Offering Experiences: The Emerging Basis of Competition

on Jan 31 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: basis of competition, distribution channels, edgeIPK, experiences
Comments: No Comments �

Can you imagine running into Steve Job’s office at Apple and exclaiming: “Steve, I just realized that the new basis of competition is being able to provide world-class experiences for our customers !” Either he would laugh you out of his office or call Apple’s security to throw you out of the company. Steve Jobs already knows that offering experiences is the way for companies to achieve stronger competitive differentiation and larger market share.

Apple, of course, is not the only company that has been pursuing this strategy. In our world of insurance, USAA, Progressive and Chubb are three insurance companies that immediately come to mind as companies providing a world-class experience for their clients.

But what about your insurance company? Of if you are a producer, what about the insurance agency or broker you work for? Does your firm provide a world-class experience? Is it planning to offer a world-class experience? (By the way, it is your customers, producers and other stakeholders who would be the ones deciding if your company offers a world-class experience.)

Let’s assume that either your company wants to offer a stronger experience or offer an experience in the first place. (Yes, every firm offers experiences. It is just that most of the stakeholder interactions are labored, awkward or otherwise painful.) What technology firm might you consider contacting that would enable your insurance company or agency / broker to offer experiences for your policyholders, prospects and others?

edgeIPK.

Who is edgeIPK? My question exactly. On Wednesday, January 27^, 2010 Wendy Corman, the newly appointed president of the U.S. division of edgeIPK and her colleagues were gracious enough to brief me about edgeIPK and show me a demo. The purpose of this post is to get across the highlights of that briefing.

Please note that I am not saying you should rush out and purchase edgeIPK’s products. But given that three of their insurance customers are Allianz, Zurich and Willis, you might want to consider reaching out to edge for a conversation, a demo and potentially creating a pilot for one of your lines of business. I’ll leave it to you to decide if you want to go their web site, find the contact information and call them.

So, what does edgeIPK offer? Edge enables insurance companies the ability to wrap and extend their functionality simultaneously to multiple delivery channels in multiple formats. That means, your insurance company can provide the same look-and-feel to producers, policyholders, prospects or others regardless of the nature and form of the interaction.

Say what? Edge enables insurer or broker functionality to be delivered in a consistent look-and-feel to the web, to mobile devices, and to laptop computers. A critically important point is that edge is ‘target platform agnostic’ so it doesn’t matter if the insurance company or broker is reaching out to people who use IE, Firefox, Safari, or other browsers. Nor does it matter what version of those browsers the target audience is using because edge (supposedly according to Wendy during the briefing) keeps up with all the browser versions and ensures the content can be correctly rendered for the target audience.

Edge capabilities can be used by marketing, distribution and call center staff in the home office as well as field office, agency or broker staff. Edge realizes insurers conduct business on a global stage and so supports multiple languages and multiple currencies. As they told me during the briefing, edge can easily handle our UK cousins use of ‘u’ everywhere as well as our US spelling. Edge supports Spanish, Chinese (Mandarin, I believe) and many other languages.

Edge uses their open presentation platform to quickly configure screens for the home office or field office user or agent or broker. Edge can configure composite screens from different applications which is particularly useful for home office call center representatives or agency support staff.

Edge focuses solely on the presentation of the information required by the insurance company or agency for their target markets. It is part of their skill set to keep up with the growing number of widgets and widget libraries. Occasionally edge will even create their own widgets for their customers when necessary. Edge also deals with security and performance to ensure that the insurance company’s target audience – regardless of end-device or browser – experiences approximately the same level of performance.

Yes, edge is new to the United States. They are in the process of building both sales and services teams here in the U.S. But based on my thirty-plus years in the insurance industry, I believe they are worth a look. Edge gets it: with the evolution of the web, the growing number of devices that clients and field personnel use, and the absolute mandate for insurance companies (and agencies and brokers) to provide a consistent look-and-feel for their policyholders, prospects and other stakeholders, edge provides the software to make that all happen.

Insurers do not have to replace their legacy systems or purchase new core administrative systems. Edge wraps around all of those systems and enables insurers to bring their ever-increasing number of Moments of Truth to the level of a world-class experience.

I’ll be checking back with edge and their insurance customers periodically to see  how edgeIPK is doing in the insurance space.  But to repeat, based on what I saw and heard (and given that Zurich, Allianz and Willis are world-class organizations themselves), I suggest you call edge and see what they can do for your company.

Building a Social Media Analyst

on Jan 03 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: anthropolgy, commerce, long tail, networks, psychology, Web 2.0, Web 3.0
Comments: 1 Comment �

A magic wand has been placed in your hands. With it, you can build what you think of as a good social media analyst.

What are the major areas of knowledge you would gather together to construct a social media analyst you would look to for research, analysis and advice?

