I am so excited to participate in the InsureTech Connect 2016 Conference taking place in Las Vegas this week. If you haven't picked up your tickets yet, do so. It's going to be a blast! I am also honored to be speaking at the conference, alongside amazing entrepreneurs like Jacob Brody of Helpful Networks, Isaac Oates Founder of Justworks and Jeff Oberstein, chief customer officer and head of science, Global Consumer Insurance at AIG. I'm actually a little nervous. Our discussion on Wednesday, Oct. 5, is titled "Sharing Economy's Impact on the Insurance Ecosystem." We will attempt to unpack the implications of the rise of the sharing economy for the insurance industry, and how it's changing the nature of work, and workers. In this vein, I want to pave the road slightly with a few key insights that will help frame our discussion. The sharing economy has been termed many things over the years: gig economy, freelance economy, circular economy, collaborative consumption, and most recently "digital matching firms" by the federal government. No matter what you term it, this new industry has changed how we consume, much like insurtech has disrupted the traditional insurance industry. How products and services are delivered is changing before our eyes. And this is a good thing. See also: 8 Exemplars of Insurtech Innovation   To better situate our thinking for InsureTech Connect 2016, here are nine impressive facts about the rise of online marketplaces, something we now term the sharing economy. 1. PricewaterhouseCoopers predicts that the sharing economy will grow to a $335 billion industry by 2025. In 2013, this industry was valued at $15 billion. Why it matters: We are in the midst of a transformation. 2. In 2013 alone, it was estimated that revenue passing through the sharing economy into people’s wallets was more than $3.5 billion. Why it matters: Can you imagine what that number is now? The sharing economy is becoming a new employment marketplace faster than we may think. 3. Airbnb has hosted 60 million guests since its founding and now has two million properties listed. This is almost double the hotel rooms currently owned by the largest hotel chain, Starwood-Marriott, which has 1.1 million rooms. Why it matters: Airbnb was founded in 2008. So, in eight years, Airbnb has more than overtaken the largest hotel chain in the amount of rooms available. This is disruption 2.0. 4. Sharing economy work is overwhelmingly part-time. Consider that the vast majority of Uber drivers work less than 30 hours a week, with 66% saying they have no set hours. Further, the average Airbnb host rents out her property for 33 nights a year. Why it matters: This is hardly full-time employment. It's exactly what we see at WeGoLook; people are leveraging our platform to supplement income through flexible part-time work. It's patchwork employment, and this is good because it gives people options and employment flexibility. 5. According to Time, 44% of U.S. adults have participated in the sharing economy in some fashion. The same study found that 22% of Americans have sold services in the sharing economy. And, the vast majority of those who offered services in the sharing economy described their experience as a positive one. Why it matters: Americans are using and selling in the sharing economy. Simple as that. 6. According to JP Morgan, working in the sharing economy boosts incomes by 15%. For Airbnb hosts, on average, JP Morgan found that sellers earn an extra $314 a month, or $533 for Uber and TaskRabbit. Why it matters: People are actually earning decent supplemental income, and they love it. 7. Although millennials use the sharing economy more than other demographics, we cannot forget about the Baby Boomers. According to research by Emergent, 18% of workers in the sharing economy are 55+. This study concludes that “the number of older Americans seeking this type of work will likely continue to grow.” Why it matters: We all think of innovative technology and equate it with millennials, but Baby Boomers are right in there as well and will require new tools as they retire and age. 8. There are currently 50 million freelancers, or gig workers, in the U.S. By 2020, 50% of the US workforce is expected to be a freelancer. Why it matters: We are moving to a freelancer workforce. People are craving flexibility and are willing to trade the certainty of a 9-to-5 job with benefits and pension, for the freedom of freelance and gig work. At WeGoLook alone, we've seen our gig workforce grow from zero to now more than 27,000 in just seven years. See also: How to Insure the Sharing Economy   9. The sharing economy makes people happy by making their lives affordable. For instance, 86% of respondents from a recent PwC survey agree that the sharing economy makes their lives more affordable. Why it matters: There's a reason people are gravitating toward access over ownership. It makes their lives easier, more affordable, and offers them income generation opportunities with almost zero startup costs. So, how will the insurance industry adapt to the sharing economy and growing disruption of the insurtech revolution? You'll have to meet me in Vegas to find out.

How well do insurers know their customers? Consider Maria, a 30-something woman living in a large city with her fiancé and his two children. Their household income is between $50,000 and $75,000, and they own one vehicle and a three-bedroom townhouse. Historically, this could have been enough information for an insurer to provide adequate customer service. However, digital disruption has changed many customers’ expectations and how they interact with service providers. Maria and her family would likely respond more favorably to an insurer that knows that her route to work is less dangerous than the average commute, that she is a safe driver who rarely speeds and that the family never leaves the house without setting the alarm. See also: The Case for Personalization   Accenture research found that 77% of customers are willing to provide usage and behavior data in exchange for lower premiums, quicker claims settlement or tailored coverage recommendations. Watch this Insurance Insight of the Week video to learn why it is imperative for insurers to offer a personalized experience. Five stages to offering more personalized insurance experiences Leading insurers are beginning to take this approach to deliver more personalized insurance experiences. One major insurer is combining customer profiles, transaction histories and social media data to generate a personalized experience via mobile app. Another is leveraging customer data to create customer microsegments to fine-tune customer retention and cross-selling campaigns. This much is clear: Existing and emerging digital capabilities will only bolster the push to personalization, and insurers cannot afford to ignore the opportunities provided by personalized services. Learn more:

• Download Satisfy the Craving for Insurance Personalization: Delivering highly relevant, omni-channel customer experiences (PDF).
• View other Insurance Insight of the Week videos.
• Email me to discuss how Accenture can help insurers successfully progress through these five stages of personalization and agility.

