New technologies offer insurers the opportunity to build more engaged relationships with their customers. Fitness-linked insurance programs, for example, are attractive to active people who have access to technology and a desire to use it. While wearables and apps are most closely associated with promoting physical fitness, technology is increasingly being put to use in lifestyle monitoring of the elderly and others in need of care. Technology that is simple to understand and use works best. Some older people find the latest gadgets baffling. Even after a device has been set up and explained, they often have little confidence and remain skeptical of the benefits. Health problems make some devices hard to operate, while the cost and lack of access to technology is another barrier. Despite the challenges, the percentage of people using technology in later life is rising fast. U.K. figures show that 75% of people 65-74 years old now have access to the internet and that more than one-third own a smartphone. Among the individuals over 75, one-quarter use tablets, and 41% have a social media account. Three-quarters of smartphone-owning older Americans use the internet several times a day or more. These numbers are all pretty close to those seen in much younger age groups. It’s no surprise the baby-boomer generation is digitally engaged, but new technologies can also provide interventions for much older adults, and many of them are eager adopters. Aging populations create opportunities for products and services. The U.K. government has committed to invest in innovation to meet the needs that result from this demographic change. See also: Insurance 2025: Smart Contracts   Telecare and telehealth are technological interventions to deliver services at a distance from the provider. Smart homes, assistive robots, technology-based wellness and therapeutics can all promote an independent lifestyle for older people, not only providing for their physical and cognitive fitness but also entertainment, leisure and wellbeing. There are reasons other than cost-saving for technological solutions to help older people remain independent, including assistance with everyday tasks compensating for lost physical or cognitive function. In Japan, where 25% of the population are senior, the predicted shortfall of caregivers by 2025 is likely to be met by nursing-care robots currently being developed with government backing. Caregivers also enjoy positive outcomes by experiencing less worry. For example, tracking how a person with dementia interacts with a virtual assistant device - the questions they ask it and how often, the tone and cadence of the voice - could help spot cognitive changes, as could analysis of onscreen scrolling and mouse movement. Phones and tablets provide isolated people information and links to social networks for friendship, help and support. Technology sends reminders about medication. Sensors monitor sleep, kitchen activity and walking speed, and raise the alarm if a person has a fall. Behavioral data from self-learning intelligent software allows caregivers to analyze patterns of behavior, spot negative trends and intervene quickly. Before insurers embark on building more digital engagement programs, it is important to know how they can appeal to the wide range of customers. It is important to maximize the potential for understanding how older adults perceive technology, and providing help with setup and support. In the Netherlands, several insurers now reimburse users employing home sensors, and others are experimenting with reimbursements on wearables. More will surely follow because technology might prevent hospitalization or worse. See also: Solving Insurtech’s People Challenge   Concerns remain over potential security and privacy risks that these technologies pose. Monitoring must be structured in an ethical way that is compliant with data laws, and there must be a person-centered approach ensuring tangible benefit for the person concerned. The pressure on health services is increasing as the numbers of elderly people continue to rise, and developed technologies that address these concerns can help reduce the overall costs of prevention and monitoring.

While more than half of individuals surveyed by Pew Research express worry over the trend toward autonomous vehicles, and only 11% are very enthusiastic about a future of self-driving cars, lack of positive consumer sentiment hasn’t stopped several industries from steering into the auto pilot lane.

The general sentiment of proponents, such as Tesla and Volvo, is that consumers will flock toward driverless transportation once they understand the associated safety and time-saving benefits. Because of the self-driving trend, KPMG currently predicts that the auto insurance market will shrink 60% by the year 2050 and an additional 10% over the following decade.

What this means for P&C insurers is change in the years ahead. A decline in individual drivers would directly correlate to a reduction in demand for the industry’s largest segment of coverage. How insurers survive will depend on several factors, including steps they take now to meet consumer expectations and needs.

The Rise of Autonomous Vehicles

Google’s Lexus RX450h SUV, as well as 34 other prototype vehicles, had driven more than 2.3 million autonomous miles as of November 2016, the last time the company published its once monthly report on the activity of its driverless car program. Based on this success and others from companies such as Tesla, public transportation now seems poised to jump into the autonomous lane.

Waymo -- the Google self-driving car project -- recently announced a partnership with Valley Metro to help residents in Phoenix, AZ, connect more efficiently to existing light rail, trains and buses by providing driverless rides to stations. This follows closely on the heels of another Waymo pilot program that put self-driving trucks on Atlanta area streets to transport goods to Google’s data centers.

In the world of personal driving, Tesla’s Auto Pilot system was one of the first to take over navigational functions, though it still required drivers to have a hand on the wheel. In 2017, Cadillac released the first truly hands-free automobile with its Super Cruise-enabled CT6, allowing drivers to drive without touching the wheel for as long as they traveled in their selected lane.

Cadillac’s level two system of semiautonomous driving is expected to be quickly upstaged by Audi’s A8. Equipped with Traffic Jam Pilot, the system allows drivers to take hands off the vehicle and eyes off the road as long as the car is on a limited-access divided highway with a vehicle directly in front of it. While in Traffic Jam mode, drivers will be free to engage with the vehicle’s entertainment system, view text messages or even look at a passenger in the seat next to them, as long as they remain in the driver’s seat with body facing forward.

While the Cadillacs were originally set to roll off the assembly line and onto dealer lots as early as spring of 2018, lack of consumer training as well as federal regulations have encouraged the auto manufacturer to delay release in the U.S. Meanwhile, Volvo has met with similar constraints as it navigates toward releasing fully autonomous vehicles to 100 people by 2021. The manufacturer is now taking a more measured approach, one that includes training for drivers starting with level-two semi-autonomous assistance systems before eventually scaling up to fully autonomous vehicles.

“On the journey, some of the questions that we thought were really difficult to answer have been answered much faster than we expected. And in some areas, we are finding that there were more issues to dig into and solve than we expected,” said Marcus Rothoff, Volvo’s autonomous driving program director, in a statement to Automotive News Europe.

Despite the roadblocks, auto makers’ enthusiasm for the fully autonomous movement hasn’t waned. Tesla’s Elon Musk touts safer, more secure roadways when cars are in control, a vision that is being embraced by others in high positions, such as Elaine Chao, U.S. Secretary of Transportation.

“Automated or self-driving vehicles are about to change the way we travel and connect with one another,” Chao said to participants of the Detroit Auto Show in January 2018. “This technology has tremendous potential to enhance safety.”