A recent Digital Tonto post  (about their recommended 2009 reading list) got me thinking about this. I agree with some of their ideas (particularly social media analysts needing to know about network theory, including power laws) on this and have added some others. I’d suggest a good social media analyst should have knowledge about:

1. Networks and network theory
2. Power laws (and the long tail)
3. Anthropology (particularly applied to communication and collaboration within digital communities)
4. Marketing and advertising within digital communities
5. Commerce initiatives within digital communities, including the acceptance (or rejection) of the hard sell within digital communities
6. Insight about the evolving web – or at least, which new capabilities (e.g. semantic technologies, augmented reality) will emerge in the next 2 – 5 years.
7. ?

And aside from reading a lot of Marshall McLuhan (that should go without saying), what would you add to this mix of domains a good social media analyst should have? Why?

Naughty or Nice

on Dec 15 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: Santa Claus
Comments: 2 Comments �

Iggy ran into Santa’s office and was almost out of breath when he got there and sat next to Robby. Robby, of course, had arrived on time and he and Santa were enjoying a warm cup of hot chocolate – with those little peppermint marshmallows – and munching on some just-out-of-the-oven sugar cookies he loved so much.

Santa merrily chuckled when he saw Iggy plop down and waved off his tardiness.

“Don’t worry about it. Here, have a cup of cocoa and some cookies. Let’s get to it. You two know I need your help deciding who has been naughty or nice in the insurance industry space.”

“What do you recommend? I had asked you, Robby, to think more about the insurance industry and you, Iggy, to think about the technology companies supporting insurers.”

Santa reached for another delectable sugar cookie covered with the many-colored sugar sprinkles. “Tell me who should get what so we can finish our N & N list.”

Robby said he did have some thoughts:

• Let’s give the life and annuity insurers a large dose of hope for 2010. They are going to be regulated up one way and down the next in 2010. Plus the retirement crisis hasn’t really pushed sales as high up as it should have. probably due to the recession.
• For property and casualty insurers, predictive analytics and other modeling capabilities would be nice stocking-stuffers; plus a large dollop of reality of the necessity of federal regulation. The marketplace has moved well into a national – and really international – framework.
• For state insurance regulators we need both lumps of coal for those who think insurers exist primarily as whipping posts so they can remain in office – and lumps of sugar for those regulators who understand without reasonable capacity as defined by actuarial standards, insurers won’t be able to do business in their states in the first place

Santa put down his hot chocolate. “Anything else we need to put on the list for insurance industry players?”

Robby said there was one last item and it was a big one: “we need to leave a large saw for all insurers so they can clear a wide path in their companies to apply enterprise risk management practices and systems.”

“That’s a good one,” Santa guffawed. “And Iggy, what should go on the list for technology firms supporting the insurance industry?” Santa asked as he got up from his desk and poured More hot chocolate for Robby, Iggy and himself.  

“To begin with,” Iggy said “I want to give technology companies a large tub of white-out or white tape.” “Why,” Santa asked. “Because everytime a really new concept comes along, too many technology firms just relabel what they were already selling and say they are now offering the new concept.”

“I also want to give some of the outsourcing companies sets of small scissors to help them cut out all of those CMM levels and professional designations from their business cards.”

“Isn’t industry training important? Isn’t capability modeling important?, ” Santa asked.

“Of course it is but we know from talking to insurance professionals they really care about their outsourcers having actual, demonstrable insurance industry experience and referenceable clients whose company names carry some weight.”

“That can’t be all, ” Santa exclaimed, blowing the excess heat from his cup of chocolate and putting more of those tiny marshmallows in at the same time.

“Nope, there’s more,” Iggy said and rattled off:

• For technology firms new to the insurance industry, I’d put HBR Case Studies in their stockings. These companies have to come up with sharp and unstandable value propositions and ways to truly differentiate themselves from the existing technology players.
• For technology firms who are in a specific niche – say billing or even predictive analytics – we should give them a financial planning manual to they can prepare themselves to be acquired … or maybe directions to the nearest white knights.
• For technology firms who are creating products or services based on new technologies (say, semantic technologies), I want to give them a 48-month annual calendar because selling something new to the insurance industry is going to take a very, very loooooong time.

And that’s it, Santa. Iggy reached for two more of those sugar cookies.

What would you add to either Robby’s list for insurers or Iggy’s list for technology firms to help Santa decide what to pack in his bag in 10 days?

Web Information Discovery Strategies

on Nov 15 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: Book of Odds, context, Google, Web 3.0, Wolfram Alpha
Comments: 1 Comment �

We all know that the digital marketplace is  continually creating ever-increasing amounts of digital content. And with a plethora of content comes at least two problems: a paucity of attention and an inability to find or otherwise leverage the growing amount of digital content.

Three firms – one we all know extremely well – and two others are using two different strategies to resolve both problems: 1. get in the middle and 2. wrap.

Google uses the ‘get in the middle’ strategy by putting themselves between us (the folks looking for information) and the sources of information. We don’t need to belabor what the technology company does and how it is broadening its footprint into areas other than search. Google is about finding information.

