An Overview of VC Investment in Insurtech
Between Series B and Series D funding, $2 billion to $3 billion is being directed to insurance startups annually -- and the amounts will keep growing.
Between Series B and Series D funding, $2 billion to $3 billion is being directed to insurance startups annually -- and the amounts will keep growing.
Get Involved
Our authors are what set Insurance Thought Leadership apart.
|
Partner with us
We’d love to talk to you about how we can improve your marketing ROI.
|
Robin Roberson is the managing director of North America for Claim Central, a pioneer in claims fulfillment technology with an open two-sided ecosystem. As previous CEO and co-founder of WeGoLook, she grew the business to over 45,000 global independent contractors.
Just as the number of animal phyla exploded during what scientists call the Cambrian period, the number of insurtechs is accelerating at an extraordinary pace.
We have reached a Cambrian moment in insurance. Just as the number of animal phyla exploded during what scientists call the Cambrian period, the number of insurtechs is accelerating at an extraordinary pace, and there are no signs of slowing.
Just look at what the carriers, alone, are doing. A KPMG survey of 200 insurance executives found that 50 reported already having corporate venture capital units. Half of those units had at least $250 million to invest, and several had more than $1 billion. Beyond those 25% who reported having a VC unit, a further 37% of the respondents said a unit was being set up. That's a boatload of cash being directed at opportunities in insurtech.
A search of news just in the hours before I wrote this found that Zurich Insurance Group, the Admiral Group, Allianz, Munich Re and Swiss Re have formed partnerships with U.K. accelerator Startupbootcamp InsurTech, as has XL Catlin. Meanwhile, Aflac announced a $100 million fund to invest in insurtech over three years.
The fact that the industry has hit its Cambrian moment is a monumentally hopeful sign for all of us who believe that insurance needs to be disrupted, but this only puts us in what I see as the second of five stages of innovation. Based on my 30 years of following innovation as it has turned numerous industries on their heads—beginning with what personal computers did to IBM and the rest of the computer industry when I covered it for the Wall Street Journal in the 1980s and early 1990s—I believe that we're now past the denial phase but still need to go through three more phases, after this Cambrian one.
And the next stage will likely be painful. It's the winnowing phase, when we learn once again that nine out of 10 startups fail and realize that many of these huge investments will be for naught. (The final two phases are: "scaling up" the startups that succeed and then "lather, rinse, repeat"—to make sure the innovation process continues.)
So, be careful. We're making real progress, and it's natural to be enthusiastic. That's the way the Cambrian phase always seems to work. But not every tree grows to the sky.
And let us know if we can help. We've assembled what I believe to be the best platform for evaluating insurtechs. We have nearly 950 companies in our data base, and many have already filled out detailed questionnaires that provide real insight into how they will fare. We also have developed great tools that allow for sophisticated searches by part of the value chain being addressed, by technology, by geography, etc. We even have a dating-site-like capability that will let you establish criteria for a match and be notified when an insurtech matches your criteria. You can check out our subscription-based service at the Innovator's Edge site, or contact us at info@insurancethoughtleadership.com for a demo.
Cheers,
Paul Carroll,
Editor-in-Chief
Get Involved
Our authors are what set Insurance Thought Leadership apart.
|
Partner with us
We’d love to talk to you about how we can improve your marketing ROI.
|
Paul Carroll is the editor-in-chief of Insurance Thought Leadership.
He is also co-author of A Brief History of a Perfect Future: Inventing the Future We Can Proudly Leave Our Kids by 2050 and Billion Dollar Lessons: What You Can Learn From the Most Inexcusable Business Failures of the Last 25 Years and the author of a best-seller on IBM, published in 1993.
Carroll spent 17 years at the Wall Street Journal as an editor and reporter; he was nominated twice for the Pulitzer Prize. He later was a finalist for a National Magazine Award.
Small and medium-sized insurance companies should start to track advances and consider partnering with insurtechs.
