Insure TV Broker Trends Masterclass: Digital Innovation

00:08.038 --> 00:10.809

Hello and welcome to this Broker Trends

Masterclass with me.

 

00:10.819 --> 00:16.059

Mark Colegate We are looking at digital

innovation in particular the increased use of

 

00:16.069 --> 00:19.938

data in placing the right levels of commercial

insurance business.

 

00:19.948 --> 00:21.739

What are the pros?

What are the cons?

 

00:21.749 --> 00:24.858

What are some of the trends to be aware of?

Well, to discuss that I'm joined here in the

 

00:24.868 --> 00:29.159

studio by Jason Chambers, head of underwriting

automation at Aviva.

 

00:29.169 --> 00:34.208

We're also joined by David Lewis, managing

director TC i Futures Limited and by Ashleigh

 

00:34.219 --> 00:37.679

Gwiliam, insurance success director at Full

Circl

 

00:40.889 --> 00:42.729

Jason.

Let's start with you from an underwriting

 

00:42.740 --> 00:45.020

perspective.

What are some of the biggest trends that you're

 

00:45.029 --> 00:48.979

seeing in digital innovation?

At the moment, we see increasing opportunities

 

00:48.990 --> 00:51.909

to automate even high levels of underwriting.

 

00:52.159 --> 00:56.349

Um, some of the principles around that are how

you codify your underwriting strategy and your

 

00:56.360 --> 00:58.909

appetite triggers.

I think more and more, uh,

 

00:58.919 --> 01:03.959

of insurers are looking to do that in a machine

learning environment and take advantage of data

 

01:03.970 --> 01:07.970

lakes and consolidating data.

I think if they you can do that in a way that

 

01:07.980 --> 01:13.269

enables you to have triage outcomes, then you

can move into a world where you can automate

 

01:13.279 --> 01:18.230

more of your business, giving faster answers to

brokers, create situations where underwriters

 

01:18.239 --> 01:22.470

can validate key points and then actually move

into a world where you give underwriters

 

01:22.480 --> 01:27.400

checklists to underwrite more in detail.

Um, alongside that which you would include

 

01:27.410 --> 01:31.370

things like decision support systems to augment

the data to support the underwriter in

 

01:31.379 --> 01:33.309

decisions.

There are significant opportunities.

 

01:33.730 --> 01:36.599

Thank you.

And, uh, David Lewis tell us a little bit about

 

01:36.610 --> 01:37.540

TCI futures.

 

01:37.550 --> 01:41.500

Where does that fit with Thomas Carroll?

That's a really good question mark about,

 

01:41.510 --> 01:46.300

um, two years ago, the group board of Thomas

Carroll started to look at really how we were

 

01:46.309 --> 01:48.879

going to make our business fit for purpose for

the future.

 

01:48.889 --> 01:51.779

We're 50 years old.

We're a very successful,

 

01:51.790 --> 01:53.379

multidisciplinary broker.

 

01:53.629 --> 01:56.220

But we've succeeded on the back of very

traditional processes,

 

01:56.230 --> 02:00.599

very traditional customer relationships, and

we're also fiercely independent.

 

02:00.610 --> 02:05.519

So in order to retain that independence, we

have to make sure that our business is equally

 

02:05.529 --> 02:07.379

fit for the next 50 years.

 

02:07.830 --> 02:10.389

Technology and innovation is clearly part of

that.

 

02:10.550 --> 02:14.449

And so the group board decided we would

establish a subsidiary company,

 

02:14.460 --> 02:20.259

uh called TC I Futures Limited, whose job

initially was as an R and D facility to look at

 

02:20.410 --> 02:22.990

the direction that we might want to go in as a

business.

 

02:23.070 --> 02:25.490

Look at the resources that we might need to

bring in,

 

02:25.500 --> 02:28.520

which are perhaps not traditional in the

insurance broken field.

 

02:28.630 --> 02:32.669

And then to start to look at ways that we could

deliver better products and better solutions

 

02:32.679 --> 02:37.880

for customers by harnessing some of the new

technologies that are available and and how

 

02:37.889 --> 02:41.860

large are you in terms of scale?

Because, uh uh,

 

02:41.869 --> 02:46.830

an INS, you know, an insurance broker firm by

itself, saying we're we're setting up an R and

 

02:46.839 --> 02:48.880

D unit.

That sounds quite punchy.

 

02:49.339 --> 02:53.570

Well, we're a decent sized independent broker.

We we we run into multimillion pounds worth of

 

02:53.580 --> 02:56.899

turnover, highly profitable, and I think we

absolutely have the scale.

 

02:56.910 --> 03:00.949

We have thousands of customers, both individual

and commercial,

 

03:01.410 --> 03:04.940

but we actually felt that it was something that

we couldn't afford not to do to be frank

 

03:04.949 --> 03:08.059

markets.

Um, whether or not you're a large scale broker

 

03:08.179 --> 03:12.970

or even a fairly modest scale broker data and

technology is going to dictate your future.

 

03:12.979 --> 03:16.970

And you either embrace it now or you get left

behind, and we weren't prepared to get left

 

03:16.979 --> 03:18.850

behind.

Thank you, Ashleigh.

 

03:18.860 --> 03:24.410

Finally, can you tell us a little bit about, uh,

FullCircl and where insurance intersects with

 

03:24.419 --> 03:26.929

that?

Well, FullCircl was founded following the

 

03:26.940 --> 03:28.600

merger of Judy and Artesian.

 

03:29.009 --> 03:34.550

Um, we provide client life cycle intelligence

with a mission to help the U K's regulated

 

03:34.559 --> 03:36.809

industries do better business faster.

 

03:37.270 --> 03:42.570

So we work with most of the U K's high street

banks, large telecom companies and as my role

 

03:42.580 --> 03:46.210

as insurance success director.

I work with industry leaders to listen to what

 

03:46.220 --> 03:51.009

the insurance market needs to help themselves

accelerate that digital journey forward,

 

03:51.309 --> 03:56.630

and how we can provide modern machine learning

algorithm led data and insights that will help

 

03:56.639 --> 03:59.750

them to help them with better outcomes for

their end clients.

 

04:00.690 --> 04:05.240

And we're talking about Obviously, all of you

have mentioned the importance of data and

 

04:05.250 --> 04:09.449

digital, but I wanted to dig into what some of

those headlines are because the sceptic will

 

04:09.460 --> 04:13.029

say, Well, everyone says they're using more

data and they're being more digital,

 

04:13.039 --> 04:14.470

and it's the it's efficient.

 

04:14.910 --> 04:19.149

But in practical terms, what are some of the

things that that you think you're doing or you

 

04:19.160 --> 04:22.510

think the industry needs to do.

Uh, David, can I start with you?

 

04:22.839 --> 04:25.239

I think, actually, Mark the scepticism is very

 

04:25.250 --> 04:28.420

well founded.

I think a lot of us are talking about data and

 

04:28.429 --> 04:31.679

how we can harness data and technology to

better effect.

 

04:31.690 --> 04:35.299

But ultimately, we're insurance brokers.

We're insurance people at heart.

 

04:35.309 --> 04:39.649

And and there's a lot for us to learn to

understand how we need to establish our

 

04:39.660 --> 04:45.369

businesses, understand what data we hold, um,

reframe our data in a way that becomes usable

 

04:45.380 --> 04:49.140

and then use it sensibly.

There's a lot of hard work needed and a lot of

 

04:49.149 --> 04:51.619

commitment and investment needed to make this

work too.

 

04:51.839 --> 04:54.920

So at one level, I think we're seeing brokers

who are,

 

04:54.970 --> 05:00.029

uh, sort of talking about using data.

But if you really want to prepare your business

 

05:00.040 --> 05:03.220

for the future, I think you've got to make some

fairly fundamental changes.

 

05:03.929 --> 05:09.359

Uh, you were mentioning that your business

looks across a range of verticals banking

 

05:09.369 --> 05:12.239

telecom companies.

So what is, uh are there things that are

 

05:12.250 --> 05:16.510

happening in other verticals that you think

would be easy wins for for the insurance base?

 

05:16.519 --> 05:19.390

I definitely think that banking is probably

more accelerated down the journey.

 

05:19.559 --> 05:24.369

Um, there's been a lot more going on within the

banking industry that the insurance you could

 

05:24.380 --> 05:29.109

be replicating, particularly around the the

smaller end of clients where a lot of digital

 

05:29.119 --> 05:32.989

on boarding is, is automated.

It's it's taken control of by,

 

05:33.390 --> 05:36.750

you know, ETrade systems where it's feeding

through.

 

05:37.059 --> 05:42.179

Um, there's been a big sway of reducing the

question set asked to on board a client,

 

05:42.429 --> 05:46.049

which not only improves accuracy by removing

human error,

 

05:46.290 --> 05:49.029

but it also improves the customer's end

experience.

 

05:49.350 --> 05:54.399

If you think if you've got to go on Bank Sy's

website and fill in 100 questions to get a bank

 

05:54.410 --> 05:57.910

account or bank Y where you can fill in five

and it's all done for you,

 

05:58.049 --> 06:00.160

people are more likely to go down that route.

 

06:00.540 --> 06:04.619

But not only is it with that client is then

having a better journey down the process,

 

06:04.690 --> 06:07.380

the data that the bank's getting in the end is

more accurate,

 

06:07.390 --> 06:09.760

and they can make better risk based decisions

on that.

 

06:10.459 --> 06:12.980

That's been going on for nearly a decade in the

banking industry.

