The sub-title of a great little book, "Happier," by Tal Ben-Shahar, is “Can you learn to be happy?” Ben-Shahar explores that question through a series of short chapters, summarizing the most popular course at Harvard University today. This book might seem a strange topic for my posts (as a writer on customer insight), but my coaching work with customer insight leaders has taught me the power of positive psychology. The book is also short (168 pages), fun and very accessible, so a suitable complement to some of the weightier tomes that I’ve reviewed. For those not familiar with the positive psychology movement, it was properly launched by Martin Seligman in his opening address when becoming president of the American Psychological Association. He proposed that, instead of just focusing on mental illness or helping clients address weaknesses, psychology could focus on ways of fostering joy, flow, strengths, etc. in individuals. In other words, to help clients focus on their strengths and how to be happier rather than seeking to address weaknesses or unhelpful thinking patterns. Professor Seligman has dedicated his subsequent career to this goal. This topic has also, of course, become popular with politicians on both sides of the “pond,” and I’m sure you’ve heard of the work on measuring well-being in society. Anyway, this book by Dr. Ben-Shahar, who teaches a course at Harvard University on happiness, is more of an accessible self-help book. It’s packed with personal anecdotes, simply communicated psychology and practical exercises for you to put into practice. Divided into three parts, these cover: What is Happiness?; Happiness Applied; and Meditations on Happiness. These are further broken down into 15 chapters, so many are less than 10 pages and an ideal short-read. Within each chapter, you’ll find at least one “time-in,” a moment for you to stop and reflect on how you’d answer a personal question. At the end of every chapter is an exercise for you to try. A number of these are suggestions of new rituals to put into place over weeks or months, not just quick fixes. Personal favorites for me, from the exercises, have been: 1) A gratitude journal: noting down, before you go to sleep, at least five things that made you happy that day and for which you are grateful. 2) Reflecting on your four quadrants of Rat Racer, Hedonist, Nihilist and Happy -- to learn from experiences about what really makes you happy. 3) Mapping your life: measuring how you spend your time and how this matches those things that give you most meaning and pleasure. 4) Goal setting: to set long- and short-term goals to move toward what you really want to do with your life. I’m conscious that without reading the book, a lot of this could sound like just American positivity, with fake smiles and overenthusiastic language. However, there really is so much more to it than that. Ben-Shahar does a great job in helping the reader understand the combination of meaning and pleasure that can help you be happier and the joy to be found in the journey rather than assuming happiness is a fixed state at which you arrive. As well, his personal anecdotes and the amount of time given to personal reflection and practical exercises continue to keep the theory grounded in the practical, day-to-day reality of your life. I was initially very skeptical of this movement and a book with such a title. Overly positive people who appear to be in denial about their circumstances and full range of emotions don’t do it for a natural skeptic like me. However, as I’ve had my eyes opened to the academically grounded theory here, I have found it very useful in my own life and with clients. My time mentoring future leaders over years had already taught me that you make more progress helping people play to their strengths rather than improve their weaknesses. In the second part of the book, Ben-Shahar addresses how to apply the theories of part one to education, the workplace and personal relationships. The workplace chapter focuses a number of pages on how individuals can find their “calling” -- what Marshall Goldsmith would call their “flow” -- that conjunction of meaning, pleasure and strength that make for the most fulfilling work. It is also pragmatic about crafting your existing role and work rather than assuming everyone takes this discovery as a Damascene conversion experience and rushes off to a new career. The personal relationships chapter is also a good reminder about expressing love, knowing the other person and expressing gratitude. The final part of this short book contains a series of seven shorter chapters or meditations on different aspects of happiness, from self-interest to beyond the “happiness revolution.” The conclusion to this work ends on a practical note, focusing us back on the here and now, thus what we are going to put into practice today. Overall, the book does well at avoiding false expectations but also helping readers try different ways of thinking and new practices in their life that could make them intentionally happier. During much of my coaching work with customer insight leaders, we come back to the source of motivation for that individual and the meaning and pleasure that keep them motivated to lead effectively and consistently over the long term. So, I would encourage any leaders to not be put off by what sounds like a fluffy title and try engaging with this short book. It may just reignite your passion and motivation to make a real difference through work that makes you happy.

