What Do Agents Want?

Beginning in 1993, the Big I and Reagan Consulting have collaborated in studying the most successful agencies in the country and how they got that way. Every three years a nomination and selection process results in the identification of 180 outstanding agencies, 30 in each of six size groups. Those agencies are studied and reported on for three yearsat which time the nomination and selection process is repeated.

Reagan Consulting collects substantial data from each best practices agency, crunches it into revealing statistical patterns, then interviews the top half-dozen or so agencies in each of the six size groups for further insights into what they do and why. The finished reports contain hundreds of charts and a good deal of representative agent commentary.

Shirley Lukens, IIAA agency technology advocate for 13 years, now manages the best practices efforts at Reagan Consulting. She reported to me recently that for the first time in her memory, even best practices agents are becoming overwhelmed with technology and ready to yell, Uncle. Operating local area networks, servers, installing and maintaining a variety of software, managing integration, interface, and e-mailwith document imaging thrown in for good measurewas tough enough. Agents are being forced to run complex data centers and that doesnt work with whats in effect a cottage industry.

And though carrier Web sites seem to provide some immediate improvement over clumsy, traditional manual systems, Lukens reports that once agents begin using three or four (rather than the one or two they do today), they will begin to experience the same efficiency nightmares they encountered with proprietary carrier terminals a decade or two ago.

The 2001 Best Practices Study runs to about 150 pages and provides a great deal of insight into the operational and financial ratios a well-managed agency can achieve. One finding is the relative business sophistication and effectiveness of the best smaller agencies. The Best Practices agencies seem especially concerned about using technology to provide high quality and efficient customer service.

The easiest way to take a look at elements of the report is to go to the Reagan Consulting Web site (www.reaganconsulting.com) and go to the research section. Youll be able to view the report in sections in HTML format and then order a paper copy for $60 if you find the HTML pages useful and interesting.

Future One 2001 Technology Study

On a regular basis and in partnership with more than 20 carriers, the IIAA produces Future One industry studies. The most recent one focuses on what Internet-related technology agents and consumers expect carriers to provide, and then what carriers actually plan to do. The study reveals some significant disconnects between what consumers say they want and what agents and carriers think they do, and between what agents say they want and carriers actually have on the drawing board.

The study grew out of a survey of almost 3,000 consumers, 200 small businesses, 667 agencies, and 35 responding carriers. The sample isnt massive, but its large enough to pay attention to. The survey indicates that both business and personal lines consumers, by a ratio of 3:1, are eager to use the Internet for insurance shopping. Theyre enthusiastic about having access to useful content for educational and ballpark pricing purposes. About 25 percent of personal lines consumers report theyd like to complete their purchase on the Internet. Depending on the service task category, consumer interest in online self-service ranges from 36 percent (claims information) to 51 percent (check coverage) to 59 percent (any claims activity).

The survey points out that agents and carriers, in their priority setting, seem to focus much more on their relationships with one another than on the customerwho the study shows is asking for attention. And though agents indicate they are especially interested in direct access to every aspect of what it takes to sell and service small commercial lines, the carriers seem less willing or able to oblige.

Though the complete study is available only to sponsoring carriers, a 16-page summary provides the key findings. I got a paper copy in January and was assured that a PDF version for download would be available through the IIAA Web site soon (www.iiaa.org).

Agents Council for Technology

ACT is an industry technology forum that includes agents, carriers, and vendors; it is unique, as far as I know, in facilitating ongoing dialog among the parties that have to work together to actually make agency-related technology work.

ACT creates industry technology-related papers and publishes them through its Web page on the IIAA site. The group released a major paper last fall, A Vision of the Future for Agency Technology. That paper, available in PDF format, includes a fictional description of a day in the life of the agency of the future, identifies key technology trends and issues, and offers specific suggestion to agents, carriers, vendors, and others about what they can do to move the process forward. The site also offers Emerging Technology and a New Vision for Agency Automation, a paper by yours truly, that supplied about half the content of the ACT Vision document and contains a succinct history of agency automation and the perennial issues that have surfaced along the way.

Although ACT hasnt so far dealt in surveys and statistics, it has and will continue to foster candid, non-political discussion among parties interested in insurance technology. With carriers, agents, and vendors able to participate in discussion of critical issues and express their perspectives and needs, theres actually a continuing potential for finding common ground for action. Prior to ACT, too many industry technology prescriptions seemed to be about agents beating up on carriers. ACT, on the other hand, is focused on facilitating the process of dialogwith the expectation that mutual understanding is more likely to result in effective solutions than one party using political doctrine or financial muscle against the other.

Making intelligent strategic decisions about agent-related technology requires as much relevant information as one can get. Best Practices, Future One, and ACT are good sourcesand in the case of ACT, a forum for participating in a sometimes frustrating, often encouraging, and always interesting industry dialog on technology.

Coming Soon
The AUGIE survey gets input from 8,000 agents.

At the beginning of the year, after months of preparation, AUGIE (the AMS Users Group Information Exchange), launched its online agents survey, which obtained input from more than 8,000 agency principals and staff. AUGIE plans to publish the study and analysis this spring.

The AUGIE survey grew directly out of agents perceiving carrier frustration. Many carriers reported an inability to know what agents, en masse, really want in the way of technology. Without that information, carriers felt it was difficult to make informed strategic decisions about agency-focused technology initiatives.

Prior to conducting the agents survey, AUGIE questioned hundreds of carriers about what theyd like to know about agents technology interests. That process resulted in a substantial inventory of questions that was consolidated into an online questionnaire. AUGIE encouraged agency survey participation beyond agency principals to include other agency staffwho might well have a different perspective from the owners.

Once the survey results are published, they should provide significant useful information for carriers trying to understand how to direct their technology interests toward agents needs. The survey questions presumably capture what it is carriers want to know, the sample is large and significant, and the data will be made available in ways that facilitate its study from a number of different angles.

John Ashenhursts company, Sound Internet Strategy, provides consulting, Web site evaluation, and seminar services to carriers and their trading partners. He can be reached at johnashenhurst@soundingline .com or (978) 318-1944.