Perceptions about conflicts of interest in the insurance industry frequently damage reputations. Profiling clients’ risks before recommending insurance reduces conflict-of-interest perceptions surrounding issues like sales commissions, over-/under-insurance and inappropriate/inadequate insurance. Risk profiling can improve the insurance industry’s reputation, letting insurance professionals:

• Engage with clients as trusted risk advisers rather than insurance product sellers.
• Demonstrate more intelligent matching of risks and insurance.
• Tailor the insurance product to specifically identified risks.
• Provide greater clarity on both uninsured and insured risks.
• Reduce under- (and non-) insurance through greater focus on higher risks.
• Ensure that insurance products are offered for the highest risks and that premiums are spent on areas of highest risk accordingly.
• Eliminate perceptions of over-insurance by using risk matching.
• Identify client risk management controls, thereby assisting insurance underwriting.

The inclusion in risk profiles of independent risk benchmarking for specific industries and multiple risk areas also assists in ameliorating perceptions of conflict of interest. Independent benchmarking provides quantifiable and empirical guidance that is not aligned to an insurance adviser’s commercial self-interest. See also: Digital Risk Profiling Transforms Insurance Until now, in the absence of conveniently accessible  benchmarking, hundreds of thousands of advisers have typically found risk profiling to be a time-consuming manual process. For this reason primarily, the use of risk profiling for commercial insurance buyers globally has been very limited and sporadic. The Risk Advisor digital risk library of 160,000 exposures and controls and 6,000 benchmarks, for 600 industries and 60 risk areas has been built to make risk profiling easy for insurance advisers and their clients. Risk profiling can improve insurance adviser reputations, and it can reduce compliance breaches and negligence. All of the outcomes from risk profiling contribute to enhanced reputations and help achieve regulatory compliance. An Economist survey highlighted that these are the greatest areas of concern across many industries, not just the insurance industry. LRN  (lrn.com ), which has E&C (reputation risk) training for more than 25 million employees of organizations globally, does annual surveys that suggest that conflicts of interest are a major area of reputation risk concern across a  wide range of predominantly U.S. companies, industries and business sectors, as shown below. The digital technology era presents a wonderful opportunity for the insurance industry to elevate its reputation, which has heretofore been hurt, often unfairly. The insurance industry pays billions of claims every year, and insurance advisers play an invaluable role in the sustainability of business through risk protection. See also: Customers’ Digital Expectations As longtime practitioners in the international risk and insurance sector, the Risk Advisor team members are excited about the opportunity for digital risk profiling to support the insurance industry and its dedicated professionals in getting the great reputations they deserve.

The recent vote for Brexit will by no means destroy the U.K. insurance industry – if managed properly, the industry can emerge more resilient and competitive than ever. While insurers in the U.K. proceed with caution as they prepare for the country’s exit from the European Union, we at EY see this “Brexit moment” as an opportunity to foster innovation and transformations in the industry. See also: Thoughts on Insurance After Brexit   Insurers agree that Brexit does present a number of challenges, including instability and legal uncertainty that may arise from a delayed exit. However, we believe that with diligence and imagination, the U.K. insurance industry can use Brexit to secure its future and maintain preeminence as a leader by:

• Investing in developing expertise in emerging areas such as big data and the Internet of Things
• Creating attractive product lines that stand out from potential rivals in Europe
• Developing services and products that will be attractive to growing regions beyond the EU

The industry should use the opportunities created by the Brexit vote to help London remain the best place in the world to conduct business and take steps to make London insurers the most innovative and customer-focused. For more information, read EY’s new report.