Modern core systems are essential to an insurer’s ability to compete effectively in today’s increasingly complex and dynamic market. Policy administration systems (PAS), in particular, are ripe for modernization -- policy administration is the heart of an insurer’s operations, and it provides the information that feeds other core systems as well as most of the secondary systems, like document management and agent portals. Insurers know that modernization is an inevitable step on the journey forward. The exciting news is that the industry as a whole has reached a tipping point where nearly two out of three insurers are engaged in some stage of PAS modernization, whether in the evaluation stage of a new solution or in the actual implementation. SMA’s recent study, Policy Administration: P&C Plans and Priorities,  reveals that all insurers know they must take the modernization journey and that most are already on the way, although in different phases and at their own pace. Fully 78% are planning to replace at least one core system (policy, billing or claims), and more than half are planning to replace all three. With so many insurers working toward the same goal, there are certain commonalities and lessons to be learned that can be used to make a company’s PAS modernization projects more efficient and effective. One of the most alarming findings from the research is the substantial challenges that insurers are still experiencing as they work with their systems’ configuration tools. This is the number one feature insurers require in a new PAS, but it is also one of the top challenges they cite in working with the solutions on the market, including issues of handling the work internally. Our observation is twofold: Evolving PAS solutions are adding and enhancing configuration capabilities, but their usability aspects are still maturing. The second insight is that insurers are coming to realize they must reorganize to some degree to improve their maintenance processes. The skills and resources that a configuration specialist needs are often assumed to exist but are not always present. Resources that could be trained for this role are typically isolated in the business or IT organizations. There needs to be recognition that there are specialized skills to be learned for configuration and maintenance, and decisions to be made about where this work will be performed. Core systems modernization is inevitable, and although PAS replacement, the biggest component of that process, demands significant investments of time, resources and money, most insurers have already begun their adoption of modern core systems. With so many companies engaged in PAS replacement, we can learn a lot about what makes these projects successful, both before and after implementation. There are challenges ahead, but they are not insurmountable, and the benefits of core systems modernization will be realized for years to come.

What’s with all the investor interest in workers’ comp services? There are several dozen private equity (PE) firms looking hard at the workers' comp services business today, with many pursuing acquisitions of companies large and small. While their approaches, priorities and goals may differ slightly, there are several reasons why their attention will likely persist for some time. First, there are a lot more investment firms out there these days than five or 10 years ago, with a lot more capital to invest. That means lots of smart people with big bank accounts are looking to park millions of dollars, which means there’s a lot of competition for attractive companies. Second, some comp services companies have gotten pretty big, with earnings in the tens of millions of dollars and revenues north of $200 million. Finding potential targets, conducting due diligence and going through the deal process takes about the same amount of time and staff if it is a $50 million or $350 million deal. Obviously, PE firms would rather do a couple or three large deals than a bunch of smaller ones as it’s a lot less work on the front end, and a lot less to manage and oversee after the deal is done. And PE firms just seem to like companies with more revenue. Third, what used to be considered a problem -- the regulatory risk associated with a workers’ comp company -- is now seen as a strength when compared to a non-work comp healthcare firm. Investors see the 51 regulatory bodies affecting workers' comp as creating far less risk than the single regulator driving Medicare, Medicaid and most health insurance programs. Investors don’t know what’s going to come out of CMS as reform is implemented, so PE firms are hedging their bets by going where, in a worst-case scenario, they’re going to get hurt in one or two big states. Fourth, there are a lot of inefficiencies, stodgy business practices and just plain poorly run sectors of the workers' comp business. PE firms make a lot of money by stripping out inefficiencies, delivering better performance, streamlining workflows and processes, removing cost and delivering more value. Anyone who’s spent any time at all in work comp knows that there are a plethora of opportunities out there to do all of these. Bill processing, analytically driven medical management, intelligent utilization review, provider clinics, complex case services, IMEs/peer review and chronic pain management and addiction services are just a few sectors where there’s a ton of opportunity. Interestingly, no PE firm has yet taken advantage of the biggest opportunity in workers’ comp. That opportunity is to buy a comp carrier/TPA, rationalize the claims and medical management process, write workers' comp insurance and make huge profits by controlling medical costs and delivering much better outcomes. The investment executives I’ve spoken with about this seem to be afraid of the risk; what if they do it wrong, or get a bunch of bad claims, or whatever? To which I respond: You can’t do it any worse than many of the current comp carriers, so what are you waiting for?