Two new companies – Wolfram Alpha and Book of Odds – both employ a ‘wrap’ strategy. Both of these web firms wrap information around other information, sort of like a donut with a jelly filling. And both firms are about leveraging information by presenting it to users in a context and in a way that seekers of information can relate … although that relationship is also about the context of the seeker (the seeker’s background, goals, objectives of seeking information and desire to continually investigate) as well as the context the information is presented.

Let’s first look at Wolfram Alpha. From their web site, the company says its goal is “making the worlds’ knowledge computable.” The About page discusses in part that “Our goal is to build on the achievements of science and other systematizations of knowledge to provide a single source that can be relied on by everyone for definitive answers to factual queries.” On the Examples page the web site has 29 categories from Mathematics to Physics to Dates & Times to Places & Geography to Colors. I suggest you click over and learn how the site works.

Now let’s turn to Book of Odds. Excerpting directly from the About page” “ Book of Odds is the world’s first reference on the odds of everyday life. It is a destination where people come to learn about the things that worry or excite them, to read engaging and thoughtful articles, and to participate in a community of users that share their interests and ambitions.”

And that learning is done in the context of news articles from a multitude of sources but grouped into four major categories: Accidents & Death, Daily Life & Activities, Health & Illness, and Relationships & Society. Seekers of information – and here we mean seekers of probabilities – will find articles both on the home page and on each of the four major category pages. In addition, Book of Odds also displays statements of odds that are not embedded in articles. People wanting to better understand how Book of Odds began can read a blog by the Founder. I also suggest you click over to the Book of Odds site to find out how that site works.

Both of these new web publishers are about exploration and discovery of information in a way that Google is not. Both are hoping to create additional value – beyond returning a site or set of sites that may (or may not) answer a seeker’s question – by establishing a context for the embedded information. Both are examples of Semantic Web or if you prefer, Web 3.0, firms. A new species trying to make a living in the always changing web terrain.

However, the challenge for both Wolfram Alpha and Book of Odds is generating sufficient and persistent profitability by:

• Satisfying the information seeker in a contextual manner they expect or want
• Encouraging the information seeker to continue their explorations and stay awhile, and most importantly
• Triggering the information seeker to purchase something. Each of these new firms will be looking for a variety of revenue paths driven by the capabilities or results they provide the seekers who click over to their web sites.

Information discovery on the web is obviously so much more than search. But, and there is always a but, do you think Wolfram Alpha or Book of Odds has an opportunity to succeed as a stand-alone company 5 years from now? I’m not sure. Are you?

Shazam – Come On, You're Impressed Too!!

on Nov 13 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: iPhone, iTunes, Shazam
Comments: 2 Comments �

I got an iPhone last year. Didn’t think I would ever “go Apple” for anything. Grew up in the insurance industry so I was used to and happy with IBM computing, including laptops. Later I got a Nokia and “hello, love!” Palm was my device of choice for contacts, calendar, notes and such. Happy as the proverbial clam.

Then a year ago, my Motorola cell died. What to do? I really appreciated Motorola’s form factors and designs. I looked around and increasingly more of my colleagues were getting iPhones. And I was already on AT&T and wanted to stay on AT&T (spent a little bit of time at Bell Labs before divestiture… the thrill of working at Bell Labs was as palpable for me as when I was fortunate to get to Arthur D. Little in the late 1980’s.)

So, I got an iPhone. And one of the ‘apps’ I heard about was Shazam. Sounded too much like science fiction: you launch the app, make sure the iPhone can hear the music and within 15 seconds (or 10 seconds depending on how you set it up), it analyzes the sounds and then tells you what the song is, the artist, and even enables you to buy it on iTunes?

Really? Of course, you all know the answer is YES. OMG as the younger generation might remark. OMG.

Pattern recognition. Not of numbers in a document or table but of sound waves (which are probably decomposed to numbers of a sort). And that is really magic.

Now, it doesn’t work for all music and it certainly doesn’t work for classical music (no, I don’t mean music from the 1950’s or the 1960’s). But most of the time, it recognizes the music.

So, what’s the Shazam application equivalent for insurance? Well, it’s the beginning of my weekend and I’m logging off for the next few days.

You tell me what equivalent applications the insurance industry could use.

Here's Looking At You, Kid !!! Insurers Should Look Forward to Web 4.0

on Oct 26 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: Augmented Reality
Comments: 2 Comments �

We all know the web is in a constant state of change, of evolution. I’ve thought of where the web has come from, where it is, and where it is headed in terms of groupings of capabilities. To me, right now, I see four groupings:

• Web 1.o – what we had initially and it was all about content. Companies used these capabilities, such as they were, to provide brochureware to clients and prospects who clicked over to their company web site.
• Web 2.0 – the sweet spot of where we are now and it is all about collaboration. I see the collaboration as having two major flavors – 1) collaboration between people expressed by social networking – and 2) collaboration between software programs expressed by web services
• Web 3.0 – the contextual web and where we are headed next. The capabilities inherent in the contextual web are semantic technologies which enable the meaning(s) of text data to be understood, managed and analyzed.
• Web 4.0 – the world of confluence where tangible assets and intangible assets come together in meaningful ways. We see the beginnings of that in some of the apps on the iPhone (and probably on the Blackberry but, alas and aghast, I don’t have one of those.)