Get Involved
Our authors are what set Insurance Thought Leadership apart.
|
Partner with us
We’d love to talk to you about how we can improve your marketing ROI.
|
Kaenan Hertz is a professional in the areas of blockchain, telematics, wearables, analytics, artificial intelligence (AI) and insurtech. He has played a key role in innovating at many startups and established carriers. Most recently, he was practice lead for innovation, fintech and strategic insights at EY.
Because SMBs often lag behind larger companies in defensive measures, they’re more susceptible to litigation on charges of negligence.
Get Involved
Our authors are what set Insurance Thought Leadership apart.
|
Partner with us
We’d love to talk to you about how we can improve your marketing ROI.
|
Byron Acohido is a business journalist who has been writing about cybersecurity and privacy since 2004, and currently blogs at LastWatchdog.com.
Commissioner Doug Ommen: "We may not always agree with insurers, but we are willing to talk about it."
Get Involved
Our authors are what set Insurance Thought Leadership apart.
|
Partner with us
We’d love to talk to you about how we can improve your marketing ROI.
|
Paul Carroll is the editor-in-chief of Insurance Thought Leadership.
He is also co-author of A Brief History of a Perfect Future: Inventing the Future We Can Proudly Leave Our Kids by 2050 and Billion Dollar Lessons: What You Can Learn From the Most Inexcusable Business Failures of the Last 25 Years and the author of a best-seller on IBM, published in 1993.
Carroll spent 17 years at the Wall Street Journal as an editor and reporter; he was nominated twice for the Pulitzer Prize. He later was a finalist for a National Magazine Award.
Chatbots are still in their early stages, but it is hard not to see their game-changing potential in the insurance space.
Once I am here, I find that I am woefully unprepared to carry on. What is basic sum insured? Pre-hospitalization? Post-hospitalization? Convalescence benefit? Ideally, I would have known what all these terms meant before I started searching for insurance, but I didn't.
Insurance providers such as HDFC Ergo know that many people don't understand these terms and provide more information. In the picture above, clicking on the little circled “i’s” next to each plan feature reveals further information. This is helpful — but only to a point. If I expand too many boxes, the screen starts to look like a jumble of words.
At this point, I would do what all people do best: procrastinate. I would return to Facebook, YouTube, Snapchat or Instagram and indulge myself in the endless stream of instant gratification I can get by simply picking up my phone or opening a new tab.
Suffice it to say that websites can only take you so far. Too much text clutters the user interface (UI) and makes the experience unpleasant. Too little text, and the user is too uninformed to make a decision.
See also: How Chatbots Change Open Enrollment
Consequently, insurance providers add the option for real human interaction in the form of instant call-backs and live chats.
Through these media, an insurance broker could answer all the questions a potential customer has and tell him exactly what he should or shouldn’t buy. The customer doesn’t need to do any digging or reading on his own.
However, this, too, is not a perfect solution.
Hiring real people is not scalable.
They need to be clothed, fed and given days off.
If you are a multinational insurance company, you can throw money at these problems and minimize the inconvenience. If you are a smaller company, though, this is not an option. You might as well say goodbye to on-the-fence customers and focus on the informed ones.
But what if there was a solution?
What if you could have human interaction without the cost? Or could inform users without human interaction?
This is the promise of chatbots.
Chatbots make conveying information easier than in traditional media. They take a daunting and impersonal process like reading up on insurance plans and turn it into a simple conversation.
Imagine if all those uninformed leads could be funneled into a familiar WhatsApp-like interface, where a piece of software living on Amazon’s servers personally answered all queries as if it were a human. Chatbots interact with potential clients as a real human would to collect basic information about a person's level of knowledge and stage in the buying process. Thus, when a human does eventually get in touch with each potential client, that human doesn't need to waste time figuring out what the client knows and can begin helping immediately.
See also: 4 Hot Spots for Innovation in Insurance
Here is an example of how Securenow, an insurance brokerage company, uses chatbots to help customers.
And this is how you can even showcase the best-suited insurance plans over a chatbot.
Chatbots are still in their early stages, but it is hard not to see their game-changing potential in the insurance space. In an industry where information is important — if not necessary — in making purchasing decisions, chatbots have the potential to make the buying process easier for all parties involved.