See also: The Evolution in Self-Driving Vehicles

We’ve already seen what sensors can do to promote safer driving. In a recent study conducted by the International Institute for Highway Safety, rear parking sensors bundled with automatic braking systems and rearview cameras were responsible for a 75% reduction in backing up crashes. According to Tesla’s website, all of its Model S and Model X cars are equipped with 12 ultrasonic sensors capable of detecting both hard and soft objects, as well as with cameras and radar that send feedback to the car.

Caution, Autonomous Adoption Ahead

The road to fully autonomous vehicles is expected to be taken in a series of increasing steps. We have largely entered the first phase, where drivers are still in charge, aided by various safety systems that intervene in the case of driver error. As we move closer to full autonomy, drivers will assume less control of the vehicle and begin acting as a failsafe for errant systems or by taking over under conditions where the system is not designed to navigate. We currently see this level of autonomous driving with Audi Traffic Jam Pilot, where drivers are prompted to take control if the vehicle departs from the pre-established roadway parameters. In the final phase of autonomous driving, the driver is removed from controlling the vehicle and is absolved of roadway responsibility, putting all trust and control in the vehicle.

KPMG predicts wide-scale adoption of this level of autonomous driving to begin taking place in 2025, as drivers realize the time-saving and safety benefits of self-driving vehicles. During this time frame, all new vehicles will be fully self-driving, and older cars will be retrofitted to conform to a road system of autonomous vehicles.

Past the advent of the autonomous trend in 2025, self-driving cars will become the norm, with information flowing between vehicles and across a network of related infrastructure sensors. KPMG expects full adoption of the autonomous trend by the year 2035, five years earlier than it first reported in 2015.

Despite straightforward predictions like these, it’s likely that drivers will adopt self-driving cars at varying rates, with some geographies moving faster toward driverless roadways than others. There will be points in the future where a major metropolis may have moved fully to a self-driving norm, mandating that drivers either purchase and use fully autonomous vehicles or adopt autonomous public transportation, while outlying areas will still be in a phase where traditional vehicles dominate or are in the process of being retrofitted.

“The point at which we see autonomy appear will not be the point at which there is a massive societal impact on people,” said Elon Musk, Tesla CEO, at the World Government Summit in Dubai in 2017. “Because it will take a lot of time to make enough autonomous vehicles to disrupt, so that disruption will take place over about 20 years.”

Will Self-Driving Cars Force a Decline in Traditional Auto Coverage?

At present, data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration indicates that 94% of automobile accidents are the result of human error. Taking humans largely out of the equation makes many autonomous vehicle proponents predict safer roadways in our future, but it also raises an interesting question. Who is at fault when a vehicle driving in autonomous mode is involved in a crash?

Many experts agree that accident liability will be taken away from the driver and put into the hands of the automobile manufacturers. In fact, precedents are already being set. In 2015, Volvo announced plans to accept fault when one of its autonomous cars is involved in an accident.

“It is really not that strange,” Anders Karrberg, vice president of government affairs at Volvo, told a House subcommittee recently. “Carmakers should take liability for any system in the car. So we have declared that if there is a malfunction to the [autonomous driving] system when operating autonomously, we would take the product liability.”

In the future, as automobile manufacturers take on liability for vehicle accidents, consumers may see a chance to save on their auto premiums by only carrying state-mandated minimums. Some states may even be inclined to repeal laws requiring drivers to carry traditional liability coverage on self-driving vehicles or substantially alter the coverage an individual must secure.

Despite the forward thinking of manufacturers such as Volvo, for the present, accident liability for autonomous cars is still a gray area. Following the death of a pedestrian hit by an Uber vehicle operating in self-driving mode in Arizona, questions were raised over liability.

Bryant Walker Smith, a law professor at the University of South Carolina with expertise in self-driving cars, indicated that most states require drivers to exercise care to avoid pedestrians on roadways, laying liability at the feet of the driver. But in the case of a car operating in self-driving mode, determining liability could hinge on whether there was a design defect in the autonomous system. In this case, both the auto and self-driving system manufacturers and even the software developers could be on the hook for damages, particularly in the event a lawsuit is filed.

Finding Opportunity in the Self-Driving Trend

Accenture, in conjunction with Stevens Institute of Technology, predicts that 23 million self-driving vehicles will be coursing across U.S. highways by 2035. As a result, insurers could realize an $81 billion opportunity as autonomous vehicles open new areas of coverage in hardware and software liability, cybersecurity and public infrastructure insurance by 2025, the same year that KPMG predicts the autonomous trend will begin to rapidly accelerate.

Simultaneously, Accenture predicts that personal auto premiums, which will begin falling in 2024, will hit a steeper decline before leveling out around 2050 at an all-time low. Most of the personal premium decline is due to an assumption that the majority of self-driving cars will not be owned by individuals, but by original equipment manufacturers, OTT players and other service providers such as ride-sharing companies.

It may seem like a logical conclusion if America’s love affair with the automobile wasn’t so well-defined. Following falling gas prices in 2016, Americans logged a record-breaking 3.22 trillion miles behind the wheel. Even millennials, the age group once assumed to have given up on driving, are showing increased interest in piloting their own vehicles as the economy improves.

According to the National Household Travel Survey conducted by the Federal Highway Administration, millennials increased their average number of miles driven 20% from 2009 to 2017. Despite falling new car sales, the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute shows that car ownership is actually on the rise. Eighteen percent of Americans purchase a new car every two to three years, while the majority (39%) make a new car bargain every four to six years.

Americans have many reasons for loving their vehicles. Forty percent say it’s because they enjoy driving and being in their cars, according to a survey conducted by Cars.com. ReportLinker reveals that 83% of people drive daily and that half are passionate about the behind-the-wheel experience of taking on the open road. Another survey conducted by Gold Eagle determined that people even have dream cars, vehicles that they feel convey a sporty, luxurious or efficient image.

Ownership of autonomous vehicles would bring at least some liability back to the owner-occupant. For instance, owing to security concerns, all sensing and decision-making hardware related to the Audi Traffic Jam Pilot system is held onboard. With no over-air connections, software updates must be made manually through a dealer. In situations like these, what happens if an autonomous vehicle crash is tied to the driver’s failure to ensure that software was promptly updated?

Auto maintenance will also take on a new level of importance as sensitive self-driving systems will need to be maintained and adjusted to ensure proper performance. If an accident occurs due to improper vehicle maintenance, once again, the owner could be held liable.