Another instantiation of Web 4.0 is augmented reality - wearing goggles that have information available to the person wearing them to better complete various tasks. The Technology Review article the link points to discusses how mechanics can complete their jobs faster and more effectively.

But think about using AR goggles for insurance claims adjudication and management.

Using AR goggles, a claims adjuster could visit a homeowner who is claiming a loss and see both the actual home as it is now after the loss and the home as it was before the loss. The AR goggles could access information from the insurance company’s databases or sources from the web showing detailed information about labor requirements, building materials and costs.

More generally, the AR goggles could show the processes and resources needed to adjudicate the claim in a way that remediates the loss to bring the claimant’s home back to the way it was before the loss event.

Similarly, AR goggles could be used by claim adjusters for automobile claims.

Yes, augmented reality might be as far off as ten years from now but I wouldn’t be surprised if some industries – other than our slow-moving insurance industry – are using AR well before that. Would you?

Thinking About Technology

on Oct 21 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: Alan Kay, Societal expectations, technology
Comments: 2 Comments �

Alan Kay defined technology some years ago as that which wasn’t around when you were born. Of course, he said it much better than that but the point stands. When you arrive in the world and become cognizant of your surroundings – including the technology that your parents use, you use, your friends use – you just think of all that ‘magic’ as normal.

Of course, we can project ourselves at many miles per hour or talk to family and friends across the globe; or see our favorite projected sights whenever we want (whether on television or YouTube or embedded in our social networking media); or text a message and expect an answer back instantaneously. We breathe, don’t we?

Those technologies are just part and parcel of our environment. They inform a baseline experience.

That baseline experience gets enhanced when the existing technologies are used in new and varied ways. That baseline experience gets enhanced when new technologies alter how we go about our daily life whether at work, play, or shopping.

Specifically the baseline moves up a notch or two or more when the application of current and emerging technologies alters  our interactions with other people, with how we conduct or affairs and, as importantly, with other technologies.

No company is an island onto itself. But you could be excused if you thought so because many companies behave as if they were impenetrable and highly fortified castles in their own right. You feel that when you ask yourself “how come I can do (fill in the blank) with that company but not with this company?”

The new baseline redefines your experience. The new baseline defines a new floor of your expectations. Companies that don’t meet those (new) expectations are competing on precarious ground.

What technologies or applications of technologies have heightened your baseline experience?

Life Insurers: Managing The When & How of Meeting Clients

on Oct 21 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: FaceBook, Life insurance, LinkedIn, Location, MySpace, Timing, Twitter
Comments: No Comments �

No, the above title is not a typo. I mean ‘when.’

The matter of ‘when’ has been changing over the decades. Back in the quite olden days of the husband working in an office and wife busy at home with 2.something children (and a dog),  life insurance clients or prospects could be reached after dinner if you wanted to talk to both spouses. That was ‘when’ was quite straightforward.

And so was the ‘how’ – a phone call. And that phone call was to a landline (or wireline if you prefer).

These days the ‘when’ is much trickier. Both spouses may be working; one spouse may be working and the other spouse is out of work but looking; both spouses may be looking for work; the stay-at-home spouse may be working at home or taking care of the children and off-and-about doing errands. Or possibly one or both of them are retired and gallivanting hither and yon.

Of course, the technology options that can be used to reach any of these people has become quite a full palette of possibilities.

Here’s one list of suggestions to reach potential life insurance prospects:

• Gen Y or younger Gen X: MySpace, FaceBook, Twitter (if the ‘following’ arrangements with each other are in place), texting  or other Instant Messaging (IM), or cell phone (do they even use a wireline phone?!)
• Older Gen X: FaceBook, IM, e-mail or cell phone
• Boomers: e-mail or wireline telephone (or possibly cell phone if you have a strong relationship with them)

And for those prospects of more complicated life insurance policies or annuities of some flavor – LinkedIn.

But what about a calendar service on the Web? Agents could upload documents for clients to view or print if they want. (Of course, agents could also create a document of potential meeting times and information to be reviewed, upload to a portion of their agency web site and send the URL to the prospective clients before the face-to-face takes place.)

How do you determine when to meet life insurance clients? What technologies do you use to arrange the meeting? To share information before the meeting? What technologies are your clients expecting or asking for to conduct business with you?

Yet Another Insurance Exchange Emerges

on Oct 14 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: insurance exchanges
Comments: No Comments �

Business Insurance published an article  written by Sally Roberts on October 11, 2009 titled “Broker group launching online placement system.”  Yes, this is yet another attempt at an insurance exchange in a long line of such attempts. Unlike natural biological systems where evolution seems to have quite a lot of success optimizing life for existing conditions, the insurance industry hasn’t had much luck with their many attempts at insurance exchanges.

Why don’t insurance exchanges find success? For an outsider, it seems like a great idea. And obviously it also seems like a great idea for producers (the demand side of the supply / demand equation) given all of their attempts to build a lasting exchange.