 

06:12.989 --> 06:18.119

Yet in insurance, very few underwriters and

brokers have started down that path.

 

06:18.609 --> 06:22.070

Um, it's something that's growing, and we're

definitely noticing trends of people doing more

 

06:22.079 --> 06:25.730

and more with those ETrade systems to automate

that process and make it simpler.

 

06:26.149 --> 06:28.799

But it's definitely something from the banking

industry that could be replicated better in

 

06:28.809 --> 06:32.339

insurance.

Joseph, what are your thoughts on that is,

 

06:32.350 --> 06:36.000

is it is it a cultural issue why insurance

isn't the same place banking or have banks got

 

06:36.010 --> 06:39.170

some natural advantages?

Just generally, In my view,

 

06:39.179 --> 06:42.170

there isn't enough healthy dissatisfaction with

the status quo.

 

06:42.179 --> 06:45.959

The market is successful at the moment, but I

think we need to take advantage,

 

06:46.089 --> 06:49.940

um, of certainly the data and technology

opportunities and listen to the customer more.

 

06:49.989 --> 06:55.230

We're seeing an increase in demand for a higher

and better customer service and increasing

 

06:55.239 --> 06:56.880

levels of digital connectivity.

 

06:57.140 --> 07:01.880

Um, faster responses are are inevitable, and

greater certainty regarding cover is is just

 

07:01.890 --> 07:06.390

part of that, Um, I think there is a need to

respond in a way that is more,

 

07:06.399 --> 07:09.630

uh, in tune with the customer's needs.

And what does an environment look like where

 

07:09.640 --> 07:12.040

the insurance industry opens up on a 24 7?

 

07:12.399 --> 07:17.339

Um, how acceptable is it now to send an email

and wait 7 to 10 days for a response?

 

07:17.519 --> 07:22.519

Um, there's certainly an ambition in the market

to deliver faster quotations and reduce the the

 

07:22.529 --> 07:26.980

pain that is the on boarding process and

anything that enables customers at a greater

 

07:26.989 --> 07:31.260

level of certainty and reduction in friction,

um is is only a good thing,

 

07:31.269 --> 07:35.820

um, in Aviva, we're certainly supporting more

and more of our underwriters with data led

 

07:35.829 --> 07:41.500

decision making, um, delivering tools and

assets that enable us to augment their thinking,

 

07:41.670 --> 07:46.220

um, to deliver a great outcome for our brokers

and our customers in turn.

 

07:46.559 --> 07:50.839

But as an underwriter, is there a nagging worry

in the back of your mind that there's all this

 

07:50.850 --> 07:54.170

data?

The machine, if you like, pulls it all together,

 

07:54.179 --> 07:55.350

makes the decisions.

 

07:55.579 --> 07:58.399

But if you ever wanted to double check, it

would be incredibly hard to do.

 

07:58.410 --> 08:02.880

There's a danger that you could be victim of

the algorithm rather than the algorithm there

 

08:02.890 --> 08:05.970

will.

There could be a point where data becomes too

 

08:05.980 --> 08:09.299

powerful.

Um, we we are moving cautiously and diligently

 

08:09.309 --> 08:12.649

in that regard.

Um, we have systems and protocols that enable

 

08:12.660 --> 08:17.339

us to be really clear what the data is doing to

ensure we don't end up with a black box,

 

08:17.649 --> 08:20.410

uh, with with specific outcomes.

And as I said at the moment,

 

08:20.420 --> 08:24.899

we're in a period of augmented support.

So we have underwriters and portfolio managers

 

08:24.910 --> 08:28.950

that are looking at that data quite

significantly, understanding the tolerances and

 

08:28.959 --> 08:34.640

working for expected outcomes and immediately

being on those systems if those outcomes don't

 

08:34.650 --> 08:38.650

align to the tolerances that we expect.

But it's certainly an issue that we need to

 

08:38.659 --> 08:41.789

keep on top of as more and more data becomes

available.

 

08:41.799 --> 08:46.380

Yeah, and David, how do you get the blend of of

not just all the data but the individual in

 

08:46.390 --> 08:48.159

there?

Because everyone you talk to insurance,

 

08:48.169 --> 08:49.919

there's always a point where someone says, like,

you know,

 

08:49.929 --> 08:52.479

the ability to pick up a telephone.

You know,

 

08:52.489 --> 08:55.250

if you're doing a lot of business, you need to

be talking to someone.

 

08:55.260 --> 08:57.059

I think that's absolutely spot on Mark.

I mean,

 

08:57.070 --> 09:01.950

independent brokers like Thomas Carroll, for

example, have become successful for 50 years

 

09:02.049 --> 09:05.349

because of the relationships that they build

with their customers and the trust that they

 

09:05.359 --> 09:08.469

build with those customers and the quality of

the advice that they give.

 

09:08.479 --> 09:11.929

So using data and technology is intended to

support that,

 

09:11.940 --> 09:13.830

not replace that service.

 

09:14.070 --> 09:19.390

What we're trying to do is to blend the two

together so that where we can automate where we

 

09:19.400 --> 09:25.030

can streamline processes where we can use data

to be more proactive in providing clients with

 

09:25.039 --> 09:28.270

advice and solutions.

Then we'll do that.

 

09:28.630 --> 09:33.159

But it will never, in my view, replace the

relationship that is so important to most

 

09:33.169 --> 09:36.530

customers.

And if you can blend the two correctly and and

 

09:36.539 --> 09:41.830

blend them efficiently, then I think you've got

a really powerful independent broker,

 

09:41.840 --> 09:43.049

uh, network for the future.

 

09:43.260 --> 09:48.070

I couldn't agree with that anymore.

I think when one of the biggest issues we faced

 

09:48.080 --> 09:52.130

during the years when the shorts got a bit of a

bad rep was people just cold calling or ringing

 

09:52.140 --> 09:54.270

up.

And do you want to talk to you about insurance

 

09:54.280 --> 09:57.010

but ringing up and being able to say we've

looked at your business?

 

09:57.020 --> 09:59.429

We've understood your business.

We've reviewed your business,

 

09:59.880 --> 10:03.799

and this is where you're exposed.

This is how we can deliver positive outcomes

 

10:03.809 --> 10:08.830

that can protect you from financial harm.

By looking at what you need and you can do that.

 

10:08.840 --> 10:11.130

Before you even met the the client for the

first meeting.

 

10:11.140 --> 10:13.770

You can do all that pre work with the data

that's out there and OK,

 

10:13.780 --> 10:16.039

yes.

You need to then review that and machine

 

10:16.049 --> 10:18.789

learning.

Then data will never replace the power of the

 

10:18.799 --> 10:21.510

human brain to look at that holistic view of

the client.

 

10:21.520 --> 10:26.270

But being able to do that work upfront and

advance, you can do so much and deliver so much

 

10:26.280 --> 10:27.469

more. Absolutely.

 

10:28.299 --> 10:32.900

And actually from the data site, How do you

make sure that you don't get into a world that

 

10:32.909 --> 10:35.479

just collects more and more data for the sake

of it?

 

10:35.539 --> 10:37.739

I mean, I.

I let me give you an example from a completely

 

10:37.750 --> 10:39.549

different impression.

I talked to a friend who was a lawyer recently,

 

10:39.559 --> 10:42.609

who said to me, You know, 2030 years ago, if

you wrote a lease,

 

10:42.619 --> 10:46.760

it was 20 pages, but it was all properly spelt.

All the key bits were in there,

 

10:46.770 --> 10:49.750

and that was it.

Now they're 80 to 100 pages,

 

10:49.760 --> 10:52.000

and basically the kitchen sinks in there.

It's cut,

 

10:52.010 --> 10:55.659

cut and paste the spellings everywhere, and

everyone said Oh,

 

10:55.669 --> 10:59.260

the computers are all sorted out, and it's just

making life,

 

10:59.280 --> 11:02.809

you know, it's making life more difficult.

There's a sort of frictional cost to it that's

 

11:02.820 --> 11:04.130

built in.

It's not efficient.

 

11:04.150 --> 11:07.559

I mean, it's definitely a thing in the UK.

We're quite privileged about the amount of

 

11:07.570 --> 11:11.460

financial data that we have on companies

through the the reporting requirements and

 

11:11.469 --> 11:13.919

stuff like that.

When you compare that in comparison to the rest

 

11:13.929 --> 11:16.099

of the world, the UK is very strong.

In that area.

 

11:16.280 --> 11:19.510

There is weaknesses, particularly around

industry classifications,

 

11:19.520 --> 11:24.590

C codes and trade data, and and and someone new

to the industry that that level of data can be

 

11:24.599 --> 11:28.500

quite overwhelming.

Um, and the key is finding those real nuggets

 

11:28.510 --> 11:32.929

of insights that value within that data.

That delivers the message that you wanna know.

 

11:33.229 --> 11:37.609

And that's where we've been investing quite

heavily in machine learning algorithms and and

 

11:37.619 --> 11:44.380

rules based decision engines that look at

identifying that key nugget of information and

 

11:44.390 --> 11:49.039

rather than you sitting and going through 100

pages of a company account to find that one

 

11:49.049 --> 11:54.150

line that matters to you, um, the modern world,

we can surface that into F 10 key lines of

 

11:54.159 --> 11:56.950

information that go.

This is what you need to speak to this client

 

11:56.960 --> 12:01.039

about, and particularly with the the modern

brokerages and the way they're working.

 

12:01.049 --> 12:05.270

We're working quite heavily with actress,

broker, relationship management portal to you.

 

12:05.280 --> 12:08.789

So to put that information directly into the

actress portal for brokers.

