Does the data really matter?
I think I have mentioned in the past that often the very best claims broker is the broker who helps clients not have claims in the first place….
A case study to explain this value.
A few years ago the firm that I then worked for was trying to win a major UK house builder’s account. The account had been with the same broker for over 20 years.
We had been pursuing the client for many years without any glimmer of winning the business. However, things had become challenging for the client. The business had grown, losses were growing and they were struggling to see the “wood for the trees”.
The business was finally put out for tender. We discovered through the tender process that the incumbent broker had become fat and lazy. The insured was getting periodic reporting on their losses but they had no real understanding about what was going on or how to resolve it. Their reporting involved sending half a tree to a client without any clear advice for readership or action.
The risk manager’s office was full of claims files and they were under enormous pressure from the business to reduce bottom line exposures.
What the client actually needed was:-
- Summary information that told them what was going on with access to the detail if necessary
- A precise of key actions that they needed to take to reduce the number of loss events
- Challenge to their insurers over the reserves being carried
- The electronic availability of all information together with claims reporting and tracking
When we won the business we introduced electronic claims reporting which emptied the risk manager’s office of claim paper.
We provided a 3 monthly report that ranked their building sites into best and worst quartiles. We then provided a summary of key actions they needed to take to improve the worst performing sites.
We challenged their insurers on reserving strategies .
At the end of the first year I received an unscheduled visit from the Risk Manager who could not believe that in just one year, new losses had dropped by 40% and that over ￡2m of reserves had been removed from the bottom line.
So a great story and one from a claims broker that does not involve any specific claims handling. The data does really matter and overlooking it or making it too difficult for a client to see can mean signing your own death warrant….
Client Executive, Insurance Services at Belvedere Mead | Owner/Coach at Gyre Coaching | Certified YouMap? Coach
8 年I appreciate the kind words Barry. I am lucky enough to have worked with some really talented people and have learned a lot from them. However, as you know, we are always learning! As you rightly said in your article, it's not just about having good results that help - it's also about managing a client's expectations. Most claims are pretty much run of the mill and run smoothly. It's how we handle those that aren't that make the difference to a client's experience.
Head of Complex Loss
8 年Couldn't agree more Barry. Having worked at both brokers and loss adjusters I have seen too many examples of brokers not understanding their role in the insurance programme. As for challenging reserves I'd say 'challenging reserves where necessary' is a better phrase as insurers do often receive challenges on reserves at renewal time, without any interest whatsoever at any other time during the insurance lifycycle and without any prior effort to understand reserving philosophy.
Client Executive, Insurance Services at Belvedere Mead | Owner/Coach at Gyre Coaching | Certified YouMap? Coach
8 年I couldn't agree more Barry, but claims staff can also add value in other ways. As an example, I received a burning cost adjustment from a client with reserves that matched our records. However, I knew they had recently taken some claims to trial and/or mediation, so enquired how they had gone. We were able to reduce reserves and this reduced the additional premium they were due to pay by over $1m. I would guess that the reason some brokers do not find these solutions is down to lack of experience; personal traits; being under too much pressure (due to stretched staffing levels); or, in your example, maybe even inadequate systems to capture and record the data required.