The goals and attributes of this latest version, which is a partnership between the Council of Insurance Agents & Brokers (CIAB) and LexisNexis, certainly are laudable. Some key points about this latest exchange from the article:

• Improve the efficiency and transparency of the broker-insurance distribution system while enabling insurers to differentiate their products (hint: this is a key factor to the potential success of any insurance exchange)
• Intermediaries will be able to submit a proposal for coverage to any of the participating insurers [hint the number and quality of these insurers are also key factors crucial to ongoing success] or wholesalers and collaborate with them on the underwriting, pricing and ultimate insurance placement
• Aggregate data flowing through the exchange to track marketplace trends including insurance pricing, individual insurer appetites{I wonder if some insurers will be shunned if they are not ‘eating enough’ as decided by ??], and new coverage introductions, in real time

Will this insurance exchange succeed where previous versions of this species quickly became extinct?

I’d be more excited about its future if there were also quotes from insurance companies in the articles that I’ve read. Insurers, after all, are the folks with the capacity – the money – to actually cover the risks.

Insurers have been none to friendly to these exchanges in the past because they do not want to become a ‘cell in a matrix’ and put themselves in a position to be chosen primarily (only) on price. Not that producers would do that, particularly in the general liability middle market where the pilots of this exchange will begin in the third quarter of 2010.

Of course, it might only take one or two insurers to participate in the exchange to break through… or not. BTW: look at the article in Business Insurance to see the costs of participation for both producers and insurers.

So, will this new exchange last longer than its ill-fated ancestors? Time will tell but I would not put much money on it until I:

• See the names of the participating insurance companies
• Find that these insurers remain on the exchange for, well, maybe not necessarily as long as Lloyd’s exists
• Better understand the revenue and profit pools for insurers, producers, LexisNexis and the CIAB
• Have a better handle on the information-based products and services the exchange will offer the market participants

What do you think? Will this insurance exchange be the one that survives? Why or why not?

The Red Herring Of IT Spend Estimates

on Sep 29 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: IT Spend
Comments: No Comments �

I don’t believe in IT Spend. That is, as an analyst I think it is a waste of time to model, estimate and project IT Spend. Whether the models are for business applications, infrastructure, storage, business intelligence or worse that anyone could think it was possible, emerging technologies.  I think IT Spend estimations and projections are a superb waste of time for everyone involved.

Why?

Insurers use IT Spend estimates as a wonderful excuse to be part of the herd. You don’t have to concentrate to hear the bleating. You have to concentrate to not hear the cacophony of me-too bleats coming from the industry. “What is my competitor spending on (fill in the blank)? Then we should be spending about the same or possibly a bit more.” Well, no, I beg to differ. It is entirely irrelevant what your competitors are spending. That should not be your primary concern (or even secondary concern).

Your primary concern should be how to meet and exceed your policyholders and producers expectations. Your primary concern should be growing your revenue stream (yes, profitably!). Your primary concern should be creating such a strong competitive position that your competitors really do wake up in the middle of the night concerned about what you are doing.

Technology firms use IT Spend estimates as a wonderful excuse to stay on track. Yup, that’s what insurers are buying so let’s offer more of that (whatever ‘that’ is). How can these technology firms break out of their box of ‘today’ if they are primarily concerned with what insurers are supposedly spending. I say supposedly because if they really believe in these IT Spend estimates and projections, I have some land in Florida I’d like to sell them.

Do you believe in IT Spend? Really? Why?

Web 4.0 Emergent

on Sep 23 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: Augmented Reality, Confluence, Web 4.0
Comments: No Comments �

I have been intrigued with the evolution of the web and its capabilities. For the past few years, I’ve thought of four evolutionary phases of the web:

• Web 1.0: the increasingly digitization of content (and yes, I want all books, music, photographs and other materials all digitized)
• Web 2.0: collaboration but of two flavors – collaboration between and among people (otherwise called social networking) and collaboration between programs (otherwise called web services)
• Web 3.0: having the capabilities of understanding the contextual relationships between and among unstructured data (also considered the Semantic Web)
• Web 4.0: blending of tangible assets and intangible assets (what I consider confluence)

When people ask me what I really mean about Web 4.0 or confluence, I sort of wave my arms and spout heuristic explanations. But now, thank you iPhone (and Android), I can point to applications that actually describe the marrying of tangible and intangible assets.

In the Technology Review article, dated September 23, 2009 and titled “What’s Augmented Reality’s Killer App?” the author – Kristina Grifantini discusses several applications currently being developed. She defines Augmented Reality as the ability to “superimpose virtual objects and information on top of the real world.”

This is definitely a capability insurers must be aware of and understand to better underwrite business and manage claims. And technology firms involved with spatial intelligence and/or applying semantic technologies should be salivating.

What do you think? How could insurers use Augmented Reality?