Are there “muzzlers” in your company? People who stifle the flow of valuable information or use their influence to create secrecy, increase political advantage or reduce transparency? When valuable and timely information cannot flow freely within and external to an organization, not only is the company’s innovation, collaboration and talent development dampened, but its external relationship ecosystem suffers, as well. What I call “muzzlers” are cancer cells lurking inside your enterprise. Their destructive behavior is almost certainly damaging the brand you’ve worked hard to build. And yet, like a cancer that hasn’t yet manifested symptoms, you may be completely unaware of the danger. Information muzzlers believe information is on a “need to know” basis -- and you don’t need to know. Too many initiatives become massive secrets; too few function as test beds whose results are disseminated in useful ways. I believe information muzzlers are an unintended byproduct of scarce resources. More and more, departments and functions have to compete for resources. This has created an internal competitive force, with jockeying for mindshare and internal wallet share. Scarcity creates a fear-driven culture that causes information muzzlers to multiply. The cost of information muzzling is huge. It prevents collaboration and wastes resources. Worse yet, it inhibits leveraging the collective intelligence of the organization. Like cancer, information-muzzling spreads and begins to affect the entire culture. Just one example: I go to a conference, I learn something really cool, but because we have an information-muzzling culture, I don’t tell anybody anything about it. Now that best practice isn’t documented, shared or spread throughout the company, and the value of sending me to the conference is a tenth of what it might have been. Down this path lies higher operating costs and lost competitive advantage. Influence muzzlers can be just as costly to an organization. Influence is about strategic relationships within a professional network. Any time we’re faced with a challenge or an opportunity, we tend to think about what we should do and how we should do it. We seldom think about who-- who we need, who we know or how we might connect the dots from the relationships we have to the relationships we need. Insurance is typically sold through brokerage firms -- a vast, strategic, relationship network. Yet influence muzzlers don’t see its utility. Who in that network really understands high-net-worth individuals? Who in that network knows exactly how to value priceless artwork? Who in one of these agencies “gets” Millennials and their digital behavior? Making those connections is good for all concerned, but influence muzzlers don’t want to share. Fundamentally, they are undermining the value in the organization’s biggest asset, which is its portfolio of relationships. So far, we’ve talked about inside the organization. But muzzling, of information, influence or both, is just as harmful outside an enterprise. External resources are a huge asset to any organization: the advisers, consultants, coaches, speakers and others who bring cross-industry knowledge and an independent lens. As an outside adviser and a professional speaker, I run across muzzlers when I am engaged by an organization. Their passive-aggressive behavior signals that they want others to think they have more information or influence than they do. As a mentor drove into me years ago, “Real power doesn’t corrupt; powerlessness corrupts!” These people don’t have real power, so they use muzzling instead. Their behavior, whether fueled by lack of self-esteem of self-confidence, or political jockeying, or ambition, comes down to 1980s tactics of information hoarding and Rolodex hiding. They make everyone else’s job more difficult, but that’s just one small aspect of their cancerous qualities. One of the promises I made to myself when I started consulting and speaking professionally more than a decade ago was that I wasn’t going to be a “pull-string” expert for hire -- the kind who takes any stage, you pull the string, and you hear the same canned recommendation or speech over and over again. I prefer to bring a unique, contextually relevant perspective to every engagement. Above and beyond interviewing the CEO or the board who hired me, I dig around to learn more about the real challenges or opportunities within the organization. I reach out through contacts on LinkedIn. I ask for interviews with key leaders down to front-line contributors. I read industry articles or analyst reports. If the firm has physical locations, I may go visit some of them to really understand the customer experience and how the value is delivered. I’m not seeking access to confidential information that should clearly be kept as such, but for inputs that will allow me to integrate the key challenges and opportunities into my content. It’s this kind of outreach that occasionally brings me in contact with an information or influence muzzler. As an independent outsider, I’m in a unique position to see that destructive behavior and call it out. If I encounter one muzzler, it causes me to wonder whether this is actually a cancer that is spreading within this organization. And, crucially, does the CEO or the board know of this person’s behavior? Would they consciously choose a muzzler to be an ambassador of their brand? It makes me ask what other cancerous behaviors are going around this company. If you are a senior leader, the legacy you leave in your organization is in large part the bench you have developed, through your intentional actions. Every time a senior executive moves on, the next generation of leaders steps up. Will an information or influence muzzler get promoted even higher up? If that is the culture you built, it dilutes not only your legacy but endangers the entire organization. You have not just tolerated but encouraged cancer to grow. Consider how we deal with cancer: Either radiation to keep it from growing, or surgery to remove it completely. That’s exactly what you have to do with information or influence muzzlers -- either call them out on their behavior and take explicit steps to fix it, or cut them out. Otherwise their dangerous behavior permeates the rest of the organization. To avoid the organizational cancer spread by information or influence muzzlers, I recommend three actions for senior leaders:

1. Build a culture that’s unafraid of retribution, where you can highlight and celebrate “non-muzzler” behaviors.
2. Build feedback loops so that your internal and external relationships can inform you if they encounter a muzzler on your team.
3. Never stop improving your bench, because the legacy you leave in your organization is the team and culture created on your watch. You want knowledge curating and influence sharing to be your mark, not hoarding and hiding.

Takeaways

1. Like a silent cancer, information and influence muzzlers act in destructive ways that senior leaders may not know about.
2. The presence of a muzzler indicates a cultural norm that may be a cancer -- and it’s probably spreading.
3. Safeguard your legacy: Constantly improve your bench by cutting out any cancer -- including muzzlers.

When people are extraordinarily successful, examining their characteristics, values and attitudes can be instructive. The rest of us can learn from them and possibly adopt some of them to advance our own goals. Larry Page, co-founder of Google is an example of one who has achieved exceptional heights. Peering into his thought process can be enlightening. Page says, “Have a healthy disrespect for the impossible.” To conceive and develop the Google concept and then the massive company, its young founders had to have a very healthy disrespect for the impossible. Others besmirched the idea of collecting all the information in the world and then making it available to everyone in the world. Not only was it a bold idea, it was thought by most to be ridiculous and impossible. But Larry Page and Sergey Brin had a very healthy disrespect for the impossible. They made it happen. The concept of disrespecting the impossible could be entertained by those of us in the workers’ compensation industry. True, few of us are likely to reach the pinnacle level of Larry and Sergey, but we can borrow some of their bold thinking to get past the assumptions and barriers that keep us from achieving more. Everyone agrees workers’ compensation as an industry needs a healthy nudge to try new things. The industry is known for its resistance to change. Maybe the way to change the industry, to be an industry disruptor, is to begin with an attitude of disrespecting the impossible. Many people, including those in the workers’ compensation industry, focus on why something cannot be done. Reasons for this notion are many, but probably cultural tradition plays a role. Inventiveness is not expected or appreciated. Too often, the best way to keep a job in corporations is to keep your head down and avoid being noticed. Spearheading a new ideas is risky. Stonewalling new ideas or doing things differently or adopting new technology in an organization thwarts creative thought and certainly diverts progress. I was once told that to incorporate a very good product would mean doing things differently in the organization. So the answer was automatically no! We all know the old saying about the word "ass-u-me." It actually packs some truth. To avoid the trap, check assumptions for veracity. Incorrect assumptions can be highly self-limiting. Begin the process of problem-solving with new thinking -- disrespect the impossible. What could be done if the perceived barriers did not exist? What could be accomplished if new methods were implemented. Probably the most important ingredient for achievement in any context is tenacity. It’s easy to quit when the barriers seem daunting. Tenacity combined with a disrespect for the impossible might be unbeatable.

