Download

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.

sixthings
Significant numbers of insurance startups are emerging in the market today, and many are providing brilliant tech-based solutions. Insurtech startups have shown so much promise that venture capital firms are starting to invest heavily in them. In fact, between 2011 and 2017, VC funding for insurtech companies grew 31% annually. Between Series B and Series D funding, $2 billion to $3 billion is being directed to insurance startups annually. Here is a look at some of the most exciting insurtech startups that are receiving significant funding. Lemonade Lemonade is a home and renters insurtech company that is making a lot of waves. The company launched in New York in 2016 but now is planning to expand into California. Lemonade uses artificial intelligence and behavioral economics to optimize accuracy and efficiency. After its latest round of funding, Lemonade has generated $60 million in total. This makes it one of the biggest players in the insurtech startup space. Lemonade’s funding is not coming from average VC firms; it is coming from high-level sources, such as General Catalyst, GV (Google Ventures) and Sequoia. See also: Let’s Make Lemons Out of Lemonade   Friendsurance Friendsurance received $15.3 million in its latest round of funding. The majority of the money invested in this round came from the Hong Kong-based Horizons Ventures. Friendsurance is a sophisticated peer-to-peer insurance startup that has its headquarters in Berlin. Originally, it was only a national company, but it is now expanding internationally. In addition to Horizons Ventures, Friendsurance has received funding from Otto Group Eventures, the European Regional Development Fund and the German Startups Group. With so much financial backing, and a steadily growing customer base, Friendsurance looks poised to succeed internationally. Amodo Amodo is a Croatian insurtech that helps insurance companies get the most out of connected devices. The company lets customers build profiles and provide data, which helps insurance companies address the specific needs of each customer much better. For example, with Amodo's Connected Customer Platform, insurance customers can use their smartphones to prove that they spent time at the gym, to earn lower premiums on health insurance. Like Lemonade and Friendsurance, Amodo has also attracted the interest of some major VC companies. In 2016, Amodo received 450,000 euros of seed funding from an Austrian VC, SpeedInvest. Also like Lemonade and Friendsurance, Amodo is in the process of expanding. The company is trying to break out of the local Croatian market and spread across the world. See also: Top 10 Insurtech Trends for 2017   Insurtech Outlook In the past few years, technology finally appears to have become as useful for insurance as it has for many other industries, such as finance, social networking, and media. This is because insurance companies thrive on data, the compiling of which has become much more advanced. Lemonade, Friendsurance and Amodo are but a few examples of the excitement VCs have for insurtech. As more and more of these startups improve the insurance world for insurers and customers alike, the list of VC-funded insurtech startups will grow exponentially in the coming years.

Robin Roberson

Profile picture for user RobinSmith

Robin Roberson

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.

Insurance has its Cambrian moment

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.

sixthings

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 


Paul Carroll

Profile picture for user PaulCarroll

Paul Carroll

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.

Why Small Carriers Need Insurtech

Small and medium-sized insurance companies should start to track advances and consider partnering with insurtechs.

sixthings
Effective customer relationship management (CRM) is key to successful business, especially when it comes to smaller insurance carriers, where the focus is on the client relationship. But smaller insurance carriers are falling behind on efficiency and speed. Larger carriers are gaining market share because of innovative digital tools and techniques, ranging from new data sources, robotic process automation (RPA), advanced data analytics such as machine learning and cognitive computing, to IoT (Internet of Things). For instance, larger carriers can deliver quotes (whether personal or commercial lines) in real time and allow binding and paying online. For small and mid-sized traditional insurance carriers, to stay relevant, and increase their growth and profitability, they need to partner with insurtechs and firms providing technological infrastructure to insurance firms. Here are three reasons why this is necessary: 1. Competitive Edge Insurtechs have a natural competitive edge over traditional insurance carriers, because of their lack of legacy systems and typically narrow focus. This leads to a much quicker service delivery model. What customers have expected traditional insurance carriers to deliver in weeks, insurtechs are now delivering in minutes or hours. To reduce the gap in service delivery models, smaller insurance carriers can partner with insurtech startups to yield innovation and improve efficiency. See also: Insurtech: Unstoppable Momentum   2. Internal Efficiency Legacy insurance carriers have slow internal processes, i.e. the long cycle between brokers, carriers, underwriters and customers, and lack of digitization of customers’ requirements or customer files. If all the file work is still actually on paper and not digital or in the cloud, then searching for and acting on information does not take seconds but takes minutes or even hours. Thus, the more digitized carriers win again. The small and mid-sized insurance carriers can overcome this gap by strategically partnering with insurtechs in a very cost-effective manner. 3. Effective and Improved Service Delivery Smaller insurance carriers need to have an effective service delivery model, which reduces the dependence on long communication channels and is completely customer-oriented. To do that, traditional smaller carriers need to show a willingness to adapt and innovate. They need to start by identifying and then partnering with startups that can improve their service delivery model. Recommendation Small and medium-sized insurance companies should start to track investments and advances that are emerging within the insurtech community and consider partnering with insurtechs to move from a traditional service delivery model to an innovative customer-centric and technologically enabled model. Such partnerships will be mutually beneficial — the carrier will benefit from new techniques and digital infrastructure such as cloud-based services in a very cost-efficient manner while the insurtech will benefit from the carriers’ legacy customer base and industry knowledge. See also: Insurtech: The Approaching Storm

