It may come as a surprise to some of you, but there was atime–not all that long ago–when life was much simpler.

When you watched a Western movie, for example, the good guyswore white hats, were neat and clean shaven, and sported asparkling smile. The bad guys, on the other hand, wore black hats,were unkempt and looked like scowling poster boys for “ExtremeDental Makeover.”

Further, while you couldn't tell for certain, you got thedistinct impression that those lawbreakers could use a stiff doseof Listerine (maybe because the heroines made such impossiblyhorrified faces when the villains tried to get up close andromantic).

Sure, one could accuse the filmmakers of stereotyping, but therewas a clear delineation of boundaries in those films that we askids found reassuring. As Archie Bunker put it: “You knew who youwere then. Girls were girls and men were men.”

So, if a good guy got shot, we hoped it was just a flesh wound;but if a bad guy got shot (and killed)–well, that was justice inthe Old West, and he probably deserved to die anyway for breathingso heavy and slobbering on the pretty little schoolmarm who wassaving herself for the righteous dude in the white hat.

In the insurance technology world, there has also long been atraditional white-hat/black-hat relationship between agents andcarriers when it comes to the nagging issue of single-entry.multiple-company interface, better known as SEMCI–or “real-time”transacting, as we know it today.

Technology to allow independent agents (our heroes) to transactwith multiple carriers from a single entry has existed for sometime. But the carriers (our villains) have insisted instead onproprietary systems that require re-keying of data by agents forsubmission to multiple insurers.

Gradually, however, a number of those insurers have beguntrading in their black hats for white headgear. Realizing thatmeeting agents' technology needs is the wisest of moves, thesecarriers have committed to newer technologies that allow agents tosubmit multiple quote requests from a single entry of customerinformation.

It sounds like the beginning of a happy ending for all–but justwhen you thought it was safe to go back in the water, anotherproblem has put the bite on the drive for real-time. That problemcan be summed up in two words–apathetic agents.

During the recent ASCnet agency technology conference, I spokewith a carrier executive whose company has worked hard and spentgood money to give agents real-time capability. This executive wasfrustrated, however, at agents' seeming unwillingness to pick upthe technology ball and run with it to achieve that capability.

“I have a group of agents I call my 'precious metals,'” heexplained. When it comes to technology, he said, “they have silverin their hair, gold in their pockets and lead in their [butts].” Hewent on to say that these agents seemed content to sit back andenjoy the fruits of their success, and were less than eager to dothe work of learning and adopting new interface technology.

“We're offering a lot” in terms of real-time technology, theexecutive added, “but unless they start using it, we're not goingto offer any more.”

Another carrier executive at the same conference pointed to “avocal few agents who are looking for an ideal world,” in which theycould take advantage of newer carrier technology by routing alltransactions through their agency management systems. The problem,according to this executive, is that the number of such agentsremains small.

For years, independent agents have been complaining aboutmultiple-entry of prospect data, but what are we to think when–atleast according to some carriers–many agents refuse to adopt thetechnology that would enable single-entry?

Most of the agents I talk to are in the “vocal few” who supporttechnology advances, but what of the great majority who neverattend a technology conference? Are such agents lazy, afraid ofsomething new, or is the problem that they just don't care?

I'm inclined to agree with another ASCnet attendee, who opined:“They just don't know what they don't know.” Whatever their reasonsmight be, however, one thing is clear–a sizeable number of agentstoday seem unwilling to do their part to help progress-mindedcarriers deliver more effective and efficient transactioninterfaces.

It's time for agents on the technology cutting edge to get theposse out and spread the word on real-time technology'sbenefits.

Unless the agency management users' groups can mobilize amassive educational campaign to promote the benefits of real-time,it seems that insurance transactions will remain largely mired in aworld where the guys with the black hats, scruffy faces and baddentures are the winners.