When Worlds Collide

on Sep 21 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: Dell, Perot Systems
Comments: No Comments �

Wow. Dell announced today September 21 they were acquiring Perot Systems for a tidy sum of almost $4 billion. (Whatever H-P can do, Dell can do better??)

A few obvious thoughts immediately come to mind:

1. Perot Systems looked down the road and didn’t see any future (well, at least not a profitable future)
2. Perot Systems was open to being acquired
3. Dell realized they needed to be more than a hardware company (which is true… only selling a product, specifically a commodity product even if it can be somewhat tailored, is a recipe for being acquired yourself) and figured growing their footprint into professional services was the right move.

So, just a few questions:

• Does Dell realize that providing professional services is not a commodity business? (referring back to the title of this post)?
• Does Dell realize that providing professional services requires an entirely different set of skills (and expectations about training as well as reward and remuneration that building hardware requires)?
• What plans does Dell have in place to ensure they do not enforce their commodity mind-set on Perot Systems?
• How long after the economy improves will it take the Perot Systems consultants and SI professionals to leave?
• How does Dell intend to compete with H-P and more importantly with IBM ? (Sorry H-P, but I still think of IBM as the complete technology/consulting/outsourcing package)

What do you think? Will this marriage generate sufficient profitable revenue (i.e., at least meet if not exceed customer expectations) or is it another holding action like so many acquisitions are (regardless of industry)?

Playing or Changing the Game?

on Sep 16 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: eInsurance Symposium, Innovation
Comments: No Comments �

More thoughts from the 2009 eInsurance Symposium…

Are you as a technology firm supporting the insurance industry – or whatever industry you support – playing the game just like your competitors or are you changing the game?

Playing the game, doing something the same as your competitors – albeit supposedly cheaper, faster, with more up-to-date technologies – or some combination is a holding action. Sure, you might pick up some market share here and there but you’re really just one of the herd. Nothing exciting and worst, no reason to think your firm really has a very long term competitive advantage.

But if you are changing the game … by hoping to change the rules of the game then it is quite possible you will create a longer-term competitive advantage.

Why bring this up?

Walking the floor of exhibitors at the 2009 eInsurance Symposium – it was a short walk because there were maybe a dozen exhibitors – only one exhibitor is truly trying to change the rules of the game: FirstBest.

Why?

You can click over to the FirstBest web site here but summing up they decided not to play in the “improving downloads or uploads” spaces. FirstBest realized insurers and agencies needed a shared platform to collaborate and accelerate business acquisition. Asynchronous communication is yesterday’s game; leveraging Web 2.0 enabling agents (or CSRs) and underwriters in the home office to see and work on exactly the same information at the same time is tomorrow’s game.

Are they wrong? Are they too far in front? What do you think FirstBest’s odds are of creating a competitive advantage?

eInsurance Symposium 2009

on Sep 10 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: eInsurance Symposium
Comments: No Comments �

Next week I’ll be attending the 2009 eInsurance Symposium in Dallas September 15 – 16. I plan to post at least one blog entry when I get back.

(Re)Allocating Insurance IT Investments

on Sep 07 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: Analytics, cloud computing, insurance IT investments, legacy systems
Comments: 3 Comments �

You’ve probably all heard of something like “if you were king – or queen – for a day what would you do?” Well, if someone waved that magic wand, made me king for a day in charge of insurance IT investments and told me that my actions would stick even after the crown disappeared, I would make some changes.

First, I’d get rid of the legacy systems. You know, those core administrative systems that are 20, 30 or 40+ years old. Yeah, they work but that’s not enough. Insurers need systems that can leverage current and emerging technologies significantly quicker than their existing legacy systems.

More importantly, insurers must have core administrative systems that can meet, if not exceed, changing customer and producer expectations. I’d either rip-and-replace them or  move these core administrative systems to the cloud. Yes, I mean the whole enchilada –  we would use a ‘platform-as-a-service’ encompassing software, hardware and, of course, storage as a service.

I’d set strong SLAs and tell all of my providers to watch The Godfather several times so they would get the basic concept of the implications of missing our company-required SLAs.

Next, I’d ensure we have systems (again in the cloud) necessary to make it easy for our producers, policyholders and prospects to conduct business with the firm. I’d apologize to all of our agents and brokers for breaking  our promises to quicken the pace of onboarding, licensing, appointments and training  (not to mention quoting and rating) that we so eloquently (and often) articulated to them  but have never fulfilled.

And I’d make sure we had the systems in place to capture and send data across the value chains between their agencies or broker firms, our field staff and our home office departments by leveraging the Web and eliminating paper. Snail-mail banished. Part and parcel, I’d implement electronic signatures [it has only been legal since Clinton was president] to enable the acceleration of onboarding, business acquisition, claim management and whatever other business functions needed authorizations.

Next I’d tackle analytics. Decision-making is critical for current and long-term strategic health. That means having robust analytic capabilities. And that means we must have the systems – and competencies – to use analytics. But analytics encompasses both structured data but also unstructured content. I’d ensure we used predictive analytics for modeling – incorporating spatial intelligence (i.e. location data) – but also text data mining.