 

12:09.409 --> 12:15.849

So when your S new 21 year old start up grad is

first in the industry and they're looking at a

 

12:15.859 --> 12:20.309

client file, they haven't got to be able to

analyse reams and reams of data they're just

 

12:20.320 --> 12:21.710

never gonna be able to do.

 

12:22.219 --> 12:27.239

It will just pop up on the screen and say to

them, This client has increased export turnover.

 

12:27.250 --> 12:29.109

You need to speak to them about marine

insurance.

 

12:29.239 --> 12:33.239

This client has started doing this.

You need to talk to them about that and

 

12:33.250 --> 12:36.710

identifying those key nuggets and those key

trends that will allow them to have those

 

12:36.719 --> 12:38.030

better conversations.

 

12:38.539 --> 12:41.080

And ultimately, that's what we all want.

As an industry is,

 

12:41.090 --> 12:43.299

it boosts the reputation of the industry as a

whole.

 

12:43.309 --> 12:47.219

If we're delivering better conversations based

on what clients actually need,

 

12:47.419 --> 12:51.159

rather than just talking a load of waffle that

anyone could not be interested in.

 

12:51.789 --> 12:54.570

I think as you were talking, I scribbled a

couple of words down.

 

12:54.580 --> 12:57.250

One is is sharing data and the other is

timescale.

 

12:57.260 --> 12:59.969

So this whole issue of timing is coming.

So just on the sharing,

 

12:59.979 --> 13:04.929

I mean to to be more efficient.

Um, Jason, it sounds that organisations will

 

13:04.940 --> 13:08.650

have to be more comfortable sharing data

between themselves.

 

13:09.690 --> 13:12.489

I can see the attractions of that.

But what are the dangers?

 

13:12.500 --> 13:16.030

Particularly when you know, you hear so much

about things that can go wrong in cyber,

 

13:16.130 --> 13:20.559

in the in the cyber world and security of data?

Is there a natural reluctance for people to say

 

13:20.570 --> 13:24.700

I'll wash a lot of my stuff through the Aviva

system to help you do your underwriting for it?

 

13:24.710 --> 13:27.030

Yeah, and we and we see a lot of opportunities.

I mean,

 

13:27.039 --> 13:30.989

we we we receive a lot of data from brokers as

we do from customers.

 

13:31.000 --> 13:34.900

And I think you know, the the big point that we

look to address is really understanding the

 

13:34.909 --> 13:38.159

value in the first instance.

So, you know, it's a case of sharing the data,

 

13:38.320 --> 13:41.070

but you really need to be clear, particularly

from the customer's perspective.

 

13:41.080 --> 13:44.429

What value are they actually getting from that?

And I think if you're clear on that point,

 

13:44.440 --> 13:47.960

we are starting to see the opportunities.

I think in terms of the sensitivities of the

 

13:47.969 --> 13:51.539

data, Obviously, as you'd expect, we have

protocols in place that support that,

 

13:51.770 --> 13:56.719

um, it It's not just a case of really, um,

moving forward with that data.

 

13:56.729 --> 13:59.039

Um, that enables you to unlock the potential of

it.

 

13:59.330 --> 14:03.159

And what we're looking to do more and more, is

how we enrich that data and then return it back

 

14:03.169 --> 14:05.150

to either the broker or the customer with

insights.

 

14:05.460 --> 14:08.590

And those insights enable either a high level

of personalization,

 

14:08.599 --> 14:11.489

particularly for the customer who more and more

wants to be recognised,

 

14:11.880 --> 14:13.900

uh, for the individual activities that they've

got.

 

14:13.909 --> 14:17.530

I think for a while the insurance industry is

somewhat pigeonholed customers.

 

14:17.700 --> 14:21.559

But we're seeing a complete level of uniqueness

and and a significant level of,

 

14:21.570 --> 14:23.099

you know, heterogeneous behaviour.

 

14:23.460 --> 14:27.919

Um, and for brokers, it's around how we move

portfolios at scale and give them faster

 

14:27.929 --> 14:32.159

decisions regarding the opportunities they've

got and how we can together unlock those.

 

14:32.750 --> 14:36.080

What are your thoughts on is it is and also

again if I put my sceptical out.

 

14:36.090 --> 14:40.539

Is there a danger that you then end up being

overly dependent on an insurer?

 

14:40.549 --> 14:43.770

It's actually quite hard if you decided you

want to move your business somewhere else.

 

14:44.169 --> 14:46.530

Yeah, I mean, that is a That's a very fair

point Mark.

 

14:46.539 --> 14:49.299

I mean, ultimately the data that we own as

brokers.

 

14:49.309 --> 14:52.724

We need to control that because it's it's our

customers data.

 

14:52.734 --> 14:56.434

It's information that we need.

But the data sets for most brokers aren't big

 

14:56.445 --> 15:01.635

enough to make some of the comparisons and some

of the data analysis that we we need to make in

 

15:01.645 --> 15:05.544

providing advice.

So I think I'm quite open to the concept of

 

15:05.554 --> 15:10.344

sharing data provided it's properly encrypted

and properly protected because I think that's

 

15:10.354 --> 15:12.835

in the greater good.

And that sort of open source attitude,

 

15:12.934 --> 15:16.755

I think, is something that we we have to

embrace in our industry if we want to make

 

15:16.765 --> 15:18.554

changes collectively.

 

15:18.809 --> 15:24.609

But at the same point, I want to make sure that

my customers and Thomas Carroll's customers and

 

15:24.619 --> 15:30.000

the customers of the other brokers that we will

work with they receive a personalised service

 

15:30.030 --> 15:33.830

so they are their their risk is reflected in

their activities,

 

15:33.840 --> 15:38.190

and the ratings and the insurance that we

provide match those activities precisely.

 

15:38.710 --> 15:41.820

Thank you.

And can I bring your your you in on your

 

15:41.830 --> 15:43.190

thoughts on data sharing?

What?

 

15:43.200 --> 15:45.000

What?

I mean, you mentioned things like banking and

 

15:45.010 --> 15:48.070

telecoms a little earlier.

Where are some of the areas that they might

 

15:48.739 --> 15:50.929

share?

Data that at the moment, the insurance industry

 

15:50.940 --> 15:54.320

doesn't It could, I think we were We were

talking before,

 

15:54.330 --> 16:01.109

um, before we sat down today about open banking,

and I think that's a real valuable tool that

 

16:01.119 --> 16:02.650

could help in the insurance industry.

 

16:02.929 --> 16:05.539

That sharing of more up to date data.

Um, you know,

 

16:05.549 --> 16:09.559

co companies house reporting is great.

Um, but that's it can be quite out of date and

 

16:09.570 --> 16:13.140

quite delayed.

And it's not updating by open banking,

 

16:13.150 --> 16:18.309

allowing data to transition easy between the

banks, allowing it to trans between a company

 

16:18.320 --> 16:23.780

and a broker can allow that broker to deliver a

product that meets your needs at that moment in

 

16:23.789 --> 16:26.179

time.

This can be really efficient for smaller

 

16:26.190 --> 16:30.150

businesses.

Um, who made them a more premium adverse and

 

16:30.159 --> 16:33.229

they can look at structuring, actually for what

they need rather than overshoot.

 

16:33.239 --> 16:37.169

And just in case they flex, I think there's a

lot more that can be done.

 

16:37.179 --> 16:41.080

I think the networks are a great opportunity

for sharing between these smaller,

 

16:41.090 --> 16:45.650

independent brokers as a way of, you know,

taking all that data that you have and putting

 

16:45.659 --> 16:46.820

it into a collective group.

 

16:47.070 --> 16:50.909

But I also think underwriters have a real key

role to play here.

 

16:50.919 --> 16:54.739

Underwriters see so much data from so many

different brokers.

 

16:55.119 --> 16:57.239

And yes, some of it's privilege.

And, yes, some of it they won't be able to

 

16:57.250 --> 17:02.210

share, but they but producing trends and

looking at right what's going on in the

 

17:02.219 --> 17:07.560

construction industry and that taking that

trend of data and that analytics and putting it

 

17:07.569 --> 17:11.489

through and sharing it with key broken clients

can be a real valuable way of putting that

 

17:11.500 --> 17:12.949

forward.

Thank you.

 

17:12.959 --> 17:15.939

And then we we talked a little bit about day

sharing, but the other part was Time Scales and

 

17:15.949 --> 17:18.579

Jason.

You mentioned that right up at the start that,

 

17:18.589 --> 17:24.709

you know, no business sits there in stone for

12 months and then it juts a bit.

 

17:24.719 --> 17:28.219

It's it's needs change and you turn up on the

right day to provide the underwriting.

 

17:28.229 --> 17:33.250

So can you talk us through how the timescales

and and sort of making sure that your your

 

17:33.260 --> 17:36.680

insurance coverage is sensitive to the to the

changes of of clients,

 

17:36.689 --> 17:41.729

how that operates or yeah, I mean, look, gaps

in cover and under insurance particularly,

 

17:41.739 --> 17:47.119

um, has been a problem for a while.

Um, and I think more and more on the back of

 

17:47.130 --> 17:50.739

inflation and some of the struggles that we've

seen businesses face the cost of business

 

17:50.750 --> 17:52.689

crisis.

There's some tough decisions for customers at

 

17:52.699 --> 17:56.839

the moment, Um, and it certainly a need to

recognise them and have high levels of empathy

 

17:56.849 --> 18:00.300

for what they're going through.

Um, data supports us doing that.

