CEO succession strategy, not helped by a sense that anyone else would hold the group together – which would have no doubt played a major role in JM’s own thinking and willingness to fund staff retentions to the tune of £50 million in its anxiety to get the deal away. Louis XV once said, “Après moi, le deluge.” A sale solved a problem that JLT's board had been unable or unwilling to tackle for years. From Marsh’s perspective, it is also hard to see the deal as in any way strategic, unless getting bigger is a strategy -- which in the case of Marsh of course it may well be! Combining the two businesses will not magically boost Marsh’s organic growth rate – if anything 2+2 here may well equal 3, at best. It is also hard to believe that the merged business will allow Marsh – lest we forget, already the world’s largest broker - to access markets or territories that were somehow previously closed to it. In fact, the biggest factor here -- beyond CEO ego, which is probably the single most under-appreciated factor in all large scale M&A -- was almost certainly the fear that, if Marsh didn’t buy JLT, Aon would. A fear almost certainly shared, by the way, by the JLT management team, who have demonized Aon for years. The opportunity for Marsh to put clear blue water between itself and its nearest competitor, could not be missed, even if the result is something of a Frankenstein creation. Aon’s aborted pursuit of Willis shows that these things matter, and no doubt that deal will also happen at some stage. Coming back then to my original question around the prospects for the merger: Perhaps the best way to answer that is by using the litmus test that JLT has long claimed to use to assess all major decisions, namely the desire to balance the interests of “our four key stakeholders: our clients, our colleagues, our trading partners and our shareholders.” From a JLT shareholder perspective, this was clearly a stunning deal – all credit to JLT's management team for bending Marsh so far over the barrel that they must almost have been touching their toes on the other side. If anything proves Marsh’s white-knuckled determination not to let JLT slip through their fingers into Aon’s embrace, it was the price they paid. Given that the JLT’s board’s primary responsibility is a fiduciary one, who can blame them or have any complaints? What this means for Marsh’s shareholders though is another matter. From a client perspective, it is hard to see the deal as anything other than negative. These were already two very good businesses – putting them together may fill in some gaps here and there for Marsh (e.g. LatAm, Asian EB, Australian public sector) and bring some extra capabilities to JLT (e.g. analytics and engineering), but it doesn’t radically improve the overall customer proposition. In fact, it may have the exact opposite effect for many customers as, in a market already dominated by three silverbacks, the loss of the one challenger willing and able to upset the natural order of things will be keenly felt. Inevitably, this will lead to client losses, particularly from some of the larger accounts, who will not be willing to put their eggs in one basket or in the same basket as one of their major competitors. See also: Distribution: About To Get Personal   What, for example, are the prospects for JLT’s U.S. wholesale business, which had previously managed to convince its producing brokers that JLT's U.S. specialty-focused play didn’t really compete with them but may now find that argument ringing somewhat hollow! What is the outlook for JLT’s hard-won U.S. specialty business, which has been largely built off the back of its ability to position itself as radically different from the big three? What is the future for JLT Re, whose strong march over the past few years has been fueled by its clients' desire to diversify their placement and its team’s ability to bring a fresh perspective? Don’t also forget that much of JLT’s success has come from winning share from its major competitors, including Marsh. The idea that these same clients will allow themselves to be tamely shepherded into the Marsh fold is wishful thinking. At best, they might tender the business -- but, with JLT out of the way, Aon and Willis will now be as likely to win the business as the enlarged Marsh is to retain it. From a trading partner, or insurer, perspective, the deal is nothing short of disastrous. The forced sale of JLT’s market-leading aviation business to AJG by the E.U., at what seems to be a knockdown value for the best franchise in the market, probably deals with the biggest area of market concentration but doesn’t solve the bigger issue. I don’t know what Marsh/JLT’s combined share of Lloyds’ is, for example, but I would have thought it could be 30% to 40%. In some classes, a lot more. It will be the same picture elsewhere. That is a big problem, albeit one of the market’s own making, as it has consistently rewarded increased placement scale with better commissions, thereby slowly strangling itself to death. The growth of JLT has been at least partly due to the markets deliberately nurturing it as a counter-point to the dominance of the big three and offering it terms that allowed it to compete on something approaching a level playing field. Of course, some of the larger markets will be seeing this as an opportunity to grab an even bigger slice of the combined book. But the prospects for many of the smaller markets, which JLT had supported by eschewing the programmatic placement of its larger competitors and distributing risk far more widely across the market, are bleak. Which brings us finally to people. And this is where the harsh reality of the deal really hits home. Job reductions of 2% to 5% of the combined workforce of 75,000 are planned. That is 3,500 people, with families and mortgages and careers, effectively funding the bulk of the short-term deal benefits. And whatever has been said about selecting the best of breed, etc., everyone knows where the brunt of these job losses will fall. In the words of Sen. William L Macey – “to the victor belong the spoils.” Hard to see who the winners are here, apart from those cashing in their share options and heading for the race track. What then are the prospects for Marsh’s own shareholders? Well, there are some positives to cling to. There will be some geographic complementarities in Asia, Australia and LatAm, where JLT is strong. JLT’s fantastic offshore operation in India also provides a template for Marsh to replicate on a far larger scale, creating a huge opportunity to drive cost and operational efficiency through the business. The cost synergies, as already mentioned, will be significant – I