Kaenan Hertz

Profile picture for user KaenanHertz

Kaenan Hertz

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.

Cyber Attacks Shift to Small Businesses

Because SMBs often lag behind larger companies in defensive measures, they’re more susceptible to litigation on charges of negligence.

sixthings
Small- and mid-sized businesses (SMBs) are increasingly at risk for data breach class-action lawsuits that typically have targeted large corporations. Large companies are learning to address cyber threats. Hackers are responding by setting their sights on SMBs. So it’s simply more productive and efficient to attack poorly protected companies that could take weeks or even months to notice they’ve been breached. As the risk of exposure moves downstream, the associated class-action lawsuits surely will follow. Statistics from the Identity Theft Resource Center show that the number of data breaches reported in 2016 exceeded 2015 levels by 40%, a worrying trend for those in the small business sector that likely will bear a greater percentage of those breaches going forward. The data stores held by SMBs may be smaller, but they’re no less rich in value to hackers. They contain financial data, healthcare information and other tantalizing personal details. Security falls short Unfortunately, because SMBs often lag behind larger companies in the sophistication and scope of their defensive measures, they’re much more susceptible to litigation centered on charges of negligence or a lack of due diligence. Exposures in the SMB sector also could go undetected for long periods, leaving more records vulnerable and increasing the size of the victim pool that may be interested in suing. See also: The Key to Survival in Wild West of Cyber   Smaller firms’ responses to the risk of cyber attack and litigation depend largely on their industry. Even the smallest healthcare entities are typically well-adapted to address potential data breaches and cyber risks. Long-standing mandates such as HIPAA — as well as a robust, centralized breach-reporting mechanism — have made companies in the medical space a little paranoid about their heavily regulated environment. Behind the curve Other small business sectors aren’t as prepared for the risk of a breach. Outside healthcare, the professional services industry, including legal and accounting, is much less aware of where threats exist or how to mitigate them. Many small firms don’t understand their responsibilities regarding data privacy or how data breach notification laws apply to them. Without a good awareness of data privacy concerns, obligations and solutions, these businesses are easy targets for any hacker who happens upon them. Litigation bills add up Data-breach class-action lawsuits can result in million-dollar judgments, but devastating costs may be incurred even if a settlement never materializes. A breached small business still needs to defend itself against litigation, and that takes money. Between legal counsel, forensic investigations, data recovery and any other steps the company may be required to take, the company is likely to incur significant financial penalties no matter which way the lawsuit goes. See also: Can Trump Make ‘the Cyber’ Secure?   Some SMBs are realizing they aren’t prepared for a cyber attack. The truly savvy ones are waking up to the prospect that, just as with the professional and employment liability insurance they already have, it would be wise to pursue coverage to defer defensive and recovery costs around their cyber liabilities. With the specter of more breaches — and more class-action lawsuits — coming down the pipeline, SMBs must find a way to minimize the threat of exposures while also putting protective measures in place should they find themselves facing litigation. This article was originally posted on ThirdCertainty. It was written by Eduard Goodman.