 

18:00.510 --> 18:05.849

Um, what we are looking for is more real time

data that supports a a deeper understanding of

 

18:05.859 --> 18:09.979

the customer activities for us to be proactive,

uh, tackling under insurance as,

 

18:09.989 --> 18:14.150

say, gaps in cover is is pretty significant.

We've already identified something in the

 

18:14.160 --> 18:18.819

region of £860 million worth of under insurance,

working with brokers and again,

 

18:18.829 --> 18:21.349

that's a really good example of how we're using

data, uh,

 

18:21.359 --> 18:26.199

to provide an insight to the customer around

whether they're appropriately insured or indeed

 

18:26.209 --> 18:28.670

if they've updated or reviewed their sums.

Insured.

 

18:28.839 --> 18:32.829

Um, 45% of our customers are only on 12 months

indemnity, period,

 

18:32.839 --> 18:37.150

and we certainly see that a number of customers

that are struggling to recover their business.

 

18:37.290 --> 18:41.069

So we're trying to bring that data more real

time to the broker,

 

18:41.079 --> 18:42.109

not just at renewal.

 

18:42.430 --> 18:45.650

Um, that information is a really good

opportunity for the broker to reach out to the

 

18:45.660 --> 18:50.209

customer at midterm, when there's perhaps a

less challenging time for a conversation.

 

18:50.219 --> 18:55.040

So we're trying to encapsulate as much data as

we can and support the broker together with

 

18:55.050 --> 18:59.689

their enrichment to not only see the customer

in entirety but really enable us to support

 

18:59.699 --> 19:01.920

them in a way that perhaps we haven't before.

 

19:02.699 --> 19:07.050

Can I just add to Jason's point about, um,

under insurance is a key issue.

 

19:07.060 --> 19:10.119

Me and Jason have had numerous conversations in

the past about it.

 

19:10.510 --> 19:14.839

Uh, mentioning indemnity periods was something

that Steve White Bieber before he stepped down,

 

19:14.849 --> 19:18.489

was talking quite heavily about how these

shorter indemnity periods were a key issue.

 

19:19.109 --> 19:22.150

But I also think when you're looking at those

indemnity periods and you're encouraging

 

19:22.160 --> 19:27.170

brokers to go out and extend B I cover to a 36

month, 24 month indemnity period.

 

19:27.689 --> 19:31.719

It's important they're looking at the the level

of cover for gross profit or revenue.

 

19:32.290 --> 19:35.459

And that's where data can really support.

Because you can look at right.

 

19:35.469 --> 19:39.349

What is your gross profit today?

And if we're going for a 36 month in damage

 

19:39.359 --> 19:43.270

period and insure you for that level, you could

be significantly under insured,

 

19:43.280 --> 19:48.229

Um, at the end of that three year period, and

by looking at the trends in data and looking

 

19:48.239 --> 19:50.589

back and going right, you've told me your BIS

today, this figure.

 

19:50.599 --> 19:54.750

But if I look at the last few years, I can

project your growth and provide a proper

 

19:54.760 --> 19:58.069

estimation of where you're going to be and the

level of cover you need.

 

19:58.479 --> 20:00.839

There was a client that we did a review of one

project on,

 

20:00.849 --> 20:05.280

and they were growing on average, their, um,

gross profit of about 16% a year.

 

20:05.619 --> 20:08.989

Well, if when they're insured for a 36 month

indebted period the size of this business,

 

20:09.000 --> 20:12.719

that could have ended up being a £33 million

under insurance claim down the line.

 

20:12.959 --> 20:15.430

It's not good for the insurer.

It's not good for the broker.

 

20:15.540 --> 20:18.089

It's definitely not good for the client, but

it's not good for the industry,

 

20:18.300 --> 20:21.140

and it gives the following on from the business

interruption court case.

 

20:21.150 --> 20:25.650

And stuff like that gives the industry a bad

name for people not looking at something so

 

20:25.660 --> 20:29.359

simple.

And that data is publicly available.

 

20:29.849 --> 20:33.359

Um, but also, if you've insured them for three

years, you should be able yourself to calculate

 

20:33.369 --> 20:35.069

the trend for your own internal data.

 

20:35.719 --> 20:39.349

And I think under insurance is a key area where

data can really help with those long term

 

20:39.359 --> 20:42.150

projections, particularly around B I and

indemnity periods.

 

20:42.500 --> 20:45.880

But but actually with, uh, again coming back to

times scales,

 

20:45.890 --> 20:49.339

let's assume your your business is growing at

16% a year.

 

20:49.349 --> 20:52.420

But then it has a year when it doesn't.

Would data allow you to say,

 

20:52.430 --> 20:55.060

Actually, guys, this year is gonna be a 3%

growth?

 

20:55.540 --> 20:56.949

I don't know.

The UK is in recession.

 

20:57.170 --> 21:00.300

Can I take Can I?

I'm in danger of being over insured now.

 

21:00.310 --> 21:03.920

Can I take that down and alter premiums

accordingly?

 

21:03.930 --> 21:06.020

I mean, it's it's definitely an issue.

I think,

 

21:06.030 --> 21:09.469

you know, and a couple of these clients we talk

about, particularly like covid.

 

21:09.479 --> 21:12.949

Made a big difference that if you'd been making

those projections suddenly the world was very

 

21:12.959 --> 21:14.550

different and they needed to adjust.

 

21:14.869 --> 21:18.310

I think at the moment, potentially, we don't

give enough flex in policies for those

 

21:18.319 --> 21:20.619

circumstances.

Where actually we've projected this.

 

21:20.630 --> 21:23.130

Can we adjust?

Sometimes you can get rebates at the end,

 

21:23.140 --> 21:26.199

which is great.

Um, but I do think we'd be looking at more

 

21:26.209 --> 21:28.569

modern data and more modern stuff that we could

be looking at.

 

21:28.839 --> 21:33.750

Something that I've spoke to Jason about before.

Um, about more of a subscription based model.

 

21:33.760 --> 21:36.260

And I think Jason's got some really fascinating

comments on that,

 

21:36.270 --> 21:41.199

but how it adjusts on a more, you know, monthly

basis to actually what the company is doing,

 

21:41.300 --> 21:43.319

and open banking can really feed into that as

well.

 

21:43.869 --> 21:46.579

Um, Devo.

So you wanted to come in there, and then Jason,

 

21:46.589 --> 21:51.329

if I bring you in around this idea of AAA sort

of a continuous present of an insurance policy,

 

21:51.339 --> 21:55.050

and I think a lot of the the comments that have

been made are absolutely valid I mean,

 

21:55.060 --> 21:58.420

under insurance, for for us as a broker is an

absolutely critical issue,

 

21:58.750 --> 22:00.839

and we're doing quite a lot of work within TC.

I.

 

22:00.849 --> 22:05.260

We're actually working with Aviva on building

systems that will help us respond to that.

 

22:05.459 --> 22:10.829

It's not always easy, because the data that we

need to ensure that property valuations remain

 

22:10.839 --> 22:15.069

at the right level and remain up to date are

not still yet as robust as they might be.

 

22:15.099 --> 22:19.329

But there are things that we can do by better

analysing our existing data to sort of make

 

22:19.339 --> 22:24.449

some assumptions around whether or not an under

insurance issue might be beginning to arise and

 

22:24.459 --> 22:26.969

then you can deal with it in a in a slightly

different way.

 

22:27.270 --> 22:30.750

Um, I also like Jason's comment about

subscription insurance because I think

 

22:30.760 --> 22:37.250

customers are going to want to move away over

time, from a fixed period insurance product to

 

22:37.260 --> 22:41.449

something that is much more flexible.

We're seeing it in the personal lines world

 

22:41.459 --> 22:45.609

with motor insurance, for example.

I suspect that will start to come into the

 

22:45.619 --> 22:49.689

commercial world as well, but you're not going

to be able to deliver that unless you've got

 

22:49.699 --> 22:52.540

the the validity of data beneath it to support

it.

 

22:53.760 --> 22:56.719

Yeah.

I mean, look, II, I think probably the industry

 

22:56.729 --> 22:59.819

has asked itself a few questions in that space

before.

 

22:59.829 --> 23:04.040

I'm not sure.

Um, renewal dates are wholly work for a lot of

 

23:04.050 --> 23:08.219

our customers now, particularly those that are

fast growing or developing their business.

 

23:08.229 --> 23:13.140

Um, I think the days of seeing a broker perhaps

once or twice a year for 30 40 minutes,

 

23:13.500 --> 23:17.079

um, asking the customer to kind of re engage

and start thinking about insurance.

 

23:17.089 --> 23:20.449

And let's be clear, most customers really just

want to get on with the business of managing

 

23:20.459 --> 23:23.530

their business.

Insurance is at the front of their mind at

 

23:23.540 --> 23:26.319

certain points.

Uh, but they certainly want the security of

 

23:26.329 --> 23:29.199

moving forward with their business knowing that

they're appropriately insured.

 

23:29.209 --> 23:33.189

So I think there is an opportunity and

necessity in my view that we look at doing

 

23:33.199 --> 23:35.479

things differently.

Uh, subscription based, uh,

 

23:35.489 --> 23:40.829

is is quite a common, uh, facility available in

other aspects of most customers.

 

23:40.839 --> 23:44.449

Working operations.

Um, they will always, I suspect,

 

23:44.459 --> 23:48.189

need to have an annual review date.

But I think anything that enables customers to

 

23:48.199 --> 23:52.250

be more in control and have a high level of

confidence around what they're paying for,

 

23:52.430 --> 23:56.189

Um, and a high level of confidence around the

cover being there for them.