Free WiFi access points (APs) are a great convenience for consumers and can be a productivity booster for business travelers. But they also present ripe opportunities for hackers. ThirdCertainty asked Corey Nachreiner, WatchGuard Technologies’ director of security strategy, to outline this exposure. 3C: What risks do consumers and business travelers take when using WiFi services in public venues such as airports, hotels and coffee shops? Nachreiner: The exposure is potentially huge. It’s natural for people to congregate and wait in places like airports and hotels and use public WiFi access. So these are ideal locations for attackers to set up faked WiFi APs. This is possible because SSIDs (wireless networks) used in these locations are widely trusted; names like AT&T Wi-Fi, XFINITY WiFi, Boingo Wi-Fi and Free WiFi. It is easy for an attacker to broadcast a faked AP using these familiar names to entice victims to connect via the attacker’s AP. Furthermore, if your computer has connected to the legit access point in the past, it may automatically connect to the faked one. Best practices: 4 steps to using public-access WiFi safely 3C: If I connect to the Internet via a faked WiFi connection, do I still get on the web? Nachreiner: Yes, but now the attacker can see what you’re doing, infect your computer and set up man-in-the-middle attacks that can steal your account credentials and work files. 3C: Does part of this have to do with the venues – the hotels and book shops – not bothering to lock down the free WiFi access? Nachreiner: Yes. 80% of hospitality WiFi networks don’t require a unique password, and 50% do not secure or monitor their networks. I can share many stories about how easy it is to set up a faked AP in public areas and watch people join. 3C: This exposure has been out there since WiFi started going public more than a decade ago. So how intensively have the bad guys been exploiting this? Nachreiner: Bad guys are definitely exploiting this. I’m a fairly regular business traveler. I’ve found suspicious and very likely malicious APs on two out of 10 trips. l’ve been on hotel networks where my security tools show other guests on the network trying to connect to my shares. Whether they were just curious guests or malicious attackers is hard to say. But hotel networks are the perfect place for attackers to find victims. 3C: Right, that’s what happened in the so-called DarkHotel attack. Nachreiner: Exactly, one of our partners, Kaspersky, discovered attackers targeting the third-party WiFi vendor of a specific hotel. They were seeking intelligence on certain guests they knew would be staying at the hotel. They used the compromised wireless network to infect the computers of their targeted victims. This was a very sophisticated attack and not the norm. That said, it’s more common to find basic criminals putting up faked hotel network connections to steal information from guests opportunistically.