As the U.S. moves toward autonomous car adoption, one thing becomes clear. Insurers will need to expand their product lines to include both commercial and personal lines of coverage if they are going to take part in the multibillion-dollar opportunity.

Preparing for the Autonomous Future of Insurance

Because the autonomous trend will be adopted at an uneven pace depending upon geography, socioeconomic conditions and even age groups, Deloitte predicts that the insurers that will thrive through the autonomous disruption are those with a “flexible business model and diverse product mix.” To meet consumer expectations and maintain a critical focus on customer acquisition and retention, insurers will need a multitude of products designed to protect drivers across the autonomous adoption cycle, as well as new products designed to cover the shift of liability from driver to vehicle.

Even traditional auto policies designed to protect car owners from liability will need to be redefined to cover autonomous parameters. Currently, only 25% of companies have a business model that is easily adaptable to rapid change, such as the autonomous trend.

In insurance, this lack of readiness is all the more crucial, considering the digital transformation already underway across the industry. According to PwC, 85% of insurance CEOs are concerned about the speed of technological change. Worries over how to handle legacy systems in the face of digital adoption, as well as the need to accelerate automation and prepare for the next wave of transitions, such as autonomous vehicles, are behind these concerns.

As insurers look toward the complicated future of insuring a society of self-driving automobiles, we believe that focusing on four main areas will prepare them to respond to the autonomous trend with greater speed and agility.

Make better use of data

Consumers are looking for insurers to partner on risk mitigation. To meet these expectations, insurers will need to start making better use of data stores, as well as third-party sources, to help customers identify and reduce threats to life and property. Sixty-four percent want their insurer to provide real-time notifications about roadway safety, while, on the home front, 68% would like to receive mobile alerts on the potential of fire, smoke or carbon dioxide hazards.

“Technology is changing the insurer’s role to one of a partner who can address the customer’s real goals – well beyond traditional insurance,” said Cindy De Armond, managing director, Accenture P&C core platforms lead for North America, in a blog.

Armond believes that as insurers focus more on the customer’s prevention and recovery needs, they can become the everyday insurer, integrated into the lives of their customers rather than acting only as a crisis partner. This type of relationship makes insurer-insured relationships more certain and extends longevity. For insurers and their insureds, the future is likely to be more about predicting and mitigating risk than about handling claims, so improving data capture and analytics capabilities is essential to agile operations that can easily adapt to new trends.

See also: Autonomous Vehicles: ‘The Trolley Problem’

Focus on digital Consumers want to engage with their insurer in the moment. Whether that means shopping online for coverage while watching a child’s soccer game or making a phone call to ask questions about a policy, they expect to be able to engage on their time and through their channel of choice. Insurers that develop fluid omni-channel engagement now are future-proofing their operations, preparing to survive the evolution to self-driving, when the reams of data gathered from autonomous vehicles can be used to enable on-demand auto coverage.

Vehicle occupants will one day purchase coverage on the fly, depending on the roadway conditions they encounter and whether they are traveling in autonomous mode. Forrester analyst Ellen Carney sees a fluid orchestration of data and digital technologies combining to deliver this type of experience, putting much of the power in the hands of the customer.

“On your way home, you’re going to get a quote for auto insurance,” she says. “And because your driving data could basically now be portable, you could do a reverse auction and say, ‘Okay, insurance companies, how much do you want to bid for my drive home?’” To facilitate the speed and immediacy required for these transactions, insurers will need to digitally quote, bind and issue coverage.

Seek automation

In the U.K., accident liability clearly shifts from the driver to the vehicle for level four and five autonomous automobiles. As driverless vehicles become the norm, the U.S. is likely to adopt similar legislation, requiring a fundamental shift in how risk is assessed and insurance policies are underwritten. Instead of assessing a policy on the driver’s claims history and age, insurers will need to rate risk by variables related to the software that runs the vehicle and how likely owners are to maintain autonomous cars and sensitive self-driving systems. The more complicated underwriting becomes, the more important automation in underwriting will be.

Consumers who can get into a car that drives itself will have little patience for insurers that require extensive manual work to assess their risk and return bound policy documents. Even businesses will come to expect a much faster turnaround on policies related to self-driving vehicles despite the complexity of the various coverages that will be required. In addition, on-demand coverage will require automated underwriting to respond to customer requests.

According to Lexis Nexis, only 20% of commercial carriers have automated the quoting process, and less than half are investing in underwriting automation.

Invest in platform ecosystems

McKinsey defines a platform business model as one that allows multiple participants to “connect, interact and create and exchange value,” while an ecosystem is a set of connected services that fulfill multiple needs of the user in “one integrated experience.” By definition, an insurance platform ecosystem in the age of autonomous vehicles would be a place where consumers and businesses could research and purchase the coverage they need while also picking up related ancillary services, such as apps or entertainment to make the autonomous ride more enjoyable.

Consumers are in search of ecosystem values today. According to Bain’s customer behavior and loyalty study, consumers are willing to pay higher premiums to insurers that offer ancillary services, such as home security monitoring or an automotive services app, and they are even willing to switch insurers to get time-saving benefits like these.

More important to insurers is the ability to partner with other carriers on coverage. Using a commission-based system, insurers offer policies from other carriers to consumers when they don’t have an appetite for the risk or don’t offer the coverage in house. This arrangement allows an insurer to maintain a customer relationship, while providing for their needs and price points.

See also: Autonomous Vehicles: Truly Imminent?

As the autonomous trend reaches fruition, insurers will need to have access to a wide range of coverage types to meet consumer and business needs, and not all carriers will be able or want to create the new products.

Extreme Customer Focus Prepares for the Future

Insurers can prepare for autonomous vehicle adoption by establishing an extreme customer focus, dedicated to establishing enduring loyalty as insurance needs change. Loyal customers spend 67% more over three years than new ones.

As the insurance marketplace opens up to the sale of ancillary services, gaining wallet share from loyal consumers will certainly help to boost revenues as demand for traditional products decline, but to stay competitive, insurers will need a broader mix of coverage types. While current coverages have remained largely unchanged over the decades, the coming years will see an industry in flux as insurers phase out outmoded types of coverage while phasing in new products and services.

In this environment, the platform ecosystems may be the most critical aspect of bridging the gaps. Today, they allow insurers to fulfill the needs of price-sensitive consumers while also meeting the evolving needs of their customers. Tomorrow, platform ecosystems will provide the “flexible business model and diverse product mix” that Deloitte says will be critical to success for insurers in the autonomous age of driving.