 

23:56.459 --> 24:00.069

Um, I had a situation where I I sat in front of

around about 2030 customers.

 

24:00.079 --> 24:03.469

Not that long ago.

Um, and they were all asked a very simple

 

24:03.479 --> 24:06.569

question, which was, How do you know you're

appropriately insured?

 

24:06.910 --> 24:10.150

And despite the fact that these customers are

spending 2030 40 you know,

 

24:10.160 --> 24:12.489

500 they're paying significant amounts of money.

 

24:12.719 --> 24:15.560

Um, I was I was dissatisfied with the answer,

really?

 

24:15.569 --> 24:20.300

That none of them could really confidently say,

I know I'm insured because of,

 

24:20.310 --> 24:23.719

um and as I say, there's not too many

industries where people are paying that kind of

 

24:23.729 --> 24:26.459

money and they move forward with that level of

uncertainty.

 

24:26.479 --> 24:29.939

And I'm not saying subscription based cover

would remedy that,

 

24:30.180 --> 24:34.560

but it would enable the customer to have a

greater understanding of the fluctuations,

 

24:34.739 --> 24:37.699

um, and a greater level of confidence around

what they're insured for,

 

24:37.709 --> 24:41.619

particularly if you can supply dashboards, um,

and information in return that,

 

24:41.630 --> 24:44.869

uh, supports either an increase or D or a

reduction in premium.

 

24:45.099 --> 24:49.040

But but David Is there a danger with the

subscription model that the client might say

 

24:49.050 --> 24:52.280

that Let's be honest, I have to dire my

enthusiasm for insurance.

 

24:52.589 --> 24:55.489

Yeah, I I when I've done it, I want to do the

right thing,

 

24:55.500 --> 24:57.449

and I don't want to have to think about it for

a year.

 

24:57.569 --> 25:00.829

That's why I'm paying the premiums.

If every month someone says,

 

25:00.839 --> 25:03.170

Well, you could tinker with that a little bit,

you could move this around,

 

25:03.180 --> 25:06.920

have another password.

I think I might lose the will to live you.

 

25:06.969 --> 25:09.510

You're absolutely right.

Margam Insurance is not something that most

 

25:09.520 --> 25:12.290

people get out of bed in the morning, looking

forward to talking about and buying.

 

25:12.670 --> 25:16.930

But subscription models won't work for every

business, but there will be some,

 

25:16.939 --> 25:19.630

particularly in today's modern world, where you

have, you know,

 

25:19.640 --> 25:23.619

far more technology based companies that are

changing very quickly in terms of their

 

25:23.630 --> 25:27.770

direction and their size and their growth,

where subscription absolutely suits them.

 

25:28.050 --> 25:32.630

It's not for everyone, but it absolutely.

I'm sure we have a a big place in our market in

 

25:32.640 --> 25:36.750

years to come.

I Is there a a an age or generational element

 

25:36.760 --> 25:39.750

in this Ashleigh, I'm I'm aware we are probably

all I think it's first say,

 

25:39.760 --> 25:44.150

north of 25 here on north of yeah, early

thirties.

 

25:44.260 --> 25:48.469

But But I mean is, Is there an element that as

you as you're talking with clients across all

 

25:48.479 --> 25:52.060

of these industries, you work work in in FullCircl works in the You think?

 

25:52.069 --> 25:56.849

Yeah, there's almost like a year and under that,

everyone is just very digitally comfortable in

 

25:56.859 --> 26:00.079

a way that over a certain age it's a bit more

of a struggle.

 

26:00.089 --> 26:04.810

I I It's a dirty word, but I myself and

technically I know I don't look at a millennial,

 

26:04.989 --> 26:10.479

Um, and with more millennials coming into the

workplace, we forget how old millennials

 

26:10.489 --> 26:14.089

actually are these days, and we're getting the

eye generation coming through.

 

26:14.099 --> 26:17.540

And these, as these younger generations come

through, they've grown up spending their lives

 

26:17.550 --> 26:20.729

on the computer and the Internet and and places

like that.

 

26:21.270 --> 26:25.520

And I'm actually part of a group of people

working across the industry looking at how we

 

26:25.530 --> 26:30.530

attract younger talent into the insurance

industry, making insurance a career of choice

 

26:30.540 --> 26:33.329

rather than something that most of us stumbled

into by mistake.

 

26:33.339 --> 26:36.369

As we got older and one of the key areas there

is.

 

26:36.380 --> 26:40.609

These younger staff coming through want to be

using more technology based products.

 

26:40.890 --> 26:45.030

They're used to looking at this sort of

technology in their personal lives.

 

26:45.260 --> 26:48.300

So to come to work and be looking at old

ledgers and handwrit.

 

26:48.310 --> 26:50.650

I mean, at least we don't handwrite cover notes

anymore.

 

26:50.660 --> 26:54.969

But looking at handwrit enough and doing all

stuff in a more manual basis is very strange

 

26:54.979 --> 26:58.109

for the staff.

And if you keep attracting the own level of

 

26:58.119 --> 27:02.680

talent and staff through for that, those people

are the ones that are dealing with people they

 

27:02.689 --> 27:07.319

went to university with that are the same

mindset that are looking for those more

 

27:07.329 --> 27:11.319

technology driven products are looking to IT to

revolutionise their lives and how they do

 

27:11.329 --> 27:14.089

things.

The Internet of things is a growing thing.

 

27:14.099 --> 27:16.729

You know, when you can have a button on your

fridge that you press when you need to order

 

27:16.739 --> 27:19.290

more milk and Amazon delivery the next morning.

 

27:19.640 --> 27:21.589

Yet you've gotta go.

And for a lot of these youngsters,

 

27:21.599 --> 27:26.530

they don't wanna sit for hours face to face,

going through massive information.

 

27:27.199 --> 27:30.239

We are finding that they still want that

relationship and they still want someone they

 

27:30.250 --> 27:32.910

can talk to.

But they'd much rather have a personal

 

27:32.920 --> 27:37.219

relationship that you give them the advice and

coming in and asking them all these questions

 

27:37.229 --> 27:40.339

that you could have done beforehand.

They they're just not interested in this.

 

27:40.349 --> 27:44.630

So there are times you can say we we did some,

um, research post Pande.

 

27:44.910 --> 27:50.540

And what was really interesting is that, um,

the the fastest level of businesses that came

 

27:50.550 --> 27:53.979

out of the pandemic were those with younger M

DS and F DS.

 

27:54.089 --> 27:58.250

In that process, largely because of the digital

connectivity they maintained with their

 

27:58.260 --> 28:00.239

customers, they already had that in place.

 

28:00.500 --> 28:07.119

And certainly we've seen more and more where

it's not now uncommon for 2 to £300,000

 

28:07.130 --> 28:11.979

premium customers to not even see their broker.

They're actually having a digital relationship.

 

28:11.989 --> 28:15.189

Obviously, they're they're talking over the

phone, but they don't actually feel as if they

 

28:15.199 --> 28:18.520

need to see their broker in person now.

I'm not sure that would have happened 12,

 

28:18.530 --> 28:22.880

24 months ago, but the younger generation are

certainly recognising the opportunity and the

 

28:22.890 --> 28:27.839

value that comes from speaking to someone with

digital insights that enable them to have a

 

28:27.849 --> 28:29.880

rich, personalised conversation.

 

28:30.810 --> 28:33.869

I think also, we're doing the older generation

a little bit of a disservice,

 

28:33.880 --> 28:37.180

actually, as well, because in my experience at

least, um,

 

28:37.540 --> 28:42.829

a lot of the older generation I include myself

in that really like and want to embrace new

 

28:42.839 --> 28:45.030

technologies.

I mean, it doesn't have to be difficult to use

 

28:45.040 --> 28:48.050

new technology.

What we're trying to do is use technology to

 

28:48.060 --> 28:51.050

make things simpler for people, make them

easier for people,

 

28:51.060 --> 28:55.550

open up information so that people can better

understand what insurance is and how it can

 

28:55.560 --> 28:58.930

work for them.

You don't actually need to be 25 to understand

 

28:58.939 --> 29:01.349

that or or understand what the benefit of that

that is.

 

29:01.619 --> 29:06.589

So I think it's how technology is presented to

people, not whether or not they're old enough

 

29:06.599 --> 29:09.790

or young enough to be able to understand them.

And that certainly resonates with one of the

 

29:09.800 --> 29:12.359

areas that we try to focus on, which is around

simplification.

 

29:12.500 --> 29:15.719

So we talk about automation more and more and

data and technology,

 

29:15.770 --> 29:18.040

but the first thing you should ask yourself is,

Do you need it?

 

29:18.339 --> 29:22.829

So from an underwriting perspective, a lot of

my main thrust at the moment is around

 

29:22.839 --> 29:24.880

underwriting simplification.

Do we need the questions?

 

29:24.890 --> 29:27.199

Do we need the process just because we've

always had them?

 

29:27.550 --> 29:31.939

So rather than just automatically thinking

about automating and digitising processes,

 

29:31.949 --> 29:33.800

the first question we ask is, Do we need it?

 

29:34.400 --> 29:37.500

You know, customers should really be able to

only answer two questions.

 

29:38.290 --> 29:41.939

Questions that they can easily understand and

questions that they can easily access

 

29:41.949 --> 29:44.750

information to answer.

Yet we continue to ask lots of questions,

 

29:44.760 --> 29:48.569

which just dumbfound number of customers.

I think that needs to change.

