Every Coverage Tells a Tale

Learn to tell stories.

Read Chris Amrhein's December column, "It's a wonderful policy.'

"Hold on there," some are no doubt thinking. "This is a serious insurance magazine, and you are supposed to be a serious insurance person providing us serious insurance advice. Storytelling? Seriously?"

Setting aside for the moment those thinking the above are evidently not regular purveyors of my articles, let me be clear. Yes, seriously.

I do not mean storytelling in the sense of lying or attempting to mislead or obfuscate, as in "You really expect me to buy that story, buddy? Go to your room!"

I refer to the purpose and effectiveness of true storytelling, as in the clear communication of what otherwise might be lofty yet unintelligible ideas. Liability coverage, anyone?

For example, which of the following best communicates the otherwise abstract issues of liability insurance and/or underinsured motorists coverage? Both appeared in recent consumer articles about how to save money on car insurance.

First, found on the Internet, this paragraph from a story in Kiplinger Personal Finance magazine by Kimberly Lankford:

One thing you don't want to do in an attempt to reduce your premiums is skimp on liability coverage. Mujadin [the independent agent quoted in the article] recommends liability limits of at least $250,000 per person, $500,000 per accident and $100,000 for property damage (or a policy with a "combined single limit" of $500,000, when available, which doesn't limit the coverage to $250,000 per person involved in the accident). Young drivers are more likely to have accidents, and lowering your liability limits could leave you on the hook for tens of thousands of dollars in expenses if your child hits another car or injures someone.

Now compare this portion of an article in Forbes' Dec. 6, 2010, issue by Ashlea Ebeling:

Last year, 10 days before his 21st birthday, Bradley Dreyer was skateboarding against traffic alongside a row of parked cars in Sonoma, Calif., when a drunk, uninsured motorcyclist crossed the double yellow line and hit him from behind. Dreyer, who had been studying to be an ER nurse, sustained a severe brain injury.

With the help of lawyer Guy Kornblum, Dreyer's parents got their own insurer, State Farm, to pay out both the full $100,000 of uninsured motorist coverage on their auto policy and their $1 million in umbrella coverage. But given Bradley's continuing needs, they now wish they'd carried even more coverage. "We have to face difficult decisions," says Bradley's mom, Mary Kate Dreyer. "We don't want to rob him of treatment now, but we need to preserve his estate for the future, what could be lifetime care."

While the first may be accurate and even great advice, it is firmly anchored upon numbers that the agent may have pulled from thin air. Sure, everyone knows younger drivers are more prone to accidents, but why are those particular limits the right answer? If all we are discussing is the theoretical possibility of an accident, without a clear understanding of the risks and rewards of certain liability choices, it all remains largely an appeal to the consumer's intellect.

Ah, but the second goes right for the gut, lighting up consumer emotions (especially parents whose worst nightmares often feature threat or injury to their child) like the proverbial Christmas tree. An innocent victim, an irresponsible driver, a promising future crushed while aborning, and even what may seem huge amounts of insurance proving minimal to meet the real needs.

Both articles are targeted to consumers. Both are accurate and realistic. Which gets the message across more effectively?

I suggest the second in a landslide. By starting with a story, the reader is fully engaged when policy limits appear in the context of actual risk and need. Rather than dismissed as "just another agent trying to sell me something," those limits are presented in true-life scenarios. Result? Even the formerly high-sounding limits in the first article now pale by comparison to this victim's true needs. In negotiating parlance, the first article sets the liability limits as the top anchor, inviting the reader to argue the agent to lower the limits and probably premium. In the second, the story establishes the higher limits as the bottom anchor, inviting the reader to ask, "How much more would be enough?"

If I walked through your agency today, what would I hear? Your staff discussing all risk, full coverage, blanket, BI and PD, UM/UIM or PIP? Or stories about all of the preceding? You have those stories, don't you? Actual claims from your agency? Real experiences from your personal life? An article you read that resonated with you in a way that will also resonate with your clients?

A word of caution: Never make up a story just to sound dramatic. Consumers have been to enough movies and watched enough television to recognize a dramatization versus real events. Your emotions, attitude, facial expressions and body language are all different between a truthful recollection of an event that resonates with you and one you just think sounds good. Notice the event doesn't have to be one you personally participated in to have resonance. Bradley's story above didn't happen to my sons, but it pushes my buttons for the simple reason I have sons and I instantly understand the potential pain and anguish of a parent in that situation. As Grady Jim Robinson explains in "Did I Ever Tell You About the Time: How to Develop and Deliver a Speech Using Stories that Get Your Message Across," when you tell an effective story, you only begin the tale– the listener or reader finishes it.

There are numerous good books beyond Grady Jim's on the art of storytelling. But you also can learn from simple observation. What movies work for you? What books do you like to read? What claims examples from your agency, seminars or reading hit you where you live? What tales are told by your clients or other consumers that grab your insurance brain's attention? Start noticing and noting, then file the ones that resonate with you for future usage, by coverage. Be sure to maintain credibility by giving credit where due; never say, "This happened to me," unless it did. Say, "I read something about that" or "I had a client one time who felt that way until…," then tell the story. Remember, because your customer will finish it with his own story, it really isn't an issue where the story came from as long as it's real and uncluttered with ego, exaggeration or needless enhancement. Effective stories stand on their own.

So this year, make a resolution to add or enhance your storytelling skills and inventory. Resolve to provide vivid illustrations in place of tired details. Replace exactness with emotion. Think of the difference between "A freighter sank in Lake Superior" and Gordon Lightfoot's "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald." Then after your next coverage "story," instead of saying "Huh?" your client may just say "Wow."

And what a Happy New Year that will be for you and your clients!