The recent speculation about Google entering the U.S. insurance market adds to the growing list of non-traditional competitors turning their attention to insurance -- a list that already includes Overstock, Facebook, IKEA and Walmart. While personal auto remains the popular entry point for these outside competitors, the impact is more far-reaching for property and casualty insurers. The question is no longer "if" outside competition will affect the insurance industry, but rather "how" agents and insurers can maintain a competitive edge and protect their businesses. Agents need to adjust their customer service approach to reflect the reality that younger consumers are not as loyal as their predecessors, while at the same time facing the increased threat of a direct sales channel. Insurers must grapple with the reality that tech companies will be relentless in finding ways to lower costs for consumers and circumvent agents. Insurers like Progressive, Geico and State Farm are already playing in the digital arena and are better positioned than mid-sized and small insurers, because they understand how the online game is played. The same is true for large national agents vs. regional or local agents. The big question is: Will the industry as a whole take a step back, identify its distinct advantages in today’s rapidly changing insurance market and start a wave of unprecedented innovation? Or, will the industry go the way of those that have come before (i.e., Blockbuster, credit card lenders in the '80s, travel agents, Yellow Pages, taxicabs, etc.)? The New-Entrant Advantage Before we discuss agents, let’s look at the advantages of the non-traditional competitor. It should come as no surprise that major tech companies and e-commerce giants have an interest in insurance. It’s one of the last remaining industries to not reach full digitization and root the business in analytics -- a weakness that can be exploited by the data-rich competitors with deep pockets.  Additionally, with the lack of customer loyalty, the struggle will boil down to who will win the customer: the agent or a company like Google. At the forefront of customers willing to jump ship are Millennials, who have surpassed the Baby Boomers to become the largest population in the country at 76.6 million strong. If insurance doesn’t take the extra steps to innovate and entice this generation, Millennials will more than likely gravitate toward a well-known tech company that already understands what they are searching for and what they are buying. Most Millennials were raised on Google -- whether it be for research, directions or email -- so why wouldn’t they feel more comfortable purchasing insurance from Google? For this reason, it’s no surprise that the top three priority areas for agents this year are found in retaining and servicing customers, as opposed to growing their business. The opportunity for agents is that this disruption from new competitors is forcing an urgency to evolve the customer engagement model to better serve Millennials, who have grown up using technology. This needed to happen regardless, and the sooner the industry modernizes its customer acquisition and retention strategies, the better. The Agent Advantage Though there is increased pressure for agents to stay relevant in this quickly evolving insurance industry, agents who leverage their distinct advantages for both customers and insurers will thrive. According to an Accenture consumer survey, customers value the insights they gain from face-to-face interactions with their insurance agent more than any other method, yet agents themselves often downplay the importance of their expertise as a competitive advantage. This is a mistake. When you consider that insurance enters our lives at times of personal turmoil, agents serve as a trusted adviser during critical moments. Agents help both the consumer and the insurer navigate the process of making the consumers’ lives whole again when tragedy strikes. Agents who adopt digital technologies and analytics will gain greater customer insights and will bring insurers the right business at the right price. According to a recent Applied Systems survey, 48% of participants listed competition as a top factor driving agency technology investments. Agents who allow a disparity in analytically driven risk management between themselves and their insurers will begin to lose their foothold in the industry. The Insurer Advantage There’s only one place where mass adoption of data-driven decision making, product innovation and modern customer engagement strategies can all take off at the same time. Insurers alone yield the largest ability to transform the industry in better service of their customers and fight back against the pure commoditization of insurance. There’s likely no stopping this trend, but there is a lot of opportunity to provide innovative solutions so that traditional insurance players maintain ownership of the customer. There is no time to waste, however. Just because the early focus is on personal auto, it should not drive a “wait and see” mentality for the property and casualty industry. Learn from industries that have gone before us in the digital revolution and suffered from technology disruption. Once the trend takes hold, the ripple effect of change industry-wide happens very quickly. The Bottom Line The best chance for agents to stay competitive and relevant is to work together with insurers, utilize data-driven strategies and engage consumers on a more personal level using technology as an enabler. The face-to-face interaction with clients is still extremely important, and analytics can effectively collect and store invaluable insights so you can make the best connection between insurer and consumer. Remaining a relevant and trusted adviser is the name of the customer relationship game.