Almost all of my mediations end with agreement to a Compromise and Release. Parties often bring a partially completed Compromise & Release form, DWC-CA form 10214(c), to the mediation. That’s great. But when considerations prevent execution of a final agreement at the mediation, a Memorandum of Understanding, known as an M.O.U., can be invaluable. After working hard to come to terms, you don’t want to let the passage of time blur people’s memories or minimize their commitment. Participants should not leave the mediation without a record of their agreements. A Memorandum of Understanding memorializes the skeleton terms agreed upon at the mediation. Parties sign off at the mediation. The M.O.U. might specify a timeline or conditions. Some settlements are complicated, requiring many addenda. Unanticipated issues may have arisen and been resolved at the mediation. Parties need to return to their offices to draft the final settlement document. The M.O.U. should specify the basic terms as well as deadlines for completion of the initial settlement document, exchange of revisions, and submission to the WCAB. See also: Work Comp: Mediation or an ‘Informal’?   Some agreements are conditional, usually upon CMS approval of a Medicare Set-Aside allocation. Attorneys may address this issue by doing everything but the walk-through, including signatures, pending approval. This leaves a potentially dangerous loophole when unforeseen events occur during the waiting period. Another way to document a conditional agreement is through an M.O.U. Unlike the agreement, which sits in a file drawer, an M.O.U. can specifically address the condition, including what will happen if the condition cannot be fulfilled. For example, if CMS comes back with a higher amount, and the parties do not assent to that amount within a specified time, they can agree to return to mediation.

How emerging technologies may transform insurance rate modeling Insurance rate modeling for mass-market consumer products such as P&C, health and life relies heavily on macro risk factors, the “law of large numbers” and building pools of risk. Broadly speaking, outside of specialized lines, relatively little customer-specific data is used in developing rates. Incentives, such as “safe behavior” discounts, are used primarily to encourage good behavior and to help ensure that low-risk prospects do not feel unfairly represented by their premiums. A practical reason for limiting the process to mostly high-level analysis is that large volumes of data are both hard to collect and to analyze on a discrete level. But emerging technologies are starting to remove some of these limitations, potentially creating ways to optimize risk portfolios in consumer-oriented insurance products. I have written several articles now talking about the potential for the Internet of Things (IoT) in loss prevention and claims facilitation. While much of my focus has been on technologies related to smart homes, arguably more progress has been made in auto telematics and wearables. Data on driving behaviors and personal biometrics of an extraordinary number of people are now being tracked in real time. These data sets may be used to do more than determine the fastest route to work or calculate the remaining target steps you need to take in a day – the data may be a treasure trove of environmental and behavioral information for insurers. Similarly, smart home devices such as connected smoke alarms and leak sensors, along with home security systems, wireless door locks, etc. are beginning to paint a picture of the risk profile in the home at a level never seen before. But the technology advancements do not stop at the increase in data availability; much of the emerging opportunity has to do with new computing models and “the cloud.” Not long ago, the resources needed to model to an individual rating outweighed the value. But we are now in a world where additional computing resources can be launched with the simple click of a button and disparate databases can easily be joined together for comparison. In other words, the discrete data now exists, and the computing power needed to analyze on an individual level is finally within reach. See also: How Tech Is Eating the Insurance World   Tiptoeing in Recognizing that technology may enable improvement on both sides of the risk pool by potentially better identifying both low- and high-risk candidates, insurers are beginning to evaluate options to model risk on a more discrete level. This enhanced lens on data may be one of the most interesting opportunities in the insurance market to-date. The availability of this data, and the associated computing power to process it, is arguably one of the core pillars of the insurtech revolution – but this discussion is for another article. In the meantime, we are seeing early tests toward enhanced data sets in four key markets: health, life, auto and home. 1) Health and Life – Early tests around wearables conducted by major health and life players seemed more to be assessments around consumer comfort with insurers potentially getting a peak into your lifestyle. For example, there have been several examples of fitness trackers given away as affinity products to members of a plan. Initially, there was broad skepticism that consumers would have interest, recognizing that insurers were testing the waters around one-day having access to more detailed lifestyle data. However, early sentiment proved positive, and the market is now seeing the use of individual diagnostic data expanding in the role of premium calculations. Automated collection of this data is not hard to imagine. 2) Auto – Many auto insurers are exploring real-time driving data analysis along with innovative safe driver rates through OBD data collection – with some starting to require it for certain program participation. Consumers, eager to lower their insurance costs, seem to be more than willing to share how fast they drive or how hard they turn when less expensive rates are in play. 3) Home – It’s easy to see how early wins in health, life and auto may translate into the homeowners market. Already, new smart home rates are entering the market, and in these cases smart home products may “self-verify” their presence, removing doubt of whether a customer truly has safety devices installed in the home. As various IoT devices in the home begin to communicate with one another, the insurer has lots of new data that can be used to adjust risk down to a specific premise. A Virtuous Circle? In today’s world of rating, there is an imbalance of information that puts insurers at a disadvantage with insureds. Insureds must represent the value of their property, the current state of the property, the cause of loss when it happens, etc. Generally forced to assume that all statements are true, insurers must price uncertainty into the risk. But moving toward greater data transparency may very well be a win-win for both the insurer and the insured. Low-risk customers may be offered rates more in line with their risk profile. High-risk customers may receive higher premiums, but they may also have clear visibility into the factors affecting their rates and potential corrective actions. Insurers may have less volatility in their portfolio with a better understanding of where the losses may occur. Perhaps this increased data availability will result in lower rates for insureds at maintained or even improved margins for insurers. But how does the overall market respond with more symmetrical information and greater transparency? More importantly, how do consumers respond when they realize the insurer now knows more specific details about them? What if the rating bar moved from basic personal information, like credit score and claims history, to allowing consumers to opt in for very granular inputs such as: how many steps you took today; whether you sped to work; whether you activated your alarm system before leaving your home? Putting aside the regulatory restrictions, the privacy concerns and the general creepiness of this concept, would consumers be willing to give insurers this very personal data in return for big discounts? If “yes,” would it further ensure good behavior of those that did opt in? Could a “positive self-selection” of sorts start to occur? In consideration of these potential impacts, there are three economic phenomena that insurers model into rates that may be affected: 1) Adverse selection – People who most need insurance are most likely to buy it, and people less likely to have loss will opt out – e.g., older folks may opt for more health insurance, or safer drivers may choose less coverage than their daredevil counterparts. The bias of high-risk consumers to buy coverage over low-risk consumers results in higher loss ratios and raises premiums of those who participate. But if rates were lowered by removing the risk padding, would lower-risk customers be motivated to participate? Would the risk/reward ratio reach a point where self-insurers feel like the better bet is to participate with the marketplace? 2) Morale hazard – There is risk that insurers bear that insureds, knowing that they have insurance, will be lazy about protecting their belongings. Why lock your doors if insurance would cover a theft? But when behaviors can be monitored, do consumers act differently? Would “safe” people open up data on their personal lives in return for discounts? Perhaps let the insurer know how many nights a week the alarm is armed or the doors are locked for a lowest-rate option? 3) Moral hazard – This phenomena is when insureds take on riskier behavior when coverage is obtained. In other words, a driver who chooses to increase coverage then goes on to take greater driving risks, again, rationalizing the change in behavior as they are “paying for coverage.” Again it’s worth contemplating if behaviors would change by exposing behavioral data. See also: Embrace Tech Before It Replaces You   Arguably, through increased transparency, a virtuous circle may be created where better information leads to lower rates. Lower rates drive lower-risk candidates into the market; as more lower-risk candidate participate, losses are lessened, which further drives down rates. Additionally, the lowest-risk candidates are the most likely to participate in high-transparency markets, compounding the loss reduction and further driving down rates. Even better, bad actors who know they may not be able to change their behaviors may opt out. I recognize I am ignoring huge hurdles for this type of transparency: regulatory constraints, privacy issues, consumer interest, etc., but I do feel strongly that early entrants into these types of products may see very interesting results. Basically, better information becomes the great equalizer… Conclusion New, high-resolution data sets along with the computing power needed to make them useful are finally here. While having this added information doesn’t necessarily serve as the silver bullet to perfect rate modeling, it certainly offers insurers an opportunity to refine their analysis and reduce the guesswork. Obviously, the effort to operationalize these new data sets may be significant, and, as noted above, there are certainly consumer and regulatory concerns as this highly personal data is used, but the potential is certainly compelling to consider. At the least, now is the time to start considering where these data sets would be useful as the industry contemplates a move toward highly individualized risk opportunities.