 

29:49.050 --> 29:53.109

Well, there's just how much of that when you

take those unneeded questions out,

 

29:53.160 --> 29:55.930

if you can call it that, are just there because

they've always been there and,

 

29:56.040 --> 30:00.219

you know, I mean, my my sort of criticism

almost or implicit criticism of Dexter was this

 

30:00.229 --> 30:01.989

stuff just builds up and accumulates.

 

30:04.900 --> 30:07.760

Yeah, there are.

There are lots of questions that that different

 

30:07.770 --> 30:12.369

insurers and brokers continue to ask.

Some of them are are are safeguarding questions,

 

30:12.380 --> 30:13.699

things that you just need to check.

 

30:13.979 --> 30:16.939

Um, I think undoubtedly there are questions out

there that,

 

30:16.949 --> 30:19.560

um probably have been around for quite some

time.

 

30:19.569 --> 30:22.560

well held beliefs that you need to obtain the

information.

 

30:22.569 --> 30:27.719

Um, more and more, we are in pursuit of the

data and technology that enables us to have a

 

30:27.729 --> 30:30.170

level of understanding where we don't need to

ask the questions.

 

30:30.180 --> 30:31.810

And perhaps it's more of a validation.

 

30:32.030 --> 30:36.270

Um, I think it's absolutely vital about playing

back information to the customer,

 

30:36.520 --> 30:40.569

the information you actually do know about the

customer so they can validate and understand.

 

30:40.699 --> 30:43.079

It's not just a case of not asking any

questions.

 

30:43.089 --> 30:46.130

Customers actually want to have the confidence

that you do know about them.

 

30:46.390 --> 30:50.569

So I think, um, there's certainly a need for us

to review question sets and philosophies and

 

30:50.579 --> 30:55.400

questionnaires, particularly that put friction

and really challenge the value that you

 

30:55.410 --> 30:57.959

actually get from the information.

Because I think increasingly,

 

30:58.109 --> 31:01.900

uh, we'll probably be less and less so.

Add to Jason's point.

 

31:01.910 --> 31:06.810

Um, when we started doing a lot of this digital

journey with a lot of the banking clients and

 

31:06.819 --> 31:09.229

working with them to look at their questions

that they're asking,

 

31:09.459 --> 31:14.560

we actually managed to reduce the questions

they asked up front by 80% and that's a lot of

 

31:14.569 --> 31:19.349

questions that when you look at it are either

can be replaced by data or as Jason potentially

 

31:19.359 --> 31:23.739

might be irrelevant these days.

And uh, yes, I think there is still an element

 

31:23.750 --> 31:27.130

that we need to ask some questions to the

client because otherwise it becomes far too

 

31:27.140 --> 31:28.790

transaction.

They don't see the value in it.

 

31:29.199 --> 31:33.680

Um, and but it's more about looking at what

you've got and giving that advice be 80% of

 

31:33.689 --> 31:36.790

questions.

It was removed by most of the high street banks

 

31:37.500 --> 31:41.040

by on boarding these clients with data and out

of interest.

 

31:41.050 --> 31:45.390

What are some of the examples of questions in

the banking system that when you sat down and

 

31:45.400 --> 31:48.770

had a bit of a think about, he said, There's

absolutely no need to ask this question.

 

31:48.780 --> 31:51.640

I mean, there's there's two types of questions

you can look at from that front.

 

31:51.650 --> 31:55.849

There's questions that were just not needed at

all, and questions that can be replaced by

 

31:55.859 --> 32:00.339

information that's already out there and a

couple of key questions that are pan banking

 

32:00.349 --> 32:04.170

and insurance were, um, C, CJ S and adverse

director history,

 

32:04.630 --> 32:07.910

and I think every broker will tell you when you

go in to see a financial director and go,

 

32:07.920 --> 32:11.500

you know, have any of the directors ever had

any negative history or anything like that?

 

32:11.660 --> 32:17.290

And the FD would always go Well, I haven't I

don't know about Jeff and they'd have by that's

 

32:17.300 --> 32:20.500

available.

We can publicly pull that data together and

 

32:20.699 --> 32:23.900

give that to banks and underwriters and brokers

to say,

 

32:23.910 --> 32:29.750

Actually, we've, um we've we've looked at that

data and we can identify all the adverse

 

32:29.760 --> 32:34.170

director history for all the directors for you

and identify that into one place rather than

 

32:34.180 --> 32:37.300

than asking them, them having to go off and

check with every other director and come back

 

32:37.310 --> 32:39.099

to you and not have that information correctly.

 

32:39.369 --> 32:42.469

So not only was it removing quite a complex

question for them to answer,

 

32:42.660 --> 32:47.270

it was becoming more accurate, and we've worked

quite a lot at FullCircl with what we call a

 

32:47.280 --> 32:49.359

conflation engine.

I don't want to get too technical,

 

32:49.369 --> 32:54.510

but it it looks at hidden links in data and

adverse Director history is a key area where

 

32:54.520 --> 32:56.310

there is adverse hidden links.

 

32:56.660 --> 32:59.310

For example, you can be registered with

company's house in multiple ways.

 

32:59.319 --> 33:04.540

I'm I'm actually myself on there twice under

two separate names and company's House One has

 

33:04.550 --> 33:06.800

my full legal name.

One has my shortened legal name,

 

33:06.910 --> 33:10.359

same postal address, same date of birth.

Company's house doesn't know I'm the same

 

33:10.369 --> 33:14.579

director, so I could choose to use that to hide

negative history.

 

33:14.930 --> 33:19.140

Um, and I'm not saying people do, but it is a

possibility, and we use this conflation engine

 

33:19.150 --> 33:21.219

to look at that and go well.

Actually, it's the same.

 

33:21.229 --> 33:23.510

First name, same last name, same date of birth,

same address.

 

33:23.520 --> 33:26.839

There's a 90% chance that's the same director.

 

33:27.170 --> 33:30.829

So that's a question we manage to remove from

the banking questionnaires from insurers

 

33:30.839 --> 33:35.119

questionnaires because they don't need to ask

that question and get a wrong answer from the

 

33:35.130 --> 33:36.130

broker from the client.

 

33:36.670 --> 33:39.979

But instead we can give them the correct answer

upfront and much more easier.

 

33:39.989 --> 33:42.550

Same with C CJ S.

It's other information that can pull through.

 

33:43.060 --> 33:44.739

And then there's some questions, and I think,

uh, you know,

 

33:44.750 --> 33:48.339

we were talking beforehand about, um,

particularly the personal lines for,

 

33:48.349 --> 33:52.189

you know, felt roos and flat Roos.

That information has not been used on personal

 

33:52.199 --> 33:56.119

lines for rating for a long while.

Um, and that's something that's been removed.

 

33:56.130 --> 33:57.660

And it's similar when you're looking at

commercial risk.

 

33:57.670 --> 34:00.430

There's other questions that we just ask, as a

matter of fact.

 

34:00.859 --> 34:02.959

But actually, when you sit down, they're

probably not needed anymore.

 

34:04.189 --> 34:07.969

And we're talking a lot about data.

But is David?

 

34:07.979 --> 34:11.169

Your experience is you've been looking at this

with TCR futures.

 

34:11.530 --> 34:16.689

Is it a case that in this more digital world,

brokers need to collect more data?

 

34:16.699 --> 34:19.479

Or actually, they just need to be smarter with

the data they've got.

 

34:19.530 --> 34:25.010

I think one of the biggest challenges for any

broker that's looking to embrace data in in the

 

34:25.020 --> 34:29.290

way that we've been talking about this morning

is is the quality of the data that they hold

 

34:29.300 --> 34:31.560

because they, they don't.

Most brokers don't hold data,

 

34:31.570 --> 34:35.689

they hold information, and they hold

information in multiple different formats.

 

34:35.699 --> 34:39.250

It's in spreadsheets, it's in multiple legacy

systems.

 

34:39.429 --> 34:43.879

There's duplication in there, Uh, and the very

first job I think that any broker needs to do

 

34:43.889 --> 34:48.260

is to cleanse that data is to make sure that

the data set that they're working with is as

 

34:48.270 --> 34:52.550

accurate as possible, because we all know that

good data leads to better results.

 

34:52.830 --> 34:57.899

But poor data leads to some really poor results

and and actually is is more trouble than it's

 

34:57.909 --> 35:01.489

worth.

So getting your initial data set cleansed,

 

35:01.500 --> 35:07.260

accurate and as accessible as you can is

without question the first job for any broker

 

35:07.270 --> 35:10.330

that's looking to use its existing data to then

build, uh,

 

35:10.340 --> 35:14.179

on on on with other products and services.

When you talk about cleansing data,

 

35:14.189 --> 35:18.649

is that something as a broker in the round, you

should be able to do in house?

 

35:18.659 --> 35:22.689

Or is that do you need to get a professional

data you can bring people in?

 

35:22.699 --> 35:26.689

It depends on how bad your data is to be

perfectly frank and what resources you have to

 

35:26.699 --> 35:30.060

to throw at it.

But, um uh, whatever it takes,

 

35:30.070 --> 35:34.939

I would suggest Make sure that you throw enough

at it to get that data in as good a condition

 

35:34.949 --> 35:37.139

as you possibly can and then work from there.

 

35:37.510 --> 35:40.600

And Jason is the underwriter in this, I mean,

when when,

 

35:40.610 --> 35:43.610

uh, when brokers are coming to you with

information about clients again,

 

35:43.620 --> 35:47.610

on the whole, do you think there's key bits

missing here that would just allow me to speed

 

35:47.620 --> 35:50.620

the job up Or is it more the The stuff you've

got is great,

 

35:50.629 --> 35:52.959

But if only you could organise it and clean it

up a bit,

 

35:52.969 --> 35:55.550

it would help us. Yeah.