What would it take to convince people that your business delivers a great customer experience? For tech giant Microsoft, the answer was more than $1 billion. That’s how much the company reportedly spent on its Windows 8 marketing campaign when the new operating system was launched in 2012. (See, for example, “Microsoft Betting BIG On Cloud With Windows 8 And Tablets,” Forbes, Oct. 11, 2012.) And how’d that work for them? Not so well. Windows 8 sales were underwhelming at launch, garnering far less market share than Windows 7 at the same point in its release cycle. So, what went wrong? In a word, it was the experience of using Windows 8. The software was designed to support both touchscreen tablets and traditional desktop PCs, but it handled neither particularly well. Many software reviewers and design gurus found the Windows 8 interface just plain confusing. One even declared that it “smothers usability” (Jakob Nielson of Nielsen Norman Group, Nov. 19, 2012, article titled “Windows 8 -- Disappointing Usability for Both Novice and Power Users.”) But this isn’t a story about the usability of a new software program. It’s a sobering reminder that great, loyalty-enhancing customer experiences -- the kind that get people talking and buying -- can’t be created with Super Bowl ads, stadium naming rights, public relations blitzes or any type of advertising campaign. Those marketing instruments may help pique people’s interest in what you have to offer, but it’s the actual interactions they have with your company -- the customer experience itself -- that will ultimately drive long-term engagement. Microsoft isn’t the only organization that’s erred in this regard. Many companies, across many sectors, try to use their marketing muscle to win the hearts and minds of consumers. The property/casualty industry spent more than $6 billion on advertising in 2013, according to research firm SNL Financial. And that’s just the carriers. It doesn’t include marketing expenditures by agents and brokers that, albeit smaller in absolute terms, are nonetheless material expenses for many field offices. Some in the industry would argue that these are necessary expenditures, required elements for raising brand awareness and consideration among one’s target market. That’s a fair statement, but in reality what often happens is that the marketing of a company’s brand promise gets far more attention than the fulfillment of that brand promise. And it’s that disconnect for customers that will undermine even the most carefully orchestrated branding campaigns, as Microsoft learned. How can you help your organization avoid this kind of misstep? Use the three tips below to reconsider what it really means to manage your company’s brand experience: 1. Think about brand in a brand new way. If the term “brand management” conjures up images of your chief marketing officer or advertising agency, then it’s time to think more broadly. People’s impressions of a company’s brand will be shaped by the totality of interactions they have with the firm. Granted, some of those interactions will be more influential than others, but they all serve to shape customer perceptions in some fashion. Companies that cultivate intense customer loyalty recognize the broad array of touch points that compose their brand experience. And they actively manage those touch points to create great, even legendary, brand impressions. For them, brand is about much more than a billboard, radio spot or TV advertisement. It’s about the end-to-end experience, from pre-sale to post-sale. It’s about their website, their call center, their retail outlets, their customer correspondence, even their billing statements. Every live, electronic or print interaction you can imagine. Case in point: Amazon.com’s obsession with packaging. The online retailer, perennially rated among the most loved brands in any industry, obsesses over every detail of their brand experience, right through and including the act of opening up the box they send you. Amazon recognizes that, even if subconsciously, the mere act of opening up a package will necessarily influence customers’ perceptions about the purchase process. And so they’ve tried to make even that as easy as possible by introducing “frustration-free” packaging that eliminates metal twist ties, razor-sharp plastic clamshells and other annoying wonders of modern packaging. As a result, it isn’t just buying from Amazon that’s effortless (thanks to their patented one-click purchase button), so, too, is opening the package they send you. That’s what end-to-end management of the brand experience looks like in practice. Think of all the customer interactions that will either reinforce your company’s brand promise or undermine it: coverage quotes, sales proposals, insurance applications, policy contracts, loss control programs, renewal communications, premium audits. The list goes on and on. No matter what you choose to have your brand stand for -- simplicity, expertise, helpfulness, sophistication, expediency or some other attribute -- ask yourself if that theme truly permeates your company’s brand experience, and not just its advertising. If it doesn’t, remedy that by better balancing investments in promoting your brand promise with investments in actually fulfilling it. 2. Don’t just say it, prove it. Talk is cheap when it comes to brand promises. Any company can claim through its marketing to be something that it isn’t: fast, friendly, knowledgeable, client-focused, easy to do business with. What ultimately matters to customers isn’t what you say but what you do. The most compelling brand promises are those that are backed up with tangible proof points -- things that demonstrate very clearly to customers (or prospects) that your business really walks the talk. Take Southwest Airlines, a company that aims to make air travel a bit friendlier, fun and hassle-free. Among the proof points: warm, personable staff and no baggage fees. Or Trader Joe’s, a company that’s sought to make the grocery-shopping experience less overwhelming. (How many varieties of ketchup does the world really need?) Proof point: The company stocks shelves with just a fraction of the number of SKUs carried by competitors, each carefully selected based on target consumer tastes. Patagonia, a maker of outdoor clothing and gear, has marketed itself as an environmentally responsible company. Proof points: The company uses organic cotton -- and even recycled soda bottles-- to make clothing and also donate 1% of revenue (sales, not profit) to environmental organizations. All three companies are beloved by their customers, in part because people know what these organizations stand for and see them delivering on their brand promise in very demonstrable ways. Does your company’s brand promise pass the “proof point” test? Consider what your firm has chosen to be famous for, what brand attributes you’ve claimed, and then ask yourself: What could you point to that proves it? If you’re at a loss to identify some tangible proof points, start creating some. Look at your customer touch points through the lens of your brand promise -- coverage quotes, applications, policy documents, correspondence, premium audits, etc. Think about how those touch points could be reshaped (or new ones added) to help bring your brand message to life during routine interactions with customers. And even if you are able to identify some existing proof points, it’s worth asking: Are you adequately highlighting them in your marketing campaigns? You might be aware they exist, but your customers and prospects might not. Don’t keep them a secret. Follow the lead of companies like Southwest, Trader Joe’s and Patagonia and show the marketplace that your organization’s claim to fame is anything but hollow. 3. Don’t sabotage your sales. While you can’t advertise your way to a great customer experience, you can at least hope to fill your sales pipeline via those marketing efforts. But even that marketing investment is pointless if it’s not easy for people to comprehend and buy your products. The purchase experience is an integral part of the customer experience. Sales interactions are as important to shaping your brand as service interactions. Yet companies often sabotage their sales (and undermine their marketing efforts) by making it difficult for people to buy their products. From poorly staffed retail stores to ill-equipped telephone sales reps to unnavigable websites, businesses erect obstacles that exhaust even the most interested prospects. BlackBerry, a company that dominated the mobile handset business for years, learned this the hard way as its product portfolio burgeoned and sales process became increasingly complex. The inflection point came around 2011, when consumers who visited BlackBerry’s website were met with a wall of more than 20 device images-- all with confusingly similar names (Bold 9780, Bold 9700, Bold 9650, etc.)-- presented on a black screen that made it difficult to even see the devices. Plus, the site offered no “electronic wizard” to help prospective purchasers narrow down the handset selection based on how they intended to use the device. Contrast that with what visitors to Apple’s iPhone website saw: just three smartphones, presented on a beautiful, bright and transparent background, making it easy to not just discern the devices but to choose the one that best met their needs. Comparing these two product purchase experiences, is it any wonder that Apple’s handset business thrived while BlackBerry’s stumbled? Oftentimes, it’s not the best product that wins in the marketplace but rather the one that’s most easily accessible and understandable to the customer. Our brains are wired for the path of least resistance. The more thought and energy required to navigate the purchase process, the more likely it is that people will just abandon the effort -- and buy something that’s less taxing on their minds. Maximize the effectiveness of marketing programs by carefully shaping the customer experience -- long before they’re a customer. How easily can prospects navigate your product portfolio? Comprehend product features? Interpret a sales proposal? Get purchase guidance when they need it? These are the questions you should be asking to create a purchase experience that not only burnishes your brand but also turns more prospects into customers. No matter what you’re selling, the real battle for people’s hearts and minds isn’t waged on billboards and airwaves. Marketing campaigns may provide air cover, but the hand-to-hand combat of each customer interaction is where true loyalty is forged -- the simplicity of your sales process, the usability of your products, the clarity of your communications, the helpfulness of your staff, etc. So, before you hang your hat on an expensive marketing campaign to convince people how wonderful your product or service is, ask yourself why they need convincing at all. This article first appeared at Carrier Management.