Get Involved
Our authors are what set Insurance Thought Leadership apart.
|
Partner with us
We’d love to talk to you about how we can improve your marketing ROI.
|
Ish Jinal is founder of Tars, a technology platform that enables businesses and brands to build conversational bots.
Given that the American Health Care Act may crash and burn, it's time to start thinking about what could come next.
Get Involved
Our authors are what set Insurance Thought Leadership apart.
|
Partner with us
We’d love to talk to you about how we can improve your marketing ROI.
|
"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it myself.” — Winston Churchill
When it comes to large-scale innovation, my experience is that history will indeed be kinder if aspiring innovators take the time to write it themselves—but before it actually unfolds, not after.
Every ambitious strategy has multiple dimensions and depends on complex interactions between a host of internal and external factors. Success requires achieving clarity and getting everyone on the same page for the challenging transition to new business and operational models. The best mechanism for doing that is one I have used often, to powerful effect. I call it a “future history.”
Future histories fulfill our human need for narratives. As much as we like to think of ourselves as modern beings, we still have a lot in common with our earliest ancestors gathered around a fire outside a cave. We need stories to crystallize and internalize abstract concepts and plans. We need shared stories to unite us, and guide us toward a collective future. Future histories provide that story for large organizations.
See also: What Is the Right Innovation Process?
The CEO of a major financial services company occasionally still reads to internal audiences parts of the future histories that I helped him and his management team write in early 2011. He says they helped him get his team focused on the right opportunities. As of this writing, his company’s stock has almost doubled, even though his competitors have had problems.
To create future histories, I have executive teams imagine that they are five years in the future and ask them to write two memos of perhaps 750 to 1,000 words each.
For the first memo, I ask them to imagine that the strategy has failed because of some circumstance or because of resistance from some parts of the organization, investors, customers or other key stakeholder. The memo should explain the failure. The exercise lets people focus on the most critical assumptions and raise issues without being seen as naysayers. T
here is usually no lack of potential problems to consider, including technology developments, employee resistance, customer activities, competitors’ actions, governmental actions, substitute products and so on. Articulating the rationale for failure in a clearly worded memo crystallizes thinking about the most likely issues.
To heighten the effect, I sometimes do some formatting and structure the memo like an article from the Wall Street Journal or New York Times. Adopting a journalist’s voice helps to focus the narrative on the most salient points. And everybody hates the idea of being embarrassed in such publications, so readers of the memo pay attention to the potential problems while there’s still time to address them.
The second memo is the success story. What key elements and events helped the organization shake its complacency? What key strategic or technological shifts helped to capture disruptive opportunities? How did the organization’s unity help it to out-innovate existing players and start-ups?
This part of the exercise encourages war-gaming and helps the executive team understand the milestones on the path to success. Taken together, the future histories provide a new way of thinking about the long-term aspirations of the organization and the challenges facing it.
By producing a chronicle of what could be the major success and most dreaded failures, the organization gains clarity about the levers it needs to pull to succeed and the pitfalls it needs to avoid. Most importantly, by working together to write the future histories, the executive team develops a shared narrative of those potential futures. It forges alignment around the group’s aspirations, critical assumptions and interdependencies. The process of drafting and finalizing the future histories also prompts the team to articulate key questions and open issues. It drives consensus about key next steps and the overall change management road map.
In a few weeks’ time, future histories can transform the contemplated strategy into the entire team’s strategy.
See also: How to Create a Culture of Innovation
Future histories also facilitate the communication of that shared strategy to the rest of the organization. Oftentimes, senior executives extend the process to more layers of management to flesh out the success and failure scenarios in greater detail and build wider alignment.
Future histories take abstract visions and strategies and make them real, in ways that get people excited. They help people understand how they can contribute—how they must contribute—even if they aren’t directly involved in the innovation initiative. People can understand the timing and see how efforts will build. People can also focus on the enemies that, as a group, they must fend off.