Byron Acohido

Profile picture for user byronacohido

Byron Acohido

Byron Acohido is a business journalist who has been writing about cybersecurity and privacy since 2004, and currently blogs at LastWatchdog.com.

Q&A With Iowa's New Commissioner

Commissioner Doug Ommen: "We may not always agree with insurers, but we are willing to talk about it."

sixthings
Q: Congratulations on becoming the new Iowa insurance commissioner. You’re a Missouri native with 30 years of experience in the industry. What brought you to Iowa? A: Thank you very much. About four years ago, I met Nick Gerhart, who was beginning his tenure as Iowa’s insurance commissioner. We had really good discussions at NAIC meetings, and he needed another member for his senior leadership team. Things really just fell into place. I’ve spent my entire career in consumer protection, and I shared Nick’s values of making government work for the people we serve — in our case, the consumers of insurance products. Another draw for me was that Iowa is a huge insurance hub. From the outside looking in, I knew that Iowa’s regulatory culture was open communication with the regulated industry. We protect consumers and have high standards for the industry we regulate, but we communicate openly. We may not always agree with insurers, but we are willing to talk about it. I feel many states don’t have that mindset. It makes a big difference to have a focus on consumers while also working with industry in a fair, flexible and positive way. Industry ultimately wants stability and to be treated fairly, and I think that is why Iowa is home to so many insurance companies. See also: A Commissioner’s View of Innovation   Q: How does it feel to have the title of insurance commissioner once again? Not many can say that. A: I am confident that those insurance commissioner statistics are not kept, but in the 150 years of state insurance regulation, I may be the sixth or seventh to serve as insurance commissioner in two separate states. Perhaps I’ll be the answer to a Jeopardy question someday. I’m very pleased to have been appointed by Gov. Branstad and Lt. Gov. Reynolds so that I can continue working to help protect consumers. We have a really, really good staff here at the Iowa Insurance Division, and I consider it an honor to lead them. Q: What’s your vision for the Iowa Insurance Division moving forward? A: Consumer protection will be the main focus. Our multi-faceted team is in place to make sure that Iowans are protected. We have a market regulation team that works with consumers on complaints, enforcement attorneys that ensure companies and producers who are doing what they are supposed to be doing, a fraud bureau that consists of law enforcement officers that investigate insurance fraud and a Senior Health Insurance Information Program (SHIIP) that helps Iowans on Medicare get the information they need to make informed decisions. Another huge part of consumer protection is ensuring that the insurance companies are solvent to be able to pay claims when needed. Our financial team works hard every day so consumers are protected that way. We also just recently launched a new website, which really puts consumers first so they can quickly and easily get the information they need. Q: There’s always talk during a new president’s term about the first 100 days and discussions about the cabinet picks. Is it the same for a new commissioner taking over? A: Well, in my case, I’ve been appointed by the same administration that my predecessor was. On one level, much stays the same. Early on in Commissioner Gerhart’s tenure, he knew there was a crisis coming as much of our staff was retirement-eligible in the coming years. We put in a lot of work in terms of strategic hires, putting our younger staff in positions to both learn and lead and reorganizing as necessary. We’ve been able to add necessary staff to those regulating company solvency to keep up with the growing and increasingly complex nature of our domestic industry. Still, we may look to continue adding to our senior leadership, whether that be from inside Iowa or outside given the strategic plans put in place under Commissioner Gerhart. I will work with industry, our universities, Lt. Gov. Reynolds and Gov. Branstad to help make Iowa an attractive place to do business and a home for talented insurance professionals. As for the first 100 days, I think a lot depends on what happens at the federal level in a few areas. What happens with the ACA is yet to be seen but will have a huge impact on what we do here in Iowa. The DOL fiduciary rule is also out there as something we are waiting to see how the new administration deals with. There’s also FIO, and I suppose the list could go on. We’ll continue to be active at the NAIC level to bring ideas forward and work for the best interest of Iowans. See also: What Is the Right Innovation Process?   Q: Iowa has generally been very forward-thinking in terms of innovation in the industry. ITL has even joined as a partner to the Global Insurance Symposium that the Iowa Insurance Division helped create. What should we expect at this year’s event? A: The Iowa Insurance Division has been a founding partner of the Global Insurance Symposium, which is held each spring in Des Moines. This year will be the fourth year, and I think it will be the best one yet. There really is something for everyone. Many of the topics such as artificial intelligence, blockchain, corporate strategy, risk mitigation and innovation in the industry truly transcend all types of insurance. This event brings together top thought leaders in industry from around the world, industry executives, regulators and insurtech startups. I think this event is in a caliber of its own, and I’m really proud to be in a position to help the event grow and showcase all we are doing in Iowa to the rest of the insurance world. This will be an event that folks won’t want to miss.