Employers need to re-evaluate their relationship with the military and the profound disconnect that exists between the lip service of “Thank you for your service” and the tangible, material benefits we give to our armed forces and veterans. The reception and perception that veterans often receive by the civilian population is in need of a total overhaul. A Veteran’s Perspective: The Frustrations of Being Valued by Civilian Workforce Hearing gratitude for one’s service does make an impact and has been special to me personally, but I would have much more preferred the chance to show what I could do with my skills in the workplace. I remember when I first separated, I spent most of my days job searching and tailoring my resumes to fit each job description precisely. I had received a few calls back but nothing that led to an interview or job offer. After about three to four months of the same routine, I found myself questioning our decision to separate from the military. My experience helped me land a job, but I found it frustrating that my training in the Air Force was considered null at my new place of employment. Veterans with just four or five years of service are almost guaranteed to have some sort of management/supervisory role when they stay in the military, so starting out at entry level all over again in a civilian job is also somewhat difficult. Some employers do not want to hire veterans for fear they might have PTSD or other performance-limiting conditions. This remarkable stigma exists and is actually a form of discrimination. The prejudice persists even though service members are expertly trained and capable of remarkable problem-solving, teamwork and leadership. Part of the difficulty veterans face is that the civilian work culture is often far different than the one in which they thrived, and often the level of discipline and performance is below their expectations. Whether it’s the Marines, Navy, Army, Air Force or the Coast Guard, veterans count themselves as being part of something bigger than themselves. Assimilating to a new standard becomes all the more difficult when moving into a new field. One veteran shared, “My co-worker showed up 20 minutes late with no consequence. If we were in the service, we would have beat his ass.” Veterans are accustomed to being pushed to excellence, to the boundaries of their abilities to serve an important calling. In the right motivating environment, veterans will bring this level of performance to the workplace. From the initial training and throughout their career, our service members are repeatedly tested to:

• Work together as a team to complete a mission
• Implement efficient procedures
• Quickly overcome obstacles
• Have one another’s back