American adults working full time spend an average of 47 hours per week at their workplace (Gallup 2013). For those dealing with a mental health issue or thoughts of suicide, employers have an important opportunity to create safeguards to protect those who may be at risk. There are many reasons why an employee may keep concerns about his or her mental health private. Stigma, fear of losing one’s job, and lack of awareness can prevent an individual from seeking help. It can also prevent someone who is concerned about a co-worker from reaching out when they may be needed most. Research shows that 70% of those who die by suicide tell someone or give warning signs before taking their own life. Coworkers see each other every day and are more apt to notice changes in mood and behavior. For this reason, they play a key role in identifying potential suicide risk and mental health crises in their peers. See also: Blueprint for Suicide Prevention   Mental health education and awareness programs can help to create an environment where employees feel comfortable reaching out for help and should be a primary component of workplace wellness initiatives. Employers can implement the following strategies that not only connect their employees with help but also promote a culture of mental health awareness: Health Promotion Health promotion programs enable employees to take action to better their health. While employers often use health promotion to encourage physical health changes, employers can use health promotion to discuss mental health issues and encourage a culture of employee engagement and connection, as well. National Depression Screening Day, held on Oct. 6 this year, raises awareness for depression and related mood and anxiety disorders. The annual campaign provides employers with an opportunity to start the conversation with employees about mental health. Online Screenings Anonymous online screenings are a proven way to reach those in need and help direct them to appropriate assistance. Employees can take a screening to determine if the symptoms they are experiencing are consistent with a mental health disorder (i.e., depression, generalized anxiety disorder, bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, an eating disorder or a substance use disorder). Upon completion of a screening, employees are provided with immediate results and linked back to employee assistance program or local community resources. If your organization does not currently have an online screening program, a more general anonymous screening can be taken here. Suicide Prevention Awareness The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently released data showing a 24% increase on average of suicide rates from 1999 to 2014. It is critical that employees learn how to talk with someone about mental health, understand how to recognize warning signs of suicide and know the actions to take to get themselves or a coworker the help they need. The National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention’s Workplace Task Force champions suicide prevention as a national priority and cultivates effective programming and resources within the workplace. The task force provides support for employers and motivates them to implement a comprehensive, public health approach to suicide prevention, intervention and "postvention" in the workplace. Programs like the Workplace Task Force are important sources of knowledge and assistance for employers. See also: 6 Things to Do to Prevent Suicides   Employers can provide resources such as Stop a Suicide Today, which educates individuals about the warning signs of suicide and steps to take if they are concerned about a coworker or loved one. There are also other lifesaving resources, like the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline (1-800-273-TALK (8255)). The World Health Organization estimates that depression will be the second leading cause of disability by 2020. Employers have the option to act as catalysts for early detection and prevention when it comes to mental health disorders and suicide, which can lead to improved quality of life for individuals, as well as for the organization itself.

I hope the Wells Fargo scam is causing boards, executives and practitioners everywhere to pause and reflect: Could something like this happen to us? If it can happen at a great institution like Wells Fargo, it can probably happen anywhere. In a couple of posts, I have shared questions that should have been asked and that should drive similar questions at other companies. For instance, why did management set incentive goals that didn't appear to be aligned with driving revenue or earnings? What led to the failure of the controls that were designed to ensure that customers approved the opening of accounts in their name? Why didn't customer complaints lead to identification of the problem? Why was the problem allowed to continue for at least five years? Did management have any idea that the culture of the organization would permit such a pervasive scheme? What was the role of internal audit, of the compliance officer, of whistleblower provisions and of risk management? In a podcast with MIS Training Institute (which I recommend), I made another point. I think this is critical for everybody to understand. I said that when people feel they are able to get away with a minor fraud, they will do something else. The level of fraud may start small, but it almost always increases. I asked what else has been happening at Wells Fargo. ********** The public reaction by the Wells Fargo CEO, John Stumpf, included an observation that the scam only involved at any time about 1,000 people of the 100,000 in the branch network. Let's set aside the fact that 5,300 people were fired over a period of five years and that this number does not count anybody who was less severely disciplined or not caught. Let's set aside the fact that 1,000 people fired in each of the last five years reflects a continuing failure and, to me, indicates a breakdown rather than a one-time failure in controls. The point is that he seems to believe that this is a small level of incidence, almost (in my words) an acceptable level of risk. See also: Bridezilla and Workers’ Comp Fraud   I am drawn to agree that this is a low level of failure. I'm not sure it is so low that it would be acceptable. Let's talk reality. While it looks and sounds good to say that an organization has zero tolerance for fraud, corruption and a failure to comply with laws and regulations, that zero level is just about impossible to achieve. You would need somebody looking over everybody's shoulder all the time to ensure that no inappropriate activity was happening, and somebody looking over that person's shoulder to make sure they were watching properly. All you can do is have what a prudent person would believe is a reasonable level of control, given the risk of fraud. According to studies by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, the typical company loses about 6% of its annual revenue to fraud. That number includes theft of time, personal use of the company's laptop and so on. Is that an acceptable level? Maybe it is; maybe it isn't. You decide for your company — and consider the cost of reducing the fraud risk. Is the cost greater than any reduction in fraud risk? The same goes for compliance issues or the activity reported at Wells Fargo. Was a reasonable level of control in place? Could controls have been improved to reduce the risk without incurring substantial cost? I suspect the answer is yes, but we don't know enough of the facts yet. ********** Let's also consider other forms of fraud, abuse and corruption. Are these acceptable practices, or are they another form of fraud?

• The CEO of a multibillion-dollar company approves the funding of a charity of which his wife is the chair. There is no clear benefit to the company, no link to its operations.
• In response to falling revenue and profits, the CEO of another company lays off about 10% of the workforce. The board awards him a $1 million bonus for completing the reduction in force. At the same time, the CEO spends $1 million to renovate the executive suite of offices.
• A senior manager in IT refuses to provide support for the implementation of a disaster recovery plan because it is not included in his personal objectives.
• The vice president of procurement for Malaysia refuses to follow instructions from the executive vice president (EVP) of procurement (to whom she does not report) and adhere to global contracts with major vendors negotiated by that EVP. Instead, she negotiates successfully with the local subsidiaries of those vendors. While she obtains better prices for Malaysia (for which she and her boss, the president of that region, are rewarded) she puts the corporate contract in serious jeopardy.
• A senior executive decides to hire a friend.
• The chairman puts pressure on the company to select as a director an individual whom he knows will vote his way rather than searching for a director who will add critical expertise.