Paul Carroll

Profile picture for user PaulCarroll

Paul Carroll

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.

Hate Buying? Chatbots Can Help

Chatbots are still in their early stages, but it is hard not to see their game-changing potential in the insurance space.

sixthings
If you wanted to buy health insurance, how would you do it? I’d probably Google “health insurance,” click on the first link (maybe skip the ads out of an irrational disdain) and reach a website that looks something like this: 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.

Ish Jindal

Profile picture for user IshJindal

Ish Jindal

Ish Jinal is founder of Tars, a technology platform that enables businesses and brands to build conversational bots.

Is U.S. Healthcare Ready for 'All Payer'?

Given that the American Health Care Act may crash and burn, it's time to start thinking about what could come next.

sixthings
Congress is debating the American Health Care Act, the first of three steps in Republicans’ march toward repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act. Things are not going smoothly. GOP conservatives, which have considerable clout in the House of Representatives, want the bill to repeal more and replace less. More moderate Republican Senators, of which there are enough to block any legislation, argue the legislation goes too far in some respects. Attempts to mollify one side hardens opposition on the other. And so far, no real effort has been made to entice Democrats to do more than watch Republicans fight one another. It’s possible President Trump, Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell can corral enough votes in each chamber to push the AHCA through Congress. It’s possible, but I’m skeptical. And what if they can’t? See also: What Trump Wants to Do on ACA   Well, they could do nothing, leaving enough uncertainty lying about that the individual market, at least, collapses. That could make 2018 a tough election year for Republicans. Or they could offer AHCA version 2.0 and hope for better results. Wishful thinking is a great pastime but hardly a vehicle for making public policy. All of which argues for doing something outside the proverbial box. Maybe Congress could even address the core problem facing America’s healthcare system: the cost of medical care. What might that look like? One option would be to look at an idea that’s been around since the 1990s, if not longer: an all payer system. It would certainly be an interesting debate. To oversimplify, under an all payer system, providers and payers (usually the government) establish a price for each medical treatment and service. Every provider accepts this rate as payment in full, and every payer (government, private insurance, self-funded plans and individuals) pays this rate. As noted by The Hill, several states experimented with one version or another of all payer systems in the 1990s, although today only Maryland’s remains. As recently as 2014, academics at Dartmouth proposed using 125% of Medicare reimbursement rates for a national all payer program. Pricing transparency advocates like all payer systems because everyone knows the cost of care – the ultimate transparency. And this system eliminates the wide variance in pricing for identical treatment so prominent today. A pure all payer system would be difficult to pass, however. Free market Republicans will not accept the government setting the price for all medical care payments. And pharmaceutical companies, doctors, hospitals and other providers are not going to take kindly to having anyone set a one-size-fits-all cost structure. But there are variations on the all payer theme that might make such a system more palatable — and allow for a healthy (and entertaining) debate.. For example, consider an all-payer system in which Medicare reimbursement rates are simply a starting point -- the benchmark used by all providers in setting their costs and all payers in determining their reimbursement levels. No more Alice in Wonderland pricing by hospitals and other providers. Each service provider would describe its fees as a multiple of Medicare. Insurers would offer plans that cap reimbursements at different multiples of Medicare. If the doctor’s charges are at a lower or the same multiple as an insurance policy’s, that provider would be fully reimbursed by the carrier, and no charges beyond co-payments, deductibles and co-insurance (if any) would be required of the patient. If the practice has set a higher Medicare multiple than a patient’s policy covers then the patient is liable for the additional cost. The key, however, is that the consumer would know this before incurring the charge. (Which is why emergency care would be treated somewhat differently). See also: Letter to Congress on Replacing ACA   An all payer system requires higher cost providers to justify the extra expense. It eliminates the helter skelter of ever-changing networks. Health insurance premiums would reflect reimbursement rates and would correlate with the number of providers whose services would be covered in full. Conservatives can’t claim all payer systems is a government takeover of healthcare. On the contrary, the only role Medicare plays is providing the baseline for reimbursement … a common language all providers and payers speak. What they do with that baseline is up to them. Liberals won’t like that insurance companies remain in the healthcare system and will object to limiting, as a practical matter, poorer Americans to low reimbursement policies. Right now, all attention is on the American Health Care Act. That’s as it should be. After all, it’s not dead yet. But, given that there’s a good chance the legislation will crash and burn, there’s no harm in thinking about what could come next. I’m rooting for something that isn’t just a rehash of the 2009 debate, but rather something bolder. An all payer proposal is just one idea, and there are no doubt many better ones. What’s your favorite? This article first appeared at the Alan Katz Blog.