These enemies may no longer be saber-toothed tigers, but they are still very real and dangerous to corporations. “Future histories” unite teams as they face the inevitable challenges.
Get Involved
Our authors are what set Insurance Thought Leadership apart.
|
Partner with us
We’d love to talk to you about how we can improve your marketing ROI.
|
Chunka Mui is the co-author of the best-selling Unleashing the Killer App: Digital Strategies for Market Dominance, which in 2005 the Wall Street Journal named one of the five best books on business and the Internet. He also cowrote Billion Dollar Lessons: What You Can Learn from the Most Inexcusable Business Failures of the Last 25 Years and A Brief History of a Perfect Future: Inventing the World We Can Proudly Leave Our Kids by 2050.
Insurtech also must mean breaking down existing operational silos and building new, streamlined structures.
Commercial insurance companies consist of various operational silos. Unfortunately, over the years, these silos have subsumed the key functions of underwriting and claims and, in effect, are controlling the overall strategy and direction of a company’s risk appetite without substantive feedback from underwriting and claims – the teams that actually interact with customers! There are numerous reasons why these operational silos have been implemented, but a key reason is the inclination to avoid risk.
Yes, there is a touch of irony here, as the industry is supposed to be in the business of assuming risk -- but these companies are protecting their balance sheets while attempting to manage increased regulatory requirements. If you are an underwriter or claims manager, climbing over the ice walls in the Game of Thrones must appear easier than dealing with the daily internal operational challenges.
The primary support that operational silos receive means that underwriting and claims team struggle to receive resources and appropriate technology investments to support existing business, improve service and produce innovative, effective and profitable risk management products in an extremely competitive market.
See also: How Insurtechs Will Affect Agents in 2017
We are repeatedly informed that insurers spend between 20% and 40% of each dollar/pound/euro of premium on costs of operations and customer acquisition costs, marketing and distribution. I would argue these costs do not factor in costs due to internal frictions -- and they are VERY expensive! Prioritizing operational silos means that internal imbalances affect all areas of the organization:
Product deliverables – Whose team are you actually on?
For those who would argue that the structure of commercial insurance companies is not a hindrance to producing business or creating products, I’d like to share a real-life example of how one commercial insurance company saw its market share and resulting profitability significantly reduced due to its own operational silos:
The underwriting teams’ inability to respond quickly to market conditions was driven by a lack of support and priority by the legal and governance departments. The company had no streamlined collaborative protocols between departments to support new product or policy form development, nor was technology used to manage the product development process.
Company A’s internal operational silos restricted a path for innovation, reduced long-term value and allowed competitors to reduce Company A’s market share. The company’s poor execution also evidenced the inability to respond quickly to market changes -- brokers and competitors began to challenge Company A's market leadership abilities.
Compliance operations – The growing beast
The disconnect between regulators and commercial insurance compliance is a pet peeve of mine -- instead of investing in systems that improve compliance by streamlining internal processes, risk identification and risk management, companies have greatly expanded compliance staff numbers over the years and added another silo of operations. This operational expansion slows customer support, increases costs and still contains high levels of inefficiency. Of course I’m aware that compliance is critical, but there are easier and more cost-effective ways to achieve compliance goals and improve regulatory reporting.
My team at Artemis Specialty conducted a London market broker survey in 2015 to identify how quickly the market develops products and the quality of service -- the results were depressing. Brokers expressed a growing concern that underwriters were spending as much as 40% of their time on internal and regulatory functions in lieu of servicing business.
Further discussions indicated that many commercial insurance companies have inadequate technology in place to support their business. Effective technology will provide underwriting and claims personnel with the required tools to meet corporate underwriting, claims and regulatory guidelines and reduce the number of compliance employees (no, I’m not anti-compliance employee). Additionally, underwriting and claims teams can focus 100% of their time on new and existing customers -- the key reason they are employed!
Innovation labs – Another operational silo?