All of these are situations where, in my view, individuals put their personal interests ahead of those of the enterprise as a whole. They act in a way that brings them rewards but that hurts the company as a whole. See also: How Bad Is Insurance Fraud Really? While technically they have not stolen and have not broken any laws, they have acted inappropriately. I will let you decide what to call their behavior. But let's be honest: Self-dealing is ripe around the world. Very few are selfless, putting the interests of others ahead of their own. ********** So what does this all mean? Where am I going?

1. What we have seen at Wells Fargo (based on the few facts we know) is, in some ways, normal human behavior. When people believe that the behavior is encouraged or at least not discouraged and that they will not be caught, they will "game" the system.
2. While we focus on fraud, we might be better off focusing on behavior and actions. There are many forms of behavior that will harm the organization.
3. We cannot prevent or even detect all actions that result in a loss to the organization. We need to understand all of its forms, the impact and likelihood of each, and ensure that we have the controls in place that provide a reasonable level of assurance that risk is at acceptable levels.
4. Management must take ownership of the design and operation of those controls.
5. Internal audit should provide assurance on the management of the more significant risks.
6. When the level of risk that the controls are failing rises, the root causes must be investigated.
7. A low level of fraud, if left alone, will normally grow until it is unacceptable.

I welcome your views.

It’s time to share the results of our coaches and mentors poll. You may remember that, back in August, we launched a short survey. Thanks to those who participated. We now have stable enough results to give an interesting, at least initial, picture. As someone who works as an external coach and mentor, I was surprised  by some of these results. See if they accord with your experience. See also: How to Choose a Great Coach   Having given advice on understanding the difference between coaches and mentors, together with when you might need each, I was keen to see take-up. So, questions in this poll centered on three topics: use of coaches; use of mentors; personal development progress. Here is what you shared… Use of coaches In answer to the question, “Do you have a coach?“:

• 57% No
• 43% Yes

The following questions were only completed by the 43%, who answered "yes" to having a coach. In answer to the question, “What type of coach are they?“:

• 33% Executive Coach
• 33% Leadership Coach
• 33% Professional Coach

Given the preponderance of "life coaches" and neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) coaches I have met at coaching events, it’s interesting to see those did not make the list. The focus on the most senior leadership roles still appears to hold true. But it was interesting to see professional coach selected as a title as well. In answer to the question, “Are they external to your employer?“:

• 100% Yes

This was the first result to not have an element of surprise. It accords with my experience that most leaders (who do hire) only hire coaches externally, or view any such internal work as "mentoring." In answer to the question, “Do you believe you need a coach, to develop your leadership or to sustain high performance?“:

• 60% Don’t know
• 20% Yes
• 20% No

This is perhaps the most concerning answer so far. There has been quite some debate within the coaching community about the need to improve methods of measuring effectiveness, to be able to demonstrate genuine progress or ROI for clients. This answer underlies the importance of that quest. If coaching clients themselves aren’t convinced they need a coach, there is probably more work to do on demonstrating what coaching delivers for them. We all need to see robust, understood metrics become commonplace. Use of mentors The next three questions in our survey focused on the use of mentors, with similar structure (to allow comparison with feedback on coaches). In answer to the question, “Do you have a mentor?“:

• 67% Yes
• 33% No

Those results bear out my own experience, of selling coaching or mentoring services into U.K. and European businesses. Many companies appear to value technical or professional mentoring, while remaining skeptical about coaching. Despite that, my experience in mentoring engagements almost always involved elements of coaching, and it may become apparent that is the client’s primary need. But, as mentors are more widely taken-up, let’s see how mentors are being used. The following questions were only completed by the 67%, who answered "yes" to having a mentor. In answer to the question, “Do they also work for your employer?“:

• 60% No
• 40% Yes

Given the common situation of mentoring being provided by senior leaders within a business, this answer also surprised me. It seems, perhaps in line with the experience I shared above, that the take-up of external mentors has increased. It may just be the language used, or perhaps reflects the time-poor nature of many business leaders. Are companies struggling to free their own senior leaders for mentoring and opting to buy-in mentoring expertise instead? Either way, the answer confirms the greater popularity of mentoring rather than coaching services. In answer to the question, “Do you believe you need a mentor, to develop in your career or succeed within your current organization?“:

• 40% Yes
• 40% No
• 20% Don’t know

A more positive answer than the equivalent one for coaching, but still the majority answering “don’t know” or “no.” Perhaps the most interesting comparison is the lower number of undecided. It seems experiencing mentoring either clarifies that it is optional or identifies a clear need for this support. Once more, mentoring seems to be better understood than coaching. Personal Development Our final three questions focused on respondents' progress in their personal development and time commitment to any form of such investment. In answer to the question, “Do you have clear goals for your leadership development this year?“:

• 50% No
• 50% Yes

A concerning lack of clarity among responders to this question. If leaders really only have a 50:50 chance of having clear goals to develop their leadership capability, a need for goal-oriented coaching or mentoring is clear. It’s perhaps not surprising from increasingly time-poor leaders, working in business that too often focus on short-term targets. However, it is still concerning and perhaps something for prospective coaches or mentors to emphasize more – the benefits of such goal setting and how they can help clients use them. In answer to the question, “Are you on track to achieve your goals?“:

• 60% Yes
• 40% No

Given the lack of clear goals identified in the previous answer, this positive view of progress risks looking overly optimistic. But, with hindsight, perhaps the wording here encouraged leaders to think about their wider goals. Another interpretation is that without clear goals it is easier to persuade yourself that you are doing fine. Certainly, believing you are on track, while potentially lacking clear goals or any accountability mechanism, could be a recipe for complacency. Does that also drive a lower uptake of coaches? In answer to our final question, “How much time (per week) do you give to your personal development?“:

• 67% 1-2 hours
• 17% 3-4 hours
• 17% >1 day

In the full version of this question, participants were asked to consider all development activities (coaching, mentoring, reading, training, events, etc). In that context, spending one to two hours a week (<5% of a 40-hour working week) seems far too little. Perhaps that is another sign that “short-termism” can rob leaders of investing what they need to grow and develop in their leadership. I’ve found that if you are not protecting sufficient time to develop your leadership skills, you not only fail to grow but also burn out quicker. What are you going to do about it? I hope those results were interesting. Feel free to share whether the scores aligned to your experience. If you have been challenged by this post, to reconsider investing more time in your personal development and perhaps seeking a coach or mentor, then stop right now. If that thought is going to become more than just wishful thinking, the best thing you can do is commit to an action you are going to take as a result. See also: Best Insurance? A Leadership Pipeline   What will you do differently, within the next two weeks? Write it down, preferably with an app that will remind you. I wish you well with your development as a leader. Today’s customer insight teams need the best leaders possible.

If empathy is the ability to experience some of the feelings of pain that another person is feeling, then compassion is the ability to translate that feeling into action. Empathy and compassion are two qualities that can fundamentally transform the growth trajectory of your sales organization. Dear Sales Leader, For the sake of your people: Read. Digest. Apply. 1. Get to know your people. They are human beings. They have lives outside the office. Respect that. If they have small kids, perhaps they'd appreciate a little flexibility on that Monday 9am or Friday 3pm sales meeting. Particularly during the summer months. Assume the best at all times. Everyone is fighting a battle you know nothing about. Provide some breathing room, and you'll receive their support 10x in return. A salesperson is not a number. Don't treat her like that. Get to know each individually and as a group. What gets each of them out of bed every morning? What role does each of them play on the team? Trust me, they all play a role. 2. Be vulnerable. Especially if you have just started a leadership role at a new company. Sure, you've worked in many great companies and been super successful at those companies. But you haven't done beans at this company yet. Sure, you have years and years of experience. You'll have the opportunity to apply what's relevant down the road. Right now, accept and publicly share that you need their help getting up to speed. You need their help understanding the business, the market, the product, the challenges, what's been tried before and what has not. Be super-inquisitive. Don't be afraid to ask why things are done a certain way if something doesn't make sense at first glance. But remember, maybe there is a valid reason for it. Once you have absorbed it all, only then can you add real value. While you are doing this, continue getting to know your people. See also: 6 Tips to Augment Sales and Prospecting 3. Walk in their shoes. Don't just say: "I wouldn't make you do anything that I wouldn't do myself." Actually go do it. You might learn a few things. Assign yourself a few accounts. Do some prospecting. Book some meetings. Take the call from that frustrated client. Take the feedback to the cross-functional partners. Close a deal. More importantly, close it out in Salesforce (or whatever CRM you use). Is it an easy process for your pepole? Experience a typical day walking in their shoes. Only then can you be truly emphatic. Titles don't make leaders. Actions do. 4. Be there for them. Listen. This is important. Genuinely be there for them. If you have done 1), 2) and 3), then they will come to you as their leader. They will look for your guidance, help and support. If you have done 1), 2) and 3) well, you may find that your role as a sales leader morphs into somewhat of a counselor. That's okay. Our role as sales leaders is to spend 90% of our time watching and listening. It is in these moments that you can apply your years of experience. Apply it. Share it. Leverage it. There will be times when your people are frustrated, and they just need to talk. Be there for them. There will be times when things are happening outside of work, things that they are dealing with. Apply empathy, give them some space, some flexibility, some breathing room. Nine times out of 10 they will thank you for it. Nine times out of 10 they will share with you what's happening in their lives. You may even be given the priceless opportunity to provide advice that will genuinely affect that person's life. That's what gets me out of bed every morning. Too often we underestimate the power of a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment or the smallest act of caring, all of which have the potential to turn a life around. 5. Earn the right to coach. If you have done 1), 2), 3) and 4) well, then you'll earn the right. Your role as a sales leader is to make your people more productive and successful (in my opinion, both personally and professionally). Get out in the field with them. How else can you provide in-the-moment coaching? Newsflash: It's often the tiny tweaks that you suggest after a client call or meeting that can translate into game-changing performance. Let people leverage your professional network. You've been in business for many years and worked for all those amazing companies, remember. Why have them struggle to find a way into the decision makers at their target companies, if someone in your network could provide a warm introduction? Be compassionate. 6. Celebrate success. Whether big, or small, celebrate it. And remember, it's not just about the numbers. What are the biggest challenges facing each of your people? Celebrate their success. Recognize them. Salespeople are human beings. Sure, they get paid commission on those big deals but what if that's not what motivates them? Maybe they are motivated by other things. A person who feels appreciated will always do more than what was expected. 7. Let them fly. There is no greater feeling than seeing your people embrace everything you have given them, all the time you have invested and watching them fly. Hearing them use some of your suggestions, seeing them get the expected reaction from the client, seeing them grow in confidence and seeing them pay it forward to those around them. This is why you chose a career in sales leadership, right? Back off slowly and let them fly. See also: Agencies: Grow Sales AND Develop Staff Empathy and compassion are two qualities that can fundamentally transform the growth trajectory of any sales organization. For the sake of your people, if it doesn't come naturally, please keep trying. They will respect you for it. Thanks for reading.