Last year’s hurricane season passed off relatively quietly. Gonzalo, a Category 2 hurricane, hit Bermuda in October 2014, briefly making the world’s headlines, but it did relatively little damage, apart from uprooting trees and knocking out power temporarily to most of the island’s inhabitants. It is now approaching 10 years since a major hurricane hit the U.S., when four powerful hurricanes -- Dennis, Katrina, Rita and Wilma -- slammed into the country in the space of a few months in 2005.

There have been a number of reasons put forward for why there has been a succession of seasons when no major storms have hit the US. It shouldn’t be so quiet. Why?

Put simply, the warmer the Atlantic Ocean is, the more potential there is for storms to develop. The temperatures in the Atlantic basin (the expanse of water where hurricanes form, encompassing the North Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea) have been relatively high for roughly the past decade, meaning that there should have been plenty of hurricanes.

There have been a number of reasons put forward for why there has been a succession of seasons when no major storms have hit the U.S. They include: a much drier atmosphere in the Atlantic basin because of large amounts of dust blowing off the Sahara Desert; the El Niño effect; and warmer sea surface temperatures causing hurricanes to form further east in the Atlantic, meaning they stay out at sea rather than hitting land.

Although this is by far the longest run in recent times of no big storms hitting the U.S., it isn’t abnormal to go several years without a big hurricane. “From 2000 to 2003, there were no major land-falling hurricanes,” says Richard Dixon, group head of catastrophe research at Hiscox. “Indeed, there was only one between 1997 and 2003: Bret, a Category 3 hurricane that hit Texas in 1999.”

There then came two of the most devastating hurricane seasons on record in 2004 and 2005, during which seven powerful storms struck the U.S.

The quiet before the storm

An almost eerie calm has followed these very turbulent seasons. Could it be that we are entering a new, more unpredictable era when long periods of quiet are punctuated by intense bouts of violent storms? It would be dangerous to assume there has been a step change in major-land-falling hurricane behavior.

“Not necessarily,” Dixon says. “Neither should we be lulled into a false sense of security just because no major hurricanes -- that is Category 3 or higher -- have hit the U.S. coast.” There have, in fact, been plenty of hurricanes in recent years -- it’s just that very few of them have hit the U.S. Those that have -- Irene in 2011 and Sandy in 2013 -- had only Category 1 hurricane wind speeds by the time they hit the U.S. mainland, although both still caused plenty of damage.

The number of hurricanes that formed in the Atlantic basin each year between 2006 and 2013 has been generally in line with the average number for the period since 1995, when the ocean temperatures have risen relative to the "cold phase" that stretched from the early 1960s to the mid-1990s. On average, around seven hurricanes have formed each season in the period 2006-2013, roughly three of which have been major storms.

“So, although we haven’t seen the big land-falling hurricanes, the potential for them has been there,” Dixon says.

Why the big storms that have brewed have not hit the U.S. is a mixture of complicated climate factors -- such as atmospheric pressure over the Atlantic, which dictates the direction, speed and intensity of hurricanes, and wind shear, which can tear a hurricane apart.

There have been several near misses: Hurricane Ike, which hit Texas in 2008, was close to being a Category 3, while Hurricane Dean, which hit Mexico in 2007, was a Category 5 -- the most powerful category of storm, with winds in excess of 155 miles per hour.

That’s not to say there is not plenty of curiosity as to why there have recently been no powerful U.S. land-falling hurricanes. This desire to understand exactly what’s going on has prompted new academic research. For example, Hiscox is sponsoring postdoctoral research at Reading University into the atmospheric troughs known as African easterly waves. Although it is known that many hurricanes originate from these waves, there is currently no understanding of how the intensity and location of these waves change from year to year and what impact they might have on hurricane activity.

Breezy optimism?

The dearth of big land-falling hurricanes has both helped and hurt the insurance industry. Years without any large bills to pay from hurricanes have helped the global reinsurance industry’s overall capital to reach a record level of $575 billion by January 2015, according to data from Aon Benfield. But, as a result, competition for business is intense, and prices for catastrophe cover have been falling; a trend that continued at the latest Jan. 1 renewals.