These skills and many more and the mindset of service for the greater good can benefit an employer in countless ways. Switching From One Battlefield to Another When our warriors move out of military life, those who deployed are sometimes moving from one battlefield to another – that being the battlefield of the mind. For those who return with images and experiences of war, their minds may ruminate on these experiences as they try to process what they experienced. Post-traumatic stress is an understandable reaction to these extreme conditions, though civilians may not have knowledge or awareness of symptoms, and may unfortunately exercise bias against the veteran unknowingly. For others, the battlefield of the mind comes from feeling isolated and misunderstood at home. One minute they are spending 24-7 in a tightly knit unit, the next minute they are surrounded by family and friends who now feel like strangers. Many don’t feel comfortable talking about their military experiences with civilians for fear of being judged. While veterans were well-trained for one battlefield, the military does not adequately train them to battle the demons of depression, anxiety, addiction and trauma. From a mental health perspective, transition inoculation is critical to thwarting the potential negative outcomes of this life change. See also: How to Help Veterans on Mental Health   We provide the greatest military training to our armed services; they are the undisputed elite military fighting force in the world. But what kind of training do we provide for re-entry into to civilian life? The preparation and training they receive is in no way comparable to the pre-deployment preparation, especially in terms of mental health. . A Veteran’s Perspective: Honoring the Warrior in Transition The loss of identity is a big deal in transition, along with camaraderie and cohesion. We think about “Who I was, who I am now, who I am going to be.” We have all these warriors coming back, and we need to find ways to honor them because they are always going to be warriors. The Transition Assistance Program does tremendously important work, and provides critical resources and access to post-service opportunities. However, many veterans have described the process as a one-size-fits-all, death-by-Powerpoint experience. They liken the process of moving out of service as something akin to being released from prison. We can do better. One veteran shared that when he received his benefits manual, it was hundreds of pages thick. He became so frustrated in trying to read through it that he literally burned it. A Veteran’s Perspective: Help Us Translate Our Warrior Skills to the Workforce What would be most helpful would be if organizations on the outside could assist veterans with translating the job skills and experience learned in the service to a language more consistent with that of the civilian workforce. One positive development is Google’s new “Jobs for Veterans” search capability where services members are able to enter their military job codes to identify civilian positions that matched their skills and abilities. This is a step in the right direction. There are many pathways veterans can lead post-service; let’s create the means and conditions where their futures follow the pathway very best for them. Often what is most helpful to veterans in transition is a peer who’s been there. Peers who’ve moved successfully in to new careers can help others behind them find their path. The continuing connection of these peers can offer troubleshooting and moral support when the job prospects are not forthcoming. Veterans can guide one another to employers who are veteran-friendly to help make sure the best and brightest job candidates are well taken care of. A Veteran’s Perspective: Employee Support Group for Veterans It would be so helpful to offer an employee veterans support group. Veterans isolate themselves because they feel others they work with do not understand their experience. Allowing veterans to meet at work will provide a safe environment for them to share current struggles in adapting as well as frustrations with communicating with their fellow civilian coworkers. Imagine being a new employee coming straight out of the military and being able to connect with other veterans at the workplace that have shared similar experiences in serving as well as the difficulties of moving into a new civilian job. Preparing Employers for What to Expect When veterans return home, some reintegrate quickly, putting their training and discipline toward becoming successful entrepreneurs or seamlessly moving to a parallel career path. Others need more help with converting their unique strengths into job opportunities best-suited for them. Often employers need coaching on what a veteran employee can do. Here’s a brief narrative: A good friend of mine, Charlie Shelby, a retired Army captain, shared his experience of trying to find post-service employment with a well-known technology company: Talent rep: “So, Mr. Selby, what did you do while in the military?” Charlie: “I worked in artillery.” Talent rep: “What does one do when they work in artillery?” Charlie: “Well, you blow stuff up.” Talent rep: “Well, we here at [well-known technology company] don’t blow things up. Thank you for your service. Have a nice day.” Charlie did not get the job. Sadly, this experience is not uncommon. A colleague from a job-sourcing company shared that “recruiters see a veteran’s resume and say ‘Oh, you have experience using a firearm; your job opportunities are a security guard or a police officer.’” This limited thinking needs to be turned on its head. How are we going to sustain enrollment in the armed forces, if returning veterans are not treated properly? How are they going to justify encouraging their children to join if they themselves are not receiving the benefits, entitlements and compassion they deserve? We grow accustomed and take for granted the benefits their continued sacrifice provides. All of us move through our day-to-day lives with relative ease and safety due to the efforts of armed service members. They protect our freedoms by facing threats to our safety abroad, and, yet, they face tremendous threats to their safety at home. Work Is Good for Veterans Meaningful work gives veterans a new mission to focus on. While the exact purpose may shift from protecting our country to something new, the discipline and teamwork needed to reach audacious goals is familiar. Veterans’ sense of duty to a larger cause can help them live through the challenges they may experience like post-traumatic stress or other mental health conditions. Veterans need to be needed. The structure of needing to get moving each day can also help veterans’ well-being. A routine in the day of exercising brain and body helps ward off emotional and physical pain. This ebb and flow of work and rest is the rhythm that humans are meant to exist within. Too much idleness is not good for the soul. When work challenges veterans in a good way, they experience “eustress” — the positive side of the stress continuum that helps us continue to grow and learn. See also: New Approach to Mental Health  Finally, working helps veterans establish a sense of community and can offer social support. Belonging is central to mental resilience. When veterans find workmates who help them evolve into their best selves, they thrive. A sense of camaraderie is formed that transcends the immediate task at hand. Building a new part of an identity post military service that extends the self into new self-descriptors beyond “former military” is a critical step in transition success. Together this enhanced self-concept combined with new, supportive tribe increases self-esteem and builds a safety net around veterans, so when times get tough, they have something to keep them standing strong. What to Do if You Are Worried about a Veteran Employee Treat them like any other employees. Don’t assume that because they served in the military they have PTSD, as many are not deployed and many do not see combat. Do assume that they come with a high level of resilience and self-reliance, so they may not readily disclose if they are experiencing hardship. You may need to ask, reassure, refer and follow up. 1. Ask: All employees should have regular mental health check-ups. Workplaces can participate in national screening days for depression, anxiety and alcohol abuse. If a supervisor or other employee is concerned they should ask directly, “Hey, you don’t seem like yourself lately. Are you okay?” 2. Reassure: Employers can create a culture of caring for all employees by reassuring them that “they have their back” if they ever are facing a mental health challenge. 3. Refer: Employers seeking to support veterans should be aware of both veteran and non-veteran mental health services, including:

• Veteran Crisis Line — 24/7 crisis counseling for military, veterans and families.
• Make the Connection — Make the Connection is a free resource with veterans, military families and clinicians who can connect veterans with care for fulfilling, healthy lives.
• Real Warriors — The Real Warriors Campaign is a multimedia public education campaign designed to promote service members' engagement with psychological health treatment. The campaign website offers access to 24/7 live chat, message boards and more.
• Vets4Warriors 855-838-8255 is a 24/7 confidential peer support network for veteran and military communities.
• Treatment Works for Vets — A new website that offers evidence-based treatment for sleep and mood issues that veterans often face.
• Give an Hour — Give an Hour is dedicated to meeting the mental health needs of military personnel, veterans, their families and communities affected by the post-9/11 conflicts through counseling and public education.

Non-veteran mental health resources (like most employee assistance programs) are not usually familiar with military-specific stressers like moral injury, traumatic brain injury, military sexual trauma and parenting/relationships challenges during deployment. Employers might brief non-veteran-specific providers with information on these challenges to help ensure that veterans’ experiences are better understood. 4. Follow up: Once support has been offered, following up is advised. Sometimes referrals don’t work out. Sometimes it’s just nice to know that someone cares. You can say, “I am not sure what is happening for you right now. I just wanted to let you know that I hope I can be that person you feel like you can talk to when things get overwhelming. I know you’d do the same for me.” While it can be challenging to look at issues of distress and despair among our veterans head-on, it is thrilling to consider a future world where our society recognizes and demonstrates our appreciation for their service in a meaningful and material way. A job and career tailored for veterans and their individual skills and abilities allows them every chance for a thriving post-military life. This article was written by Sally Spencer-Thomas, David Maron and Jason Field.