This article is about opening minds, eyes, hearts and futures. I'm going to take you on a journey into a world where I shine my flashlight into dark corners, challenging norms, introducing ideas and connecting different areas of current players and practice.   Thanks in advance for sharing, caring and daring to think in ways that transform. - Steve *********************************************************************** Imagine if we could just wave a magic wand and all enjoy mutually delicious sips from the same icy cocktail of healthcare reform. The solutions appear to be so clear and obvious — to everyone except the major players that engage in healthcare. Why would health systems, medical facilities and specialists willingly leave the B2B payer system and depend on consumer payments?  Why would hospitals, big pharma and providers want to compete on price when they can use their political influence and retain greater certainty in a regulated pricing model? If large self-insured companies contract with health systems directly, could we count on these companies to pass savings directly to their employees, rather than pocket them as profit? Moreover, what would be the fallout on payer pricing to the individual and the fully insured markets? If payer competition was lessened through direct contacting, could health systems ultimately wield pricing leverage in these relationships? Check out the latest reports on wellness plans and seniors' use of digital health tools. Why would patients who feel good or are not remunerated financially want to make these consistent, long-term behavior changes? In a country with a proven history of high obesity and chronic disease rates, why would patients choose to change their lifestyles en masse? What is the motivation for long-term adherence and results? Okay, then, how do we disassemble a massively interconnected, for-profit health model that is complete with individual and institutional shareholders and bondholders? What about the leftover millions of employees from payers, brokers and insurance agents who are not able to be repurposed into other jobs? What happens to the rest of the economy when consumer spending from all this unemployment and loss of investment money drops our GDP into the toilet? How would this affect future tax rates for individuals and companies? We need payers, drug companies, providers and hospitals to lower healthcare costs. But, if they do lower costs, what then? Instead of being motivated by satisfying shareholders and taking in more profit, will these companies choose to willingly pass on new savings as a result of lower pricing to healthcare consumers? If that's the case, why haven't we seen any major industry players going on record to say this? Enter Will McAvoy from the HBO show “The Newsroom.”  The fake TV anchor from ACN said it best with his famous utterance: “The first step in solving any problem is realizing there is one.” See also: Consumer-Friendly Healthcare Model   Increased healthcare costs, lower quality, worsening outcomes, fraud, waste, abuse, mass unaffordability, stagnant wages, overutilization, defensive medicine, uber-administration and physician burnout are all too obvious, painful and expensive realities. Yet these are largely the emerging effects of a largely missed core problem: The chief reason for our healthcare crisis has been political leaders' lacking the guts to make the tough decisions for our future. If our current weak, spineless, clueless, ego-driven, special interest capitulating, partisan robots led America during WWII, I fear we'd today be speaking Japanese or German. But the leaders in the 1940s recognized and decisively drew upon the need for all Americans to pull together for the greater good. Our citizens and businesses believed in the vision and greatness of perpetuating a better America for the next generation. As much as I never thought I'd say it, we actually need greater government oversight in several key areas. It is obvious that large healthcare industries and public players are not simply going to go away or let their built-up leverage shrivel up. Consumers and employers need to stand on more equal footing, which cannot be accomplished solely by the Triple Aim (simultaneously improving the experience of care, bettering the health of the population and reducing per-capita costs). When I think of great decisions that shaped our country, I think of John F. Kennedy's decision to land a man on the moon. I think of Lyndon B. Johnson getting the Civil Rights Act passed. I think of Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. I think of Congress passing the 19th Amendment. I think of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal with 100 days of full bipartisan support. And I think of the way America rallied together, had conservation drives and raised war bonds during WWII. We need those same leadership qualities to better position and deliver affordable, quality healthcare for the next generation. Consumer initiatives and bold plans are good — until special interests hit politicians. Apart from aspirations of greater political leadership, we need to have a viable model for bringing fairness, accountability and affordability to the current status quo of health care. ENTER: THE ‘HIT-IQ’ PLAN HIT-IQ = Health reform by Intelligent augmentation, Transparency, Incentive and Quantity. HEALTH REFORM: To speed up the ability for all players in the U.S. health system to benefit from reform, the HIT-IQ plan fills the cracks in healthcare reform. It is composed of the following: INTELLIGENT AUGMENTATION (IA): Also known as intelligence amplification. Think of IA as a computer system or technology that supports and enhances human thinking, analysis, planning and decisions. Yet it allows the control and oversight to remain with humans. An example is Google's search algorithm that allows us to find what we want online, in just a matter of seconds. Contrast this with artificial intelligence (AI), where machines are meant to fully reproduce human cognition within a system that functions and learns autonomously in its own domain. True human-free AI is not fully here yet, though portions of AI are coming forward in new technology and solutions. We now live in a world where much of our data has moved from paper to digital. Big data offers great benefit, yet it still has to be organized, analyzed, prioritized and optimized for a specific purpose. IA is the generator, and when coupled with massive computing power and speed, it allows humans to become far more accurate and efficient in their business and life activities. See also: The Search For True Healthcare Transparency   In a previous article on AI, I wrote about different companies, each with emerging technologies meant to improve accuracy and efficiency in different facets of