I mean, the the two fundamentals,

 

35:55.560 --> 35:56.300

I mean, I.

I can't.

 

35:56.310 --> 35:58.610

I get often asked, you know, Do you want more

data?

 

35:58.669 --> 36:01.649

Um, yeah.

We could always do with more data,

 

36:01.659 --> 36:04.510

but for me, it's actually to your point.

It's about accuracy.

 

36:04.669 --> 36:05.889

Um, and it's about speed.

 

36:06.199 --> 36:10.169

So certainly, uh, having that information

arrive at exactly the right time for our

 

36:10.179 --> 36:12.870

underwriter to make in the moment decisions is

vital.

 

36:12.969 --> 36:15.620

Um, and I think that's really a key point,

which is,

 

36:15.629 --> 36:19.709

you know, having the opportunity to have a

conversation with the broker at exactly the

 

36:19.719 --> 36:21.239

right time.

With the right information.

 

36:21.250 --> 36:23.909

More data led in terms of decision making is

fundamental.

 

36:23.919 --> 36:26.939

We are more and more finding ourselves on a on

an equal footing.

 

36:27.290 --> 36:30.389

Um, with brokers regarding the information that

they have on a customer.

 

36:30.399 --> 36:35.959

In the level of rich, we operate a number of,

uh, ecosystems that pulls in significant

 

36:35.969 --> 36:38.620

information.

As you can imagine, lots of insurance companies,

 

36:38.629 --> 36:40.889

particularly Aviva, are seeing customers over

again.

 

36:41.030 --> 36:45.669

We're starting to harness a lot of the data and

start to create consolidated views of of the

 

36:45.679 --> 36:50.959

customer and more importantly, how we see the

whole customer opportunity across the entire

 

36:50.969 --> 36:53.629

group.

Um, and that's equally interesting because then

 

36:53.639 --> 36:57.570

we can start to identify some of the high

levels of personalization opportunities that

 

36:57.580 --> 37:00.629

are there.

But anything that really enables us to support

 

37:00.639 --> 37:05.370

the broker having a conversation where we can

join forces with the data is is certainly the

 

37:05.379 --> 37:06.790

ambition we're in pursue of.

 

37:07.280 --> 37:10.879

And and on that, I mean, because we were

talking a little bit about patterns in data and

 

37:10.889 --> 37:14.550

how it's really the insurers that aggregate a

lot of us that are able are are gonna be the

 

37:14.560 --> 37:17.419

pattern sort of producers of the patterns, if

you like,

 

37:17.429 --> 37:18.439

rather than individual brokers.

 

37:18.770 --> 37:20.989

Um, have you got examples of patterns you've

spotted?

 

37:21.000 --> 37:23.750

So when you're dealing with a client, you said,

I know you've come to talk to us about X,

 

37:23.760 --> 37:28.969

but given what you've shown me, we we probably

need to have a conversation about why as well,

 

37:28.979 --> 37:32.100

you know, it sounds like there could be

something missing somewhere else.

 

37:32.110 --> 37:34.679

So just just in terms of creating business

opportunities.

 

37:34.689 --> 37:37.850

Yeah, I think I think the biggest one that

comes to mind is probably around.

 

37:37.860 --> 37:42.790

Um, May maybe on for comes through on renewals.

More, um,

 

37:42.800 --> 37:47.229

goes back to the under insurance, Unfortunately,

which is so many of our customers haven't

 

37:47.239 --> 37:53.469

updated or reviewed their sums.

Insured Outside index linking for 34 plus years.

 

37:53.699 --> 37:58.010

So you were in a situation where we've seen

unprecedented change in the economy.

 

37:58.379 --> 38:01.750

Um, it's a simple trigger.

Has the customer reviewed their sums?

 

38:01.760 --> 38:05.899

Insured, um, out and seen a material change

outside index linking,

 

38:05.909 --> 38:10.580

um, we'd expect most of our customers to review

review their sums insured up and down,

 

38:10.590 --> 38:16.590

yet a significant proportion 30 40% haven't

actually seen a material change outside index

 

38:16.600 --> 38:21.909

linking on things like buildings, machinery,

stock, rent this interruption.

 

38:21.919 --> 38:25.929

So I think we're starting to use the data more

and more to have conversations with the brokers

 

38:25.939 --> 38:28.189

around.

Just reviewing those sums insured.

 

38:28.199 --> 38:32.439

It's information that I suspect is available in

most brokers databases,

 

38:32.679 --> 38:36.979

but it's not always surfaced in a way that

enables the the broker to have a,

 

38:36.989 --> 38:41.709

uh to have a conversation, and certainly it's

not not coming through in the conversations as

 

38:41.719 --> 38:44.590

much as we would like.

So we're trying to be really proactive on that

 

38:44.850 --> 38:48.800

and certainly provide recommendations to the

brokers around limits,

 

38:49.000 --> 38:53.530

Um, and levels of cover that the customer

should actually be starting to think about,

 

38:53.679 --> 38:55.909

Um and that needs to be done with the broker

and the customer,

 

38:55.919 --> 38:59.340

giving them an informed choice, at least for

them to understand the consequences of their

 

38:59.350 --> 39:00.419

current situation.

 

39:00.800 --> 39:06.540

And actually, is there a a threat here in all

of this to the existing insurance industry and

 

39:06.550 --> 39:10.320

the ecosystem?

Um, you know, you might argue insurers are very

 

39:10.330 --> 39:13.520

good at insurance, but the great scheme of

things are not great at the tech.

 

39:13.530 --> 39:15.699

And there's this whole world of ensure techs

coming out here,

 

39:15.709 --> 39:17.840

you've talked about banking.

I mean, I think we've all,

 

39:18.219 --> 39:24.080

you know, come across the monzo's, the revolute.

Some of these new organisations Um do do you

 

39:24.090 --> 39:27.280

think there's where where do you think they're

likely to fit in this world?

 

39:27.290 --> 39:31.389

I think that for a long while, there was a

common misconception that applying tech and

 

39:31.399 --> 39:33.260

writing was Turkey's voting for Christmas.

 

39:33.580 --> 39:36.179

People were worried it was gonna remove the

need for roles,

 

39:36.189 --> 39:38.800

and it was going to address it.

But it that's definitely not the case.

 

39:38.810 --> 39:45.020

I think the data is there to allow underwriters

to provide better outcomes for those clients by

 

39:45.030 --> 39:46.290

looking at what's going on.

 

39:46.590 --> 39:50.760

And I think some of the MGAS out there have

embraced it a bit faster than a lot of the

 

39:50.770 --> 39:53.219

insurers.

Aviva are doing fantastic work, and so are a

 

39:53.229 --> 39:57.139

couple of the other big brand names.

But those MGAS have been a lot quicker about

 

39:57.149 --> 40:01.129

updating things, particularly on the the

simpler, smaller covers like DNO and Cyber and

 

40:01.139 --> 40:06.010

stuff like that, where a lot of that can be

automated and that that client experience that

 

40:06.020 --> 40:09.189

client journey is is slimmed down and treated

so much better.

 

40:09.750 --> 40:11.149

And that's what the banks have been doing for

years.

 

40:11.159 --> 40:14.689

And we're starting to see that in a lot of MGAS

that are coming through with these really

 

40:14.699 --> 40:18.139

clever type policies where you can, you know,

as a broker,

 

40:18.149 --> 40:22.110

you can go on a port and you can click about

four buttons and it's you bound the cover,

 

40:22.520 --> 40:26.620

and I like I'd like to see that expand more in

some of the larger policies I think there's

 

40:26.629 --> 40:30.439

definitely a scale we can take it to quite

larger turnovers on that,

 

40:31.100 --> 40:36.600

Um, I don't think there is a threat.

I think now is the time to adjust and change.

 

40:36.610 --> 40:41.350

And I think if the threat comes from the ones

that don't modernise and rely on the old

 

40:41.360 --> 40:47.540

fashioned ways, mainly because they're gonna

deliver worse outcomes for the end company and

 

40:47.550 --> 40:49.860

at the end of the day, that's what we all want

is better outcomes of the end company.

 

40:49.870 --> 40:52.370

So if they don't adjust, they are gonna fall

behind the pack.

 

40:52.379 --> 40:55.639

Standing still isn't doing doing nothing.

Sorry isn't standing still.

 

40:55.649 --> 41:01.429

It's falling behind, and I think that's where

it's if it's not hard to adapt,

 

41:01.439 --> 41:02.679

and now is the time to do it.

 

41:03.399 --> 41:07.169

III, I think, from the broker perspective, it

it you'd expect me to say this.

 

41:07.179 --> 41:08.840

It's both a threat and an opportunity.

 

41:09.050 --> 41:12.469

I mean, if you if you look at the particularly

small size commercial insurance,

 

41:12.479 --> 41:15.989

you're you're starting to see companies like

Google and Amazon sniffing around the

 

41:16.000 --> 41:19.250

commercial insurance space.

Now they hold enormous amounts of data.

 

41:19.260 --> 41:24.189

They're highly trusted by individuals and and

by by those who run businesses as well.

 

41:24.510 --> 41:27.010

And if we allow them to get a foothold in the

insurance sector,

 

41:27.020 --> 41:28.610

then I think they could be a threat.