Recently, Insurance Thought Leadership.com ran an article by editor Paul Carroll called “The Future of Mobility Takes a Surprise Turn.” It’s about the emergence in urban, particularly downtown, areas of “micromobility,” aka “scooter sharing.” Some vendors are making electric scooters available, one being a startup called Bird, which reportedly has raised capital at a valuation of $2 BILLION. Another, Lime, has a valuation in excess of $1 billion. Both Uber and Lyft are experimenting with scooters. I live in the Nashville, TN, area, and the (mis)use of these scooters has been a high-profile news story. Visiting my son yesterday, I was amazed by the number of scooters flying by on sidewalks and streets; they created the appearance of a moving obstacle course. Paul’s article cites a Washington Post article about the number of people who are ending up in hospital emergency rooms as a result of scooter accidents, both operators and victims. That is almost certainly going to increase, creating an emergency and significant risk that must be managed. One way to manage risk is insurance. So, what are the insurance implications? First of all, I have no idea what liability insurance these vendors provide, if any, for themselves or operators. In this article, I’m addressing the operators’ and victims' own P&C insurance policies. Because I can’t cite the precise language of every P&C policy in the marketplace, my observations will necessarily be generalized and, I hope, spur inquiries by readers into what liability coverage, if any, is provided by the policies they sell. See also: Will Technology Kill Auto Insurance?   Personal Auto Policies Few, if any, PAPs would provide liability coverage for vehicles not specifically designed for use on public roads. Many policies expressly limit coverage to motor vehicles of the private passenger, pickup or van variety. Medical payments, uninsured/underinsured motorists and no-fault coverages MIGHT apply to someone struck by a vehicle designed for use on public roads, but that depends on the UM/UIM and no-fault statutes or case law in each state. Homeowners Policies Homeowners policies vary significantly in how they treat motor vehicles, but it is probably safe to generalize that most of them will not provide coverage for vehicles that do not service a residence, are not designed to assist the handicapped or otherwise are used off an insured location. In addition, most HO policies have fairly stringent business use exclusions, and it appears that these scooters are sometimes used for business travel. Business Auto Policies While the eligibility requirements of most BAPs are not as restrictive as PAPs, an unlicensed motorized scooter that is not subject to motor vehicle laws could conceivably meet the definition of “mobile equipment,” something that sends us a CGL policy…. Commercial General Liability Policies Motor vehicles not subject to MV laws that are “designed for use principally off public roads” may qualify as “mobile equipment” and may, therefore, be covered under CGL policies. The $64,000 question is whether these vehicles are designed for use off public roads, regardless of how they are operated. See also: The Need to Educate on General Liability Needless to say, we have more questions than answers. Do the policies you sell cover these exposures? Are your customers asking about this?

To get a sense of which companies are innovating well, and which aren't, ITL conducted a major study with our friends at The Institutes, and ITL Chief Innovation Officer Guy Fraker lays out the findings in the second part of his three-part series on innovation. He reports that a growing number of insurers, especially the larger ones, have cleared the first hurdle: They see the need for innovation and have made it a priority. But he also spots problems, based on the survey, based on his extensive consulting work and based on the more than 1,000 hours of interviews that we conducted with executives.

The problems lie on the people side. Too few companies have appointed the sort of small, centralized team that needs to drive innovation. Vanishingly few seem to have figured out how to draw on the resources available to them across the breadth of their operations and may have put themselves in a vicious circle. Companies don't expect their people to be innovative and don't offer rewards for innovation, so people don't offer innovative ideas, which leads their bosses not to trust their ability, which....

As usual, Guy also busts some myths about innovation. Two struck me as especially important:

• The key to innovation isn't, in fact, to think outside the box. It's to think inside the right box, based on your customers, your employers, your capabilities. In fact, constraints inspire innovation and help ensure that ideas will be the kind you can take to market at scale.
• The key to innovation also isn't technology. Yes, AI, blockchain et al. are impossibly cool, and, yes, they will be involved in some breakthroughs, but technology has to serve the innovative idea, not lead the thinking.

I encourage you to read the whole piece. I think you'll get a lot out of it.

Have a great week.

Paul Carroll
Editor-in-Chief

Earthquakes are among the most devastating and economically destructive natural disasters, with the 1994 Northridge earthquake still ranking as the fifth-costliest disaster in U.S. history. Yet unlike other common perils such as floods, fires and windstorms, the overwhelming majority of earthquake risk in the U.S. is completely uninsured. Even in California, the most earthquake-exposed state in the union, only about 13% of residences maintain coverage for earthquake damage, according to the most recent survey completed by the state insurance department. The primary cause of this low percentage is that, unlike those other risks, earthquake coverage is not required to secure the collateral of mortgages owned or guaranteed by the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) known as Fannie Mae (the Federal National Mortgage Association), which accounts for 21% of the $14.99 trillion U.S. mortgage debt outstanding. and Freddie Mac (the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation), which accounts for 12%. This exposure should be of concern to policymakers. Ten years ago this month, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac both were taken into conservatorship by their regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), and were granted a $187 billion capital injection from the U.S. Treasury Department. While each of the GSEs has subsequently repaid its debt to the government, including a 10% return on investment, the Treasury continues to provide financial support through senior preferred stock purchase agreements. Currently, the Treasury owns $200 billion of the GSEs’ senior preferred stock. See also: Spreading Damage From Wildfires   Should a major earthquake strike in the U.S.—as is inevitable—Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac both would see the destruction of potentially billions of dollars in structures that serve as collateral for their mortgage portfolios and mortgage guarantees. In addition to requiring direct Treasury outlays to the GSEs, the low takeup rate of earthquake insurance also means that taxpayers almost certainly would be asked to shoulder a disproportionate amount of disaster recovery costs through state and federal disaster aid. The FHFA acknowledges that it does not currently track the GSEs’ exposure to uninsured earthquake risk. This paper seeks to quantify the size of that uninsured liability and to propose a means to transfer these implicit taxpayer guarantees to the private sector. Our data analysis comprises three components:

• Using seismic maps published by the U.S. Geological Survey, we identify 249 counties across 21 states that are substantially exposed to the largest earthquake risks.
• Using property-level databases published by the FHFA, we find that, as of 2016, the GSEs held $355.71 billion of unpaid principal for mortgages in those 249 counties, including $210.1 billion held by Fannie Mae and $145.61 billion held by Freddie Mac.
• Making certain base assumptions about the proportion of principal that is attributable to structural value and regional surveys of earthquake insurance takeup, we estimate the total value of uninsured earthquake-exposed collateral held by the GSEs, as of 2016, is $204.68 billion.