Product development, target marketing, claim management, reinsurance (what mix of ceding and assuming?) and customer service are dependent on expert use of analytics (or would be if I was king for a day). I’d build an area of analysts that were expert in statistical analysis and using the capabilities of semantic technologies.

I’d also make sure we used all of our cloud capabilities enabling our operational engines and analytic systems to work together to support eDiscovery and compliance requirements.

If I was king for a day and could reallocate my insurance company IT investments, that’s what I would do.

What would you do?

Brushing Back The Tide

on Aug 30 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: change, technology
Comments: No Comments �

Back in 1996/1997, I delivered a presentation as a META Group analyst to a room full of insurance business and IT people.  The occasion was META’s annual conference – Metamorphosis (you’ve got to love the name) – and the theme of my presentation was the current and impending impact of the Internet on the insurance industry.

During the Q & A, one of the attendees from the insurance industry asked me ‘if there were any ways we could we stop it?’ I asked ’stop what?’ He replied ’stop the Internet from impacting the insurance industry.’ I was taken aback for a few seconds… and then replied ” well yes, but first we need to get some brooms and stop the ocean from hitting the beach.”

Why is our industry so afraid of change? Why can’t we see that we need to leverage current and emerging technologies to build or strengthen our competitive advantage?

Up In The Clouds

on Aug 14 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: cloud computing
Comments: No Comments �

We are hearing increasingly more about clouds.  The July/August 2009 edition of Technology Review has a wonderful section – actually what they call a Briefing - on cloud computing. In the series of articles in this briefing, you’ll read about both public and private clouds.

And that got me thinking…. Is there a natural progression of types of clouds that we will see in the marketplace each offering different capabilities that can be leveraged in the insurance industry?

By the way,  I relize there are significant issues centered around security, privacy, standards, data interoperability as well as time to move data to and from the clouds. For the purposes of this blog post, I’m going to put those issues aside for now.

Three Cloud Types

• Public clouds – brought to the market by the likes of Amazon, Google, Microsoft, IBM and others.
• Private clouds – built by and managed within the boundaries of specific corporations or possibly trade associations (LOMA, ACORD, III, or even the National Association of Insurance Commissioners)
• Personal clouds – created by the public cloud firms but scaled significantly down to a size that individual consumers or employees within a company can use .

Insurance Industry Cloud Applications

As those of us in the insurance industry know, to us glacial is fast. Slow and steady wins the race…. heck, we have a business to run: premium to collect, commissions to pay, regulations to comply with. So, we experiment, we pilot but we don’t race ahead to the bleeding edge. Wouldn’t want to create a disruptive force and make our competitors react to us….

But having let loose with that little rant, there are some opportunities here:

• Private clouds are a distinct possibility. I don’t see insurers trusting public clouds with their core administrative systems (policy administration, billing, claims, ..) or even financial and investment processes. But I do think it makes sense for insurers who can craft private clouds to do so. This gives them another option to the usual cast of characters (CSC, StoneRiver, Guidewire, Camilion, …). One possibility – contradicting myself here – is that insurers who have very strong relationships with their core admin technology providers might be willing to experiment with a cloud arrangement if their core admin provider creates and manages the cloud (preferably to very high SLA arrangements)
• Personal clouds- I see personal clouds used by agents or brokers as well as by their agencies or brokerages. Clouds and mobility go together well. Same reason I see the use of personal clouds for any field staff including claim adjusters.  One issue here that stands out is the critical need for data standards so data can flow from the field staff or broker personal clouds to the insurer’s private clouds.

What do you think? Is there a cloud too many here? What are some of the other applications you can think of in our wonderful, wacky world of insurance?

Meeting Technology Head-On: Insurance Implications

on Jul 26 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: risk landscape, technology, value-chain
Comments: No Comments �

Insurance is an information-driven legal product with a risk-driven financial wrap. As the business of insurance collides head-on with changing technology (whether information or telecommunications technologies), the insurance industry must understand and know how to react to how technology:

• Alters the landscape of risk
• Impacts the set of activity / value chains that comprise the business of insurance
• Improves costs by eliminating or streamlining business processes [why don't insurance executives first ask if the process they are streamlining should be done at all?!]
• Reshapes the nature of communication and collaboration (whether within the boundaries of the insurance company; across its walls to the field force and distribution channels; or amongst all customers, prospects and other key stakeholders)

2009 Vertafore Industry Forum

on Jul 11 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: brand, relationships, Technology Firm, Vertafore
Comments: No Comments �

Vertafore had their first (insurance) Industry Forum  July 9-10, 2009. The event was held in Seattle and sunshine was the order of the day for the event.

Why hold this august gathering? (Obviously that sentence would have worked out even better if the event was actually held next month). Vertafore has been an active acquirer over the past several years pulling ImageRight, AMS Services – which itself acquired Sircon last year – SilverPlume and BenefitPoint into its collection. Insurance industry pundits (analysts, consultants, and press) and Vertafore’s clients wanted to know where all this was leading.