A number of commercial insurance entities have created innovation labs, which, at first glance, is an admirable step to introduce disruption -- but it does raise a number of questions:
I have restructured numerous departments over the years to refresh the innovation culture, create products, improve efficiencies and increase customer service and satisfaction -- surely this can be replicated throughout an organization and at the corporate level? How many operational meetings have I attended over the years to push for improved internal collaboration, efficiencies and the transformation of the broking, underwriting or claims operations and processes? Why is the response almost always: “It’s too difficult.”
See also: 10 Predictions for Insurtech in 2017
Many analysts cheer when companies are acquired or merged, as there is now “scale” and a reduction of costs through layoffs and other efficiencies. I have attended numerous analysts’ calls throughout my career and noted they rarely question M&A technology efficiencies in depth; in fact, it’s rare when technology questions are raised during annual or quarterly financial investor and analyst updates. Will analysts and investors now raise more technology questions due to the increased insurtech enthusiasm and press? I would be a bit more curious about how a company is meeting new technological challenges and its impact on future company profitability.
Existing commercial insurance strategies of top-line growth or releasing underwriting reserves are not sustainable -- nor is it a sustainable strategy to create mass layoffs when the former strategies no longer work.
A new commercial insurance model is not about implementing a digital front end to create a smoke-and-mirrors modernization image to support existing products -- nor is it simply about partnering with or acquiring an insurtech company. It’s about breaking down existing operations and rebuilding a collaborative and innovative model to improve operational efficiency, control costs, create innovative products, improve customer engagement experiences and produce sustained profitability. Let’s break down these barriers!
Get Involved
Our authors are what set Insurance Thought Leadership apart.
|
Partner with us
We’d love to talk to you about how we can improve your marketing ROI.
|
David V. Cabral is the founder and managing director of Artemis Specialty Ltd., a consulting firm that helps clients develop new products, reduce risk, improve operational efficiencies and increase profits.
Integrating risk management into strategic planning is NOT doing a strategic risk assessment; it is so much more.
We will review what will happen to management projections after the risk analysis is performed in the next section.
See also: A New Paradigm for Risk Management?
Step 3 – Performing Risk Analysis
The next step includes performing a scenario analysis or Monte Carlo simulation to assess the effect of uncertainty on the company’s strategic objectives. Risk modeling may be performed in a dedicated risk model or within the existing financial or budget model. There is a variety of different software options that can be used for risk modeling. All examples in this guide were performed using the Palisade @Risk software package, which extends the basic functionality of MS Excel or MS Project to perform powerful, visual, yet simple risk modeling.
When modeling risks, it is critical to consider the correlations between different assumptions. One of the useful tools for an in-depth risk analysis and identification of interdependencies is a bow-tie diagram. Bow-tie diagrams can be done manually or using the Palisade Big Picture software. Such analysis helps to determine the causes and consequences of each risk and improves the modeling of them as well as identifying the correlations between different management assumptions and events.
The outcome of risk analysis helps to determine the risk-adjusted probability of achieving strategic objectives and the key risks that may negatively or positively affect the achievement of these strategic objectives. The result is strategy@risk.
Example: Risk Management Implementation (Continued)
The risk analysis shows that while the EBT in 2018 is likely to be positive, the probability of achieving or exceeding the strategic objective of 3,000 million rubles is 4.6%. This analysis means:
Management should focus on mitigating these and other risks to improve the likelihood of achieving the strategic objective.
Tornado diagrams and result distributions will soon replace risk maps and risk profiles as they much better show the impact that risks have on objectives.
This simple example shows how management's decision making process will change with the introduction of basic risk modelling.
Step 4 – Turning Risk Analysis Into Actions
Risk managers should discuss the outcomes of risk analysis with the executive team to see whether the results are reasonable, realistic and actionable. If indeed the results of risk analysis are significant, then management, with help from the risk manager, may need to:
Get Involved
Our authors are what set Insurance Thought Leadership apart.
|
Partner with us
We’d love to talk to you about how we can improve your marketing ROI.
|
Alex Sidorenko has more than 13 years of strategic, innovation, risk and performance management experience across Australia, Russia, Poland and Kazakhstan. In 2014, he was named the risk manager of the year by the Russian Risk Management Association.