Finally, we propose that Congress move immediately to require a report on risk transfer by the GSEs. Building on their recent credit risk transfer programs, we believe Fannie and Freddie should be required by the FHFA to transfer at least a portion of their earthquake exposure to the private market through a combination of traditional reinsurance transactions and catastrophe bond securitizations. See also: 5 Tips for Avoiding Personal Injury Claims   To finance such transactions, the GSEs should require mortgage originators to assess an appropriate credit charge to take on mortgages in earthquake-prone regions. To provide incentives for property owners, that charge could be waived for properties that demonstrate continuous earthquake coverage or significant investment in seismic retrofitting mitigation. You can find the full paper here.

One noticeable change in the insurance industry over the past 20 years has been the requirement for providers to deal with foreign-language documents in both claims handling and marketing. It makes good business sense to communicate effectively with customers and potential customers whose native language might not be a mainstream one, and it is a feature of the beginning of the 21st century that few nations are now uniformly monolingual. Insurance translation services – the options Most insurance providers opt for a professional translation agency that specializes in insurance. The translation is expected to replicate the accuracy and thoroughness of the original communication. Insurance translators have often worked within the insurance industry themselves or have a good grounding in insurance terminology or a certain field of it, such as medical or legal documents. Insurance providers can basically choose between working with individual translators, translation agencies with human project managers or automated translation job portals. Automated portals have been immensely popular for a few years now. In recent years, however, we have experienced a regression, with abandonment of such automated providers. Here’s why: Translating communication materials Insurance providers have learned that there is good business to be had in adapting their insurance products and the way they communicate information about their products with a new cohort of customers. But insurance, whether it is household insurance, automotive insurance, life insurance or any other insurance service, is a highly specialized industry, and communicating with clients requires specific and precise terminology. It can be hard enough for those whose native language is the same as that of the insurance provider to understand the language of insurance, but the translation must let a customer choose the right plan, understand the terms and conditions of that plan (including the all-important “small print”) and make a claim if they need to do so. See also: 3 Keys to Success for Automation  Working with an individual translator is often not feasible due to the scope of the work, and automated portals are tricky because providers cannot request a specific translator, which creates serious issues with consistency and continuity. The ideal middle way is the human-centered translation agency that can organize a panel of quality translators who collaborate and ensure consistency over time. Even one or two translators leaving does not jeopardize quality and turnaround times, as the translators can easily be replaced within the team. Translating claims-related documents Translation portals often offer no human-to-human interaction. Questions about a translation job either cannot be asked or are subject to a substantial time lag. Smaller translation providers, on the other hand, offer “old-fashioned” email-based customer service, which is often more desirable for insurance provider employees as they have a designated human contact point who can update them on the progress of a project if needed. Time-critical situations that involve the transport of injured clients or even the urgent repatriation of a dead body are common in this field. Support staff are often under a lot of pressure, and direct communication with a translation project manager can help them a lot. A realistic estimation of the turnaround time of a translation is, after all, a lot more helpful than an automatically calculated one that may or may not be realistic. Using an individual sole-operator translator for claims materials is not feasible, as providers ideally want 24/7 or at least 20/7 availability, something easily achieved by a well-managed mid-sized agency but not by an individual. The billing issue Insurance providers often have very specific billing requirements. This can include something as simple as the provision of a case or policy number on an invoice, or the supplier’s ability to upload invoices to a designated supplier portal. Such specific workflows are not supported by large translation portals, where users may be able to download invoices but there’s no guarantee that they comply with legislative requirements or special workflows. Smaller providers, on the other hand, can adjust their invoicing procedures with relative ease. See also: Here Comes Robotic Process Automation   A word about machine translation Although fully automated translation technology is still years or decades away from being used without the need for human input, the use of what is called “semi-automated technology” is certainly now standard. This technology helps to automate and speed up parcels of text that are routine and repetitious. It can build and incorporate glossaries and style guides that streamline translation and provide consistency from one project to another and between translators who may be working as a team on the same project. Good insurance translators and insurance translation agencies, however, always professionally edit and proofread all their translation output before submitting it back to their insurance provider client. Outlook The industry has learned to answer the growing needs of customers who may speak a variety of languages by dealing with claims-related documents in foreign languages. This has resulted in the requirement for an efficient and accurate industry-specific translation service. It also makes the choice of professional insurance translators an important one. It’s either a sole practitioner, a human agency or an automated portal. At least for the time being, humans seem to have won the race.

Beware of those who seek to revise history by erasing or rewriting it altogether. This rule applies to the study of history, as well as the history of a subject such as consumer or construction safety. Indeed, for all the safety features that are now standard features in automobiles, from airbags and anti-lock brakes to seatbelts and side impact beams: If we look at how much safer it is drive, it is even more shocking to learn the history of resistance by car manufacturers to the most basic forms of safety. The same is true within the construction industry, not because of opposition by workers, but because of challenges by insurers; which is to say that, just because a new type of technology increases safety—just because cameras allow a crane operator to see an entire job site—does not mean insurers want to champion the power of sight. This is not an indictment against insurers, but a reminder that change is a matter of small steps rather than a series of giant leaps. It is a matter of education and engagement by the advocates of change, of attendance at seminars large and small, of speaking to convention-goers and going to conferences of regional influence and national importance, of listening, always, and never failing to answer questions. See also: Bridging Health and Productivity at Work   Take Chris Machut of Netarus, whose company develops innovative solutions for overhead cranes, tugboats and construction sites. I mention his name, and commend him for having made a name for himself regarding safety, because too many otherwise avoidable crane accidents happen—like the one on the 17th anniversary of 9/11, at the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center in New York City—in which the inability to see what is necessary puts workers and pedestrians at an unnecessarily high degree of risk. While that accident was not deadly, it was nonetheless responsible for traffic delays and gridlock along the West Side Highway. It was also a reminder that a few degrees separate the safe installation of a steel beam and its collapse against a crane, costing lives and the livelihoods of workers. How, then, can insurers get behind a movement, whose members want to avert danger and stay ahead of possible threats? In so many words: Pay attention. Pay attention, not to perceived problems but to certified opportunities to improve safety. Pay attention to technology that expands visibility and enhances accountability. Pay attention to the agents of change, be they vendors or those who want to better protect a venue, so you can lower costs and boost confidence with current and prospective clients. See also: Agents Must Become ‘Discussion Partners’   Above all, do not mistake an asset for a liability. Not when the technology that ensures safety deserves support from insurers. Not when we can save lives by acting together. Not when the consequence of inaction is a burden we cannot bear and a hardship we cannot meet, based on a pledge we cannot keep. Let us open our eyes to safety.