From my perspective, Vertafore has major challenges in at least three domains they need to resolve before making significant headway:

1. Answering Kimberly’s question
2. Balancing brand and relationships
3. Auditing and adjusting

First: Answering Kimberly’s Question

My analyst colleague, Kimberly Harris-Ferrante from Gartner ( please note we work for different firms ) very astutely asked a key question at the event: what does Vertafore want to be when it grows up? This is critical. Without being able to answer this question, they will not be successful in whatever they want to accomplish.

To begin to answer her question, Vertafore needs to think through: 

• Do they intend to focus on channels, insurers or the value chains connecting these two interdependent actors? And in what way to achieve what value add for either the agencies or insurers? In other words, what will Vertafore bring to the party? Why should they continue to exist?
• How will either the agency channel or insurance industry structure change in the face of this ongoing financial crisis (which could lead to insurance industry consolidation, more insurers becoming single segment providers rather than offering multi-line coverages), shifting demographics (i.e., Gen X is  in the workforce; Gen Y is pouring in as we speak) and technological changes enabling faster connectivity from just about anywhere.

Two: Balancing Brand and Relationships

Each of the companies in Vertafore’s portfolio has some degree of brand recognition in its own right. Three of the firms – AMS Services, Sircon and ImageRight – are well known in the insurance industry. Vertafore  is planning to strengthen its own brand in the insurance marketplace. However, they must achieve this in a way that 1) doesn’t dissipate the brands of its subsidiaries and simultaneously 2) builds and strengthens relationships the company wants with its clients. 

But in the insurance space, particularly working with agencies there is a kicker that has to be taken into play. And it has to with relationships. Because in insurance, relationships are crucial. The emerging digital marketplace notwithstanding, relationships – or the lack of them or the lack of strong relationships – will knock an agency or  insurer off of its leadership position.

Insurance is a relationship business whether from the perspective of agents with their clients or from the perspective of agencies with the technology firms that support their agency operations. Or from the perspective of an insurance company with the technology firms it decides to do business with.

Brand and relationships: two interdependent forces. Either one is necessary but you need both to have a sufficient solution.

Three: Auditing and Adjusting

This domain of challenges encompasses the need for Vertafore – writ large to include its current and future acquisitions – to continually audit what they are doing and what they plan to do against the ever-changing marketplace around them. Competitive dynamics, obviously. But keeping on top of what their current and targeted clients want, need and expect is mandatory. That is the ‘auditing’ processes.

The ‘adjusting’ processes are not as straightforward because they include more than just having the skills and competencies to use newer technologies (i.e. cloud computing) or enhance Vertafore’s existing technology solutions. Adjusting successfully means having the cultural will to change what the firm is doing even if it appears to be successful now. Adjusting successfully means not falling into the ‘innovator’s dilemma’s trap’ that was so wonderfully discussed by Clayton Christensen’s  1997 book “The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fall.” At issue is whether Vertafore has or can strengthen a culture of change particularly when they might arrive at a moment of being very proud of their solutions and services.

Wrapping Up

I’ve listed three domains of challenges – vision (what really is or will be Vertafore’s value add to the insurance marketplace), strategy (balancing brand and relationships), and tactics (auditing and adjusting).

Obviously there are at least two other domains – operations (the initiatives and processes Vertafore needs to shape and execute in support of its strategy and vision) and controls (the financial processes and protocols as well as the infrastructural support Vertafore needs to underpin the entire set of value chains).

Overall it was a very good event. I learned quite a bit and met several people from Vertafore and some of the companies it has pulled into its orbit. It will be very interesting to see how Vertafore moves forward in pursuit of achieving its competitive position in the insurance marketplace.

What do you think? Will Vertafore succeed – why or why not?

PBBI Analyst Day / User Conference

on Jun 14 by Barry Rabkin
Tags: Technology Firm, Technology Firm Analyst Event
Comments: No Comments �

I attended the Pitney Bowes Business Insight Analyst Day Tuesday June 2 and then stayed for the PBBI User Conference held directly after from June 3 through Noon on June 5. Both events were held at the Omni Hotel at ChampionsGate in Orlando, Florida.

Having attended quite a few analyst events during my 4+ years as the lead analyst of Financial Insights global insurance advisory service, I had significant comparison material to other technology firm analyst events. My take-aways were that:

• PBBI management and employees were quite solid. They knew what they were talking about.
• Refreshingly, PBBI people were not full of themselves. They understood what they had to accomplish to succeed but were not drunk on their own koolaid as some (very) large technology firms are.
• They understood their roots – from all the companies that have come together to make PBBI what it is today
• They are easy to talk to and I assume, do business with which is also different from other technology firms

For me to see how PBBI is leveraging their parent company’s (Pitney Bowes) competencies with those of the various companies that have come together (i.e., Group 1 software; MapInfo) was one of those ‘aha’ moments.

I am hoping, though, that if I attend next year, I won’t be collecting business cards from the PBBI team that still has their previous firm’s e-mail addresses in the domain name.