healthcare. This includes medical imaging, mental health, risk management, drug discovery, genomics, hospital monitoring and lifestyle management. IBM's Watson is a great example of IA in healthcare, where doctors can better diagnose and employ the latest personalized evidence-based care. Help in efficiency can come none too soon. Recent reports show the last three quarters of U.S. worker productivity are at the lowest levels since the pre-stagflation period in the 1970s. According to popular economists, something very interesting is happening. The last six years of great technology has not helped overall productivity — in fact, it has gone backward in a hurry. This becomes extremely important for healthcare, which, at the end of 2016, will have the highest employment pool of any U.S. sector. Moreover, the pricing of healthcare and health coverage has become unsustainable for many individuals and small to mid-size employers. A big game of “financial musical chairs” now exists between employer profits, consumers who want to afford healthcare and retain their current standard of living and health companies that want to satisfy shareholders with ever-surging profits. The big fear of robotic automation and AI is that computers will replace human workers. But I believe IA efficiency makes job elimination en masse an absolute necessity in bringing down the cost of healthcare. Any company's purpose is to make profit, attain customers and stay competitive — and that does not include keeping people employed. That is, unless the replaced quality, accuracy and value becomes less than when current high levels of human capital were involved. With what I continue to see coming in IA solutions, I believe it will not be long until we see deep learning and pattern recognition being applied to hiring, work flows, management and core operations — as well as patient intake, diagnosis, m-health data, patient marketing, population health and chronic and acute remote and in-house care management. The fact that interest rates remain low also bodes well for healthcare companies to make investments in greater levels of integrated technologies that will replace bunches of humans with greater accuracy, efficiency, fewer errors and greater predictability. Let's not forget this technology operates 24/7/365 with fewer salaries, benefits, sick days, arguments — or the ability to file lawsuits. But wait...there's more! Look for malpractice rates and defensive medicine practices to come down significantly, as expertly designed, optimized, scalable and proven algorithms come into play. As medical malpractice rates drop, health systems and providers will capture that cost difference — and not add them over current net salaries. Et voila! Still lower costs! It's not magic, folks; we're trading off large inefficiencies and human-based error inherent with a large employment pool. There's a reason medical error is the third-largest killer in America, and big data analysis, predictability, accuracy, greater monitoring and efficiency are precisely what is needed for lower costs, higher quality, greater safety and better outcomes. Best of all, the system will still be run by humans. TRANSPARENCY: This is one area where the government must make a mandate across all states. We have seen that without mandated public and easy-to-access transparency, health consumers and employers have absolutely no chance of greater affordability. Healthcare companies have no interest in making healthcare more affordable to consumers. And, please, don't be lulled into thinking that just because payers, plans, medical device companies and big pharma/PBMs are working to lower healthcare costs and increase care quality that the savings will be passed on to the consumer in the form of lower, more affordable pricing. Look at this: United Healthcare's PATH program is a joint effort for better care outcomes. In 2015, 1,900 providers hit their program marks and were paid a bonus of $148 million, near $78,000 per provider. Sick and diseased consumers are going into bankruptcy and medical debt or are holding holding off seeing doctors because financial constraint — and United is paying doctors bonuses to lower costs that should have never been that high to begin with? Is this a joke? Providers are being rewarded for doing what is expected anyway, and the consumers (errrr, paying customers) get regularly increased premiums? Take a look at the PATH consumer website; with all the accolades on improving health, help me find where it says United will reward customers by delivering lower prices for their plan's premium pricing. Here are needed areas of transparency: 1. An all-claims reporting mandate, from every payer, hospital, facility, doctor, self-insured company and government agency. While the recent ERISA ruling by the Supreme Court caused some setback, the Department of Labor could — and should — push through self-insured entities to report payments through state-mandated requirements. 2. Every hospital, facility, health system and provider should have their full fees, within 90 days for every product or service, be freely and easily available to the public. Any website or app could tie into the API or data to create patient or employer comparison shopping tools. 3. Every individual and company must be able to see what underwriting factors and specific influences went into a payer deciding upon their fully insured plan premium. Line-by-line calculations, each fully explainable. 4. All pharmacy benefits managers (PBMs) should be required to be fully transparent on all fees, kickbacks and bonuses. 5. There must be increased safety when it comes to providers and facilities. There is no reason that circumstances involving doctors, hospitals or medical facilities that have been found guilty of state law violations or have lost or settled in malpractice suits shouldn't be made clear to consumers. 