 

41:29.330 --> 41:33.179

But from a broking perspective and something

we've identified at Thomas Carroll,

 

41:33.189 --> 41:36.520

and we've been talking to a number of other

independent broker networks about this,

 

41:36.949 --> 41:41.550

the big advantage that we have as brokers well,

we have 21 is distribution.

 

41:41.560 --> 41:46.709

We already have large client bases.

Secondly, we have personal relationships,

 

41:46.719 --> 41:50.429

and we have expertise, which is not something

you're gonna get from an insure tech,

 

41:50.439 --> 41:54.669

which traditionally works on a B to C model.

So it's cutting out that advisory piece,

 

41:55.610 --> 41:58.169

but we'll only take advantage of that in the

New World.

 

41:58.179 --> 42:02.790

If we change the way we do things, we need to

refresh the way that brokers work.

 

42:02.800 --> 42:08.500

We need to use technology, use automation, use

data not just to improve processes,

 

42:08.510 --> 42:11.580

everybody.

We're all talking about streamlining processes

 

42:11.590 --> 42:14.879

and making things easier and more efficient.

Absolutely 100%.

 

42:14.889 --> 42:20.659

We should be doing that, but good data analysis

will also allow us to develop new products and

 

42:20.669 --> 42:24.669

new solutions that we can offer to customers

that we're not offering to those customers at

 

42:24.679 --> 42:28.129

the moment.

Embedded insurance, for example, is a is a very

 

42:28.139 --> 42:33.199

hot topic in our world right now, and it's a

way in which we can help customers and insurers

 

42:33.209 --> 42:38.090

all of us increase market share by offering

something to the client's customers and add

 

42:38.100 --> 42:39.139

value in that way.

 

42:39.620 --> 42:45.320

But you'll only be able to do that if you start

making some inroads now into understanding how

 

42:45.330 --> 42:48.340

you need to change and what opportunities are

out there.

 

42:48.449 --> 42:52.199

So I think it's a threat and an opportunity.

But it depends what you do now.

 

42:53.219 --> 42:59.919

But in say, we roll the clock forward UH, 15

years and we've described this cohort of

 

42:59.929 --> 43:02.159

people in their twenties and thirties who are

digital natives.

 

43:02.169 --> 43:06.229

They're they're much more happy with, uh,

interacting online,

 

43:06.239 --> 43:09.489

not not as much face to face.

It's all about efficiency.

 

43:09.989 --> 43:13.370

If somebody like Google Insurance turned up at

that point and said,

 

43:13.379 --> 43:17.090

we charge 60 P in the pound for whatever Thomas

Carroll does.

 

43:17.100 --> 43:19.870

And yeah, we're not perfect, but we're we're

we're sort of the,

 

43:19.879 --> 43:22.489

um we're the sort of the cheap and cheerful

solution.

 

43:22.500 --> 43:24.469

Put your data in here.

You know us.

 

43:24.479 --> 43:26.239

You trust us on the Internet and everything

else.

 

43:26.709 --> 43:29.590

You.

So does that worry you?

 

43:29.600 --> 43:32.810

That could be a problem or Or I.

I don't think it does,

 

43:32.820 --> 43:35.510

provided we respond properly.

Um, you know,

 

43:35.520 --> 43:39.389

again, I think everybody's talking about a I

and the fact that it can replace advice and it

 

43:39.399 --> 43:43.129

can replace a lot of a lot of jobs and advice,

but actually,

 

43:43.139 --> 43:44.679

I don't think it will.

In the short term.

 

43:44.689 --> 43:48.800

I really don't think it will in the short term,

but we have to show customers that we are

 

43:48.810 --> 43:53.060

prepared to embrace those new technologies and

give them all those cost efficiencies that

 

43:53.070 --> 43:57.790

Google or Amazon might be able to offer but

bundle it with the professional service and

 

43:57.800 --> 44:02.020

expertise that we instinctively offer.

Uh, now I think I think the key point for

 

44:02.030 --> 44:07.340

customers is experience and relevance, and I

think insurance needs to adapt to deliver both

 

44:07.350 --> 44:09.110

of those.

You know, I think I think experience is

 

44:09.120 --> 44:10.239

absolutely fundamental.

 

44:10.530 --> 44:15.189

Um, we need to give our customers a far better,

uh, an improved experience,

 

44:15.199 --> 44:18.939

and they currently appreciate at the moment.

And I think it's vital that brokers and and

 

44:18.949 --> 44:25.389

insurers demonstrate a level of relevance to to

customers um around their insurance needs and

 

44:25.399 --> 44:29.090

what we can do for customers enable them to

grow and support and feel confident about their

 

44:29.100 --> 44:32.709

business.

Um, we've done very well on that for many years,

 

44:32.719 --> 44:35.540

but I think now certainly is a time for us to

change and adapt.

 

44:35.780 --> 44:40.270

Um, if if we don't, I think to some degree we

could be in trouble with some customers.

 

44:40.280 --> 44:45.709

So, um, but any any industry at the moment is

looking to focus on what they deliver in terms

 

44:45.719 --> 44:49.300

of experience and personalization and and

obviously relevance.

 

44:49.310 --> 44:50.679

And, uh, we need to respond.

 

44:50.979 --> 44:53.750

Well, actually can I.

I think that a really valid point.

 

44:53.760 --> 44:58.389

I think so to consider when we're talking about

how this these Googles and Amazons are coming

 

44:58.399 --> 45:01.060

in.

Just think how long ago it was that we got all

 

45:01.070 --> 45:04.199

these aggregator sites of personal lines and

all the you know,

 

45:04.209 --> 45:06.669

everyone goes online.

They can do their car insurance and home

 

45:06.679 --> 45:10.709

insurance online.

Um, but personal lines breakers are still

 

45:10.719 --> 45:14.040

performing very well, and that hasn't eroded

that industry.

 

45:14.129 --> 45:17.629

And actually, from a lot of the personalised

brokers I speak to are starting to see a lot

 

45:17.639 --> 45:21.179

more people come back to them after they've

realised for years they're not getting the

 

45:21.189 --> 45:25.189

advice and the support that they were getting

through that comparison website,

 

45:25.520 --> 45:30.320

where they were getting to a claim of finding

they weren't insured properly and because

 

45:30.330 --> 45:33.800

they'd inputted all the information themselves.

And there was some cleverly worded question

 

45:33.810 --> 45:37.449

they got wrong cos they don't understand

insurance to the level as a professional would

 

45:37.459 --> 45:40.050

do.

Naturally, they were getting pa uh, not paid

 

45:40.060 --> 45:43.100

out for claims.

It was damaging the industry's reputation.

 

45:43.110 --> 45:48.050

It was damaging to the client.

And then So these clients are now pulling away

 

45:48.060 --> 45:51.360

from those comparisons, going back to

personalised brokers who have always been there

 

45:51.370 --> 45:52.929

and not struggled during that.

 

45:53.439 --> 45:57.010

So when people talk about the threat of Google,

Amazon or other companies coming into the

 

45:57.020 --> 46:03.290

commercial space, the industry held strong

against these comparison websites.

 

46:03.300 --> 46:07.649

It will happen again if it comes to commercial,

and people will be more risk averse on

 

46:07.659 --> 46:10.030

commercial because it's more of a risk for them.

 

46:10.350 --> 46:13.989

We are pretty much out of time, but I've just

got time to get a final thought from each of

 

46:14.000 --> 46:18.949

you, so we've got a huge amount of ground, but

If there's one key message or take away from

 

46:18.959 --> 46:21.250

today that you want to leave us with, what

would that be?

 

46:21.350 --> 46:24.310

Um, David, can I come to you first?

I mean,

 

46:24.959 --> 46:27.810

yeah, absolutely, Mark.

I mean, from from our perspective,

 

46:27.820 --> 46:33.570

the advice I would give to to any broker in our

position looking to protect their business for

 

46:33.580 --> 46:37.409

the future is is don't be intimidated by

technology.

 

46:37.419 --> 46:42.340

Don't be intimidated by the work necessary to

get your data into the right sort of framework.

 

46:42.350 --> 46:47.239

Because it is one of the best investments you

will ever make is to embrace the opportunity

 

46:47.250 --> 46:48.750

that of that is offered to you.

 

46:49.000 --> 46:52.340

Your clients will love you for it.

Your business will be healthier for it,

 

46:52.350 --> 46:56.169

and in fact, so will theirs.

So don't shy away from this.

 

46:56.179 --> 46:58.909

Embrace it because it's a hu huge opportunity

for us.

 

46:58.919 --> 47:02.000

Thank you, Ashleigh.

It might sound very strange comment from

 

47:02.010 --> 47:04.570

someone who wants to provide more data to the

insurance industry.

 

47:04.580 --> 47:09.649

But I think the first thing that any broker or

underwriter should do before progressing is

 

47:09.659 --> 47:14.939

take a step back, take a holistic view of what

you've already got and see where you stand on

 

47:14.949 --> 47:16.949

that.

Are you using your broker relationship

 

47:16.959 --> 47:20.860

management tool effectively, you know, Are you

utilising all the functionality you've already

 

47:20.870 --> 47:23.949

got?

And then uncover where the gaps are?

 

47:24.020 --> 47:28.149

What the problem is you would like to solve to

deliver better outcomes and then have a look at

 

47:28.159 --> 47:31.620

how to solve them.

Um, I think too many people don't maximise what

 

47:31.629 --> 47:32.639

they've already got available.

 

47:33.850 --> 47:37.909

Yeah, picking up on the theme.

Um, I'd probably say that we should have a,

 