When I first started with Tech Decisions magazine, adecision was made that—for the most part—the focus of our articleswould be on what insurance carriers had to say about subjects inthe industry, along with a few consultant and analyst types.

Insurance software vendors were rendered to providing us accessto a few of their customers and that's about it. This month,though, we are giving some industry vendors an opportunity tocommunicate their thoughts on various topics.

The idea for this came to me last June at the CIO/CTO Roundtableat the IASA conference in Dallas. My friend George Grieve was moderating a session that featured severalvendors expressing their views on the industry.

I decided to incorporate that into the Tech Decisionseditorial calendar and now that we are part ofPropertyCasualty360.com the idea has expanded into a series ofposts this week that will allow vendors to speak out on the topicsthat affect them and their relationships with insurancecarriers.

I think one of our problems over the years—and one thatinsurance carriers had as well—has been that we looked at vendorsas wanting something from us rather than as contributors to theprocess. Insurers have also been guilty of looking at solutionpartners as simply vendors rather than what they really are:partners.

One of the questions we posed to several software companies whoasked to take part in this week's Web-exclusive series and in themagazine article that will be printed in the April issue washow did they view the relationship with carriers.

To give you a sample, Joseph Pilkerton, founder and COO ofFirstBest Systems, writes: “We strive to go beyond being a merevendor to be a trusted advisor.”

I'm sure we've all heard independent insurance agents use thosewords in describing their relationship with policyholders, so Ifound it fascinating to consider the relationship between vendorsand carriers has many of the same characteristics—particularly ifit is working correctly.

Mark Cummings, principal consultant with FIS North America,writes: “Then there are those carriers who (unfortunately) view apartnership as requiring a winner and a loser or a way to extractgreat discounts. These carriers will often make decisionswithout having offered the solution provider insight into theorganization, goals, limitations, and priorities. When the solutionprovider lacks the benefit of the big picture, and when carriercommunication is lacking, everyone is at a disadvantage. Inthis situation, projects tend to be more reactive and rarely resultin success.”

Fortunately, this appears to be a problem that is gettingsolved. Times are too delicate to even consider the possibility ofa project failure. Pointing fingers at the vendor won't earn youany bonus points with the executive committee or the board.

Finally, Wendy Corman, president, North America, for edge IPK,offers some advice for other vendors: “All vendors should act as ifthey had a stake in the carrier's decision; educating and providingexamples during the evaluation process. A good vendor is onethat can assist with information to help the buyer determine thebest fit.”

These are all good pieces of advice that some of us have beenignoring for too long.