6. People should be made aware of drug companies' R&D costs. We're all sick and tired of the moaning relating to big pharma's R&D and how our demands for price cuts will kill future new cures and drug development. Okay, then, let's open those books so we can share in your pain. Hey, greater public appreciation and demand for IA in drug delivery will keep profit margins while bringing down prices. INCENTIVES:  I'd like to meet the geniuses who believe that a healthcare population that is 40% obese, full of chronic disease and is constantly tempted by fast food and sedentary online entertainment is going to make (wait for it) long-term consistent changes by using wellness programs. Will they do so because doctors (who are compensated by financial incentives or are punished by financial withholding penalties) tell them to do so? Here's a toughie: What if we asked doctors and practices to lower their cost to provide care, make less in profits and lower their salaries. Then, we told them they would willingly pass on these newfound monies to reduce pricing for patients because it would be financially healthier for the country's future. How do you think our white coat paladins, hospital administrators and health system executives would respond? This is not rocket science — it is common sense. Studies are very clear that loss aversion related to money is a far better motivator, even than giving them money. Moreover, only 25% of employees find their wellness programs at work to be effective. In a recent study of 7,600 businesses by Payscale, 73% of employers believe they pay fairly, while only 36% of employees feel the same. And just 21% of the workers believe the company is transparent about pay. Catching my drift, employers? You can kill three birds with one stone: gaining healthier employees, potentially lowering healthcare costs and improving engagement through greater levels of trust and feeling appreciated financially. Reward healthcare consumers by tying wellness goals to financial rewards or punishments. (We are talking cash here, folks — not trips, massages or points). Health plans? Same thing. If you want to balance out the risk of sicker members, per enrollment with the ACA mandates, hit up your chronic, pre-chronic and younger members. See how financial incentives and disincentives work there. If they use wearables and contribute data to you or their provider, they are rewarded financially. If they hit goals on medication adherence, weight loss, lowering cholesterol or blood sugar, give them a paid check rebate. If they have a yearly physical, reward them. Better yet, show them that future check with all applicable bonuses added together for their rewards. It is a nice, juicy number. Now, deduct 2% of that cash every week they don't execute — like a melting ice cube. Keep showing them as often as possible what they are going to be missing. Catching my drift? QUANTITY: Care delivery professionals, facilities and systems will soon have outcomes, patient satisfaction and cost numbers pitted against their service reimbursement levels — and, eventually, against each other.  Consumerism is growing and, whether healthcare stays largely regulated in its pricing or not, reimbursement levels at all aspects of the care supply and delivery chain (including on many prescription drugs) will likely decrease. Moreover, reimbursement via bundled, value-based payments will come to replace the old, perverse, fee-for-service model. Hence, lower payments for the same work means the number of people engaging in healthcare products and services must grow if revenues are to grow. Healthcare businesses will have to optimize every possible aspect of their business for new and repeat customer engagement and to retain their customer base. Especially important here will be those successful companies who focus on their intangible assets. These include advertising, marketing, sales, goodwill, customer relationships and various expertise that hospitals, providers, payers, drug companies and facilities have, which they can, and should, capitalize upon to their economic advantage. The companies that get this will shape their precise outcomes through mastering the art of optimization. Learning how to maximize their intangible assets to drive more engagement of current and prospective consumer clients, thus increasing quantity of services and products. They will look at every consumer and business relationship, every past and present contact, every opportunity in current consumer interactions, every supply and distribution channel, every employee and every piece of capital or human capital they have. See also: Is Transparency the Answer in Healthcare? Many healthcare companies suffer from tunnel — instead of “funnel” — vision. They believe they provide products or care and are paid for such — and that's it. But the organizations that recognize they can not only offer more but be more than their basic business offerings will derive greater revenue and profit. Population health is a great example. It is about more than capturing data from wearables; it is about recognizing the interplay between chronic disease and genetics and the need for screening those who don't currently engage in healthcare services. It is about tying in mental health for those who are caregivers and don't take care of themselves. It is about recognizing that, if you work out a medical debt with more than a negotiation but perhaps a thank you card sent after, your name will be more gold than mud. For direct primary care doctors, it is about offering a rebate to customers who bring new members to your practice. For a health system, it might be coordinating a telehealth counseling visit to a family member grieving because of a loved one's illness. What about making that extra call to check up on how a patient is doing at home the day after they get home from the hospital? Perhaps it's giving a free service. Often, the most self-serving thing a company can do is actually to be selfless. Maybe it is a doctor's office sending flowers after a successful surgery outcome or even upon a loved one dying. Maybe it is a call from a drug company outbound customer coordinator, just to see how the new medication is working. Health companies of all types and sizes that replace current limiting beliefs with empowering ones will find themselves on a track toward capturing greater community value, engagement and increasing their market identity. In short, companies that get people to want to engage and help others engage with those same companies will thrive. Players in healthcare must not forget that consumerism is not a dirty word; it is people putting up their hands saying, “I want to be cared for and find value in that care so that I can feel good about my time and money spent.” If they have to be cared for because of sickness or an emergency, then that is all the more reason to make patients feel good about you. It is no longer a healthcare world where providing the service, billing and receiving payment suffices. People and employers are smartening up and recognizing that lower reimbursement, more competition and new options for care and coverage are developing. Those healthcare companies that can integrate the intangibles in a meaningful, ethical and value-added manner for their current and prospective healthcare consumers will thrive. Increasing quantity of consumers and identifying and rendering necessary services is key (especially in a healthcare business environment that has properly integrated lower costs, greater efficiency through technology and better outcomes). It will make — and keep — current and future healthcare consumers far happier in the long run. Now that's some of the best risk management I know about.