We certainly shouldn’t think that next year will necessarily be as quiet as the past few have been. Meanwhile, the values at risk from an intense hurricane are rising fast. Florida -- perhaps the most hurricane-prone state in the U.S. -- is experiencing a building boom. In 2013, permissions to build $18.2 billion of new residential property were granted in Florida, the second-highest amount in the country behind California, according to U.S. government statistics.

“The increasing risk resulting from greater building density in Florida has been offset by the bigger capital buffer the insurance industry has built up,” says Mike Palmer, head of analytics and research at Hiscox Re. But, he adds: “It will still be interesting to see how the situation pans out if there’s a major hurricane.”

Of course, a storm doesn’t need to be a powerful hurricane to create enormous damage. Sandy was downgraded from a hurricane to a post-tropical cyclone before making landfall along the southern New Jersey coast in October 2012, but it wreaked havoc as it churned up the northeastern U.S. coast. The estimated overall bill has been put at $68.5 billion by Munich Re, of which around $29.5 billion was picked up by insurers.

Although Dixon acknowledges that the current barren spell of major land-falling hurricanes is unusually long, he remains cautious. “It would be dangerous to assume there has been a step change in major-land-falling hurricane behavior.”

Scientists predict that climate change will lead to more powerful hurricanes in coming years. If global warming does lead to warmer sea surface temperatures, then evidence shows that it tends to make big storms grow in intensity. Even without the effects of climate change, the factors are still in place for there to be some intense hurricane seasons for at least the next couple of years, Dixon argues.

“The hurricane activity in the Atlantic basin in recent years suggests to me that we’re still in a warm phase of sea surface temperatures -- a more active hurricane period, in other words. So we certainly shouldn’t think that 2015 will necessarily be as quiet as the past few have been.”

Storm warning

Predictions of hurricanes are made on a range of timescales, and the skill involved in these varies dramatically. On short timescales (from days to as much as a week), forecasts of hurricane tracks are now routinely made with impressive results. For example, Hurricane Gonzalo was forecast to pass very close to Bermuda more than a week before it hit the island, giving its inhabitants a chance to prepare.

Such advances in weather forecasting have been helped by vast increases in computing power and by "dynamical models" of the atmosphere. These models work using a grid system that encompasses all or part of the globe, in which they work out climatic factors, such as sea surface temperature and atmospheric conditions, in each particular grid square.

Using this information and a range of equations, they are then able to forecast the behavior of the atmosphere over coming days, including the direction and strength of tropical storms. But even though computing power has improved massively in recent years, each of the grid squares in the dynamical models typically corresponds to an area of many square miles, so it’s impossible to take into account every cloud or thunderstorm in that grid that would contribute to a hurricane’s strength.

This, combined with the fact that it is impossible to know the condition of the atmosphere everywhere, means there will always be an element of uncertainty in the forecast. And while these models can do very well at predicting a hurricane’s track, they currently struggle to do as good a job with storm intensity.

Pre-season forecasts

Recent years have seen the advent of forecasts aimed at predicting the general character of the coming hurricane season some months in advance. These seasonal forecasts have been attracting increasing media fanfare and go as far as forecasting the number of named storms, of powerful hurricanes and even of land-falling hurricanes. Most are not based on complicated dynamical models (although these do exist) but tend to be based on statistical models that link historical data on hurricanes with atmospheric variables, such as El Niño.

But as Richard Dixon, Hiscox’s group head of catastrophe research, says:  “There is a range of factors that can affect the coming hurricane season, and these statistical schemes only account for some of them. As a result, they don’t tend to be very skillful, although they are often able to do better than simply basing your prediction on the historical average.”

It would be great if the information contained in seasonal forecasts could be used to help inform catastrophe risk underwriting, but as Mike Palmer, head of analytics and research for Hiscox Re, explains, this is a difficult proposition. “Let’s say, for example, that a seasonal forecast predicts an inactive hurricane season, with only one named storm compared with an average of five. It would be tempting to write more insurance and reinsurance on the basis of that forecast. However, even if it turns out to be true, if the single storm that occurs is a Category 5 hurricane that hits Miami, the downside would be huge.”

Catastrophe models

That’s not to say that there is no useful information about hurricane frequency that underwriters can use to inform their underwriting. Catastrophe models provide the framework to allow them to do just that. These models have become the dominant tools by which insurers try to predict the likely frequency and severity of natural disasters.

“A cat model won’t tell you what will happen precisely in the coming year, but it will let you know what the range of possible outcomes may be,” Dixon says.

The danger comes if you blindly follow the numbers, Palmer says. That’s because although the models will provide a number for the estimated cost, for example, of the Category 5 hurricane hitting Miami, that figure masks an enormous number of assumptions, such as the expected damage to a wooden house as opposed to a brick apartment building.

These variables can cause actual losses to differ significantly from the model estimates. As a result, many reinsurers are increasingly using cat models as a starting point to working out their own risk, rather than using an off-the-shelf version to provide the final answer.