would guess that the stated target of £250 million will be comfortably beaten - Marsh has been around the block enough times to know to under-promise and over-deliver in this area. And from a revenue perspective, there is a big opportunity to re-engineer JLT’s book and take advantage of Marsh’s more aggressive approach to squeezing insurers for enhanced commissions, work-transfer fees, consultancy arrangements, re-insurance placements and all the other weapons in the broker’s arsenal of dark arts. The only problem, of course, is that this is all one-off. Extracting the cost synergies and re-engineering the book will significantly improve short-term profits. But it won't deliver the long term organic revenue growth that will be required to justify the nose-bleed multiple that Marsh has paid. Although of course, by the time anyone runs the actual numbers, it will probably be someone else's problem to deal with! The real question, therefore, is whether the profit improvement will offset the unavoidable attrition that will result from the combination of the two businesses. Attrition born partly by clients voting with their feet, for the reasons already set out above, but more out of the collateral damage caused by the inevitable clash between the two business’ cultures. It is hard to overstate just how big an issue this is likely to be. JLT was a disruptor. It deliberately positioned itself (not always very accurately!) as the nimble, entrepreneurial, innovation-led counterpoint to Marsh, Aon and Willis’ slow, monolithic and commoditized approach. In a market drowning in a sea of sameness, JLT was able to articulate a distinctive message with real cut-through that was hugely successful in attracting some of the best people in the market from the big three, by making them feel special and part of something different and better. It was almost tribal – you were either lucky enough to be invited to be part of JLT, or you were against them. Whatever the cold economic logic of the circumstances that led to JLT selling out, many will always view this decision as an unforgivable betrayal of trust, such was the power of the "cult" that JLT had created. It is patently nonsensical to now expect these same people – who in choosing to work at JLT had in most cases consciously rejected the opportunity to work at one of the big three to benefit from JLT’s culture and more delegated approach to management and placement - to accept life under Marsh’s command-and-control management style. It makes you wonder whether Marsh really understand what they have bought or the challenge they will face in hanging onto it. The story I have heard (which I have no way of verifying) is that the deal was struck in little over a week – if true, I’ve spent longer choosing wallpaper! The oddity, of course, is that if there was one real strategic opportunity from this deal it would be JLT injecting some of its entrepreneurial DNA into the Marsh culture and giving it some of JLT’s street-fighting swagger. I'd love for that to happen. But history tells you that it is the one thing that is most likely to be lost. See also: Insurtech Is Ignoring 2/3 of Opportunity   Whatever retentions are put in place – and a staggering £75 milliion has been earmarked for this purpose up until the deal completes -- the best people will surely leave, as they always do. And there will be no shortage of people looking to offer them a home, or private-equity companies willing to back the right management teams. If I had to make a prediction, I would say that Asia, Australia, U.K. mid-market insurance broking and EB will be pretty stable. But JLT’s European network will fragment, as I doubt any of them will take the Marsh shilling. JLT’s LatAm minority interests will sell out to Marsh, providing some short-term stability, but good luck enforcing a restrictive covenant in Peru or Chile when their earn-out comes to an end in three or four years’ time! JLT Re will, you would think, given the over-concentration of the broker market, have largely re-constituted itself somewhere else within a few years. JLT’s London market wholesale and specialty business will fragment, attracted either to specialist competitors or to one of the various PE-backed start-ups that are circling JLT's carcass. JLT U.S. will also fragment as the team disperses, whether together or across the market, bringing to an end one of the most impressive market entry initiatives in recent memory. How much business could be lost? Your guess is as good as mine, but if I had to speculate I would say 30%, maybe even 40% in some areas over the next few years, as people leave and clients move. But here’s the best part: The Marsh shareholders may well not even care! When you lose the revenue, you lose the associated costs, as well, and many of these brokers are very well paid indeed. The combined impact of the cost savings and the portfolio re-engineering, plus the undeniable benefits of scale in today’s market, may well mean that Marsh can afford to take this level of revenue loss and still deliver a good return to its shareholders, having in the process also taken out an increasingly annoying thorn in their side. The big winners here – apart from the headhunters who must already have their new Porsches on order and the deal advisers pocketing hundreds of millions of dollars of fees - will almost certainly be the next tier of brokers, who stand to hoover up talent and business in the biggest feeding frenzy the market has seen for a long time. In particular, Hyperion and AJ Gallagher would seem to be well-positioned as the natural successors to JLT’s crown, with a growing global footprint and a proposition (at times more aspirational than actual) focused around specialty and agility, that many within JLT will find reassuringly familiar and attractive. I would also have thought that some of the bolder U.S. brokers such as Acrisure, Alliant or Assured Partners, looking to grow outside of their domestic markets, may well also see this as an unprecedented opportunity to build an international bridgehead. Overall, though, it is hard not to feel sad as another great London market name bites the dust. JLT’s shareholders are undeniably richer, and maybe in the modern world that's all that matters - what choice did they really have at the end of the day? But JLT’s clients, colleagues, trading partners and the market at large will be a lot poorer for its passing. Couldn't a BlackRock or a KKR have taken JM's stake off its hands and .... we will unfortunately never know. But perhaps this isn’t the end of the JLT story. Some phoenixes will almost certainly rise from the ashes of this deal. This article originally appeared here.