Alan Katz

Profile picture for user AlanKatz

Alan Katz

Alan Katz speaks and writes nationally on healthcare reform, technology, sales and business planning. He is author of the award-winning Alan Katz Blog and of <em>Trailblazed: Proven Paths to Sales Success</em>.

To Shape the Future, Write Its History

We need stories to crystallize and internalize concepts and plans. We need shared stories to unite us, and guide us toward a collective future.
sixthings

"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.

Innovation Challenge for Commercial Lines

Insurtech also must mean breaking down existing operational silos and building new, streamlined structures.

sixthings
Let’s be realistic. Managing customer requirements is expensive and exhausting with current structures for commercial insurance operations! While insurtech is currently seen as incorporating technology into an organization to produce new products or touch customers in new ways, it also must mean breaking down existing operational silos and building new, streamlined structures. Any reengineering should incorporate strategic innovation and technology to ensure that all parties have aligned objectives to rapidly respond to new opportunities and exit unprofitable ones while improving operational efficiency and controlling costs. Operational Silos – Release the wrecking balls!!! 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:
  1. Will the lab be viewed and managed internally as an additional operational silo?
  2. If the innovation lab is separate from existing operations, how will it challenge the status quo?
  3. Where is the buy-in at all levels of the company? How do you create excitement across the entire organization to participate in innovation experiments?
  4. Can the lab be described as innovation if it is only created to digitize existing legacy products?
Internal disruption is difficult, but M&A is easier? Seriously? Over the past 15 years, it has become glaringly obvious that it is time to develop a new business model for our customers -- they deserve it! So, why is internal disruption difficult? During the last 10 to 20 years, there have been numerous commercial insurance mergers and acquisitions. Companies instill a new corporate identity in to the acquisitions and new employees while integrating legacy systems. If a company is capable of a merger and acquisition, why is it not capable of implementing and managing its own internal disruption to create innovative, efficient and customer-focused environments? 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!

David Cabral

Profile picture for user DavidCabral

David Cabral

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.

4 Steps to Integrate Risk Management

Integrating risk management into strategic planning is NOT doing a strategic risk assessment; it is so much more.

sixthings
Let me start by saying that integrating risk management into strategic planning is NOT doing a strategic risk assessment or even having a risk conversation at the strategy-setting meeting; it is so much more. Kevin W. Knight, during his first visit to Russia a few years ago, said, "Risk management is a journey… not a destination." Risk practitioners are free to start their integration journey at any process or point in time, but I believe that evaluating strategic objectives at risk can be a good starting point. The evaluation is relatively simple to implement yet has an immediate, significant impact on senior management decision making. Step 1 – Strategic Objectives Decomposition Any kind of risk analysis should start by taking a high-level objective and breaking it down into more tactical, operational key performance indicators (KPIs) and targets. When breaking down any objectives, it is important to follow the McKinsey MECE principle (ME – mutually exclusive, CE – collectively exhaustive) to avoid unnecessary duplication and overlapping. Most of the time, strategic objectives are already broken down into more tactical KPIs and targets by the strategy department or HR, saving the risk manager a lot of time. This breakdown is a critical step to make sure risk managers understand the business logic behind each objective and helps make risk analysis more focused. Important note: While it should be management’s responsibility to identify and assess risks, the business reality in your company may be that sometimes the risk manager should take the responsibility for performing risk assessment on strategic objectives and take the lead.  Example: Risk Management Implementation VMZ is an airline engine manufacturing business in Russia. The product line consists of relatively old engines, DV30, which are used for the medium-haul airplanes Airliner 100. The production facility is in Samara, Russia. In 2012, a controlling stake (75%) was bought by an investment company, Aviarus. During the last strategic board meeting, Aviarus decided to maintain the production of the somewhat outdated DV30, although at a reduced volume due to plummeting sales, and, more importantly, to launch a new engine, DV40, for its promising medium-haul aircraft Superliner 300. See also: What Gets Missed in Risk Management   The board signed off on a strategic objective to reach an EBT (earnings before tax) of 3,000 million rubles by 2018. Step 2 – Identifying Factors, Associated With Uncertainty Once the strategic objectives have been broken down into more tactical, manageable pieces, risk managers need to use the strategy document, financial model, business plan or the budgeting model to determine key assumptions made by management. Most assumptions are associated with some form of uncertainty and hence require risk analysis. Risk analysis helps to put unrealistic management assumptions under the spotlight. Common criteria for selecting management assumptions for further risk analysis include:
  • Whether the assumption is associated with high uncertainty.
  • Whether the assumption impact is properly reflected in the financial model (for example, it makes no sense to assess foreign exchange risk if in the financial model all foreign currency costs are fixed in local currency and a change in currency insignificantly affects the calculation).
  • Whether the organization has reliable statistics or experts to determine the possible range of values and the possible distribution of values.
  • Whether there are reliable external sources of information to determine the possible range of values and the possible distribution of values.
For example, a large investment company may have the following risky assumptions: the expected rate of return for different types of investment, an asset sale timeframe, timing and the cost of external financing, rate of expected co-investment, exchange rates and so on. Concurrently, risk managers should perform a classic risk assessment to determine whether all significant risks were captured in the management assumptions analysis. The risk assessment should include a review of existing management and financial reports, industry research, auditors’ reports, insurance and third party inspections and interviews with key employees. By the end of this step, risk managers should have a list of management assumptions. For every management assumption identified, risk managers should work with the process owners and internal auditors and use internal and external information sources to determine the ranges of possible values and their likely distribution shape. Example: Risk Management Implementation (Continued) The assessment would look into: Macroeconomic assumptions
  • Foreign exchange
  • Inflation
  • Interest rates (rubles)
  • Interest rates (USD)
Materials
  • DV30 materials
  • DV40 materials
Debt
  • Current debt
  • New debt
Engines sales
  • New DV30 sales volume
  • New DV40 sales volume
  • DV30 repairs volume
  • DV40 repairs volume
  • DV30 price
  • DV40 price
Other expenses
  • Current equipment and investments in new
  • Operating personnel
  • General and administrative costs
Based on the management assumptions, VMZ will significantly increase revenue and profitability by 2018. Expected EBT in 2018 is 3,013 million rubles, which means the strategic objective will be achieved.
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:
  • The risks to achieving the strategy are significant and need to be managed
  • Strategic objectives may need to change unless most significant risks can be managed effectively
Further analysis shows that the volatility associated with the price of materials and the uncertainty surrounding the on-time delivery of new equipment have the most impact on the strategic objective. 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:
  • Revise the assumptions used in the strategy.
  • Consider sharing some of the risk with third parties by using hedging, outsourcing or insurance mechanisms.
  • Consider reducing risk by adopting alternative approaches for achieving the same objective or implementing appropriate risk control measures.
  • Accept risk and develop a business continuity/disaster recovery plan to minimize the impact of risks should they eventuate.
  • Change the strategy altogether (the most likely option in our case)
Based on the risk analysis outcomes, it may be required for the management to review or update the entire strategy or just elements of it. This is one of the reasons why it is highly recommended to perform risk analysis before the strategy is finalized. See also: A Revolution in Risk Management   At a later stage, the risk manager should work with the internal auditor to determine whether the risks identified during the risk analysis are in fact controlled and the agreed risk mitigations are implemented. Join our free webinar to find out more (click the link to see available dates and times). Read the full book from which this is adapted. You can download it for free here.

Alexei Sidorenko

Profile picture for user AlexeiSidorenko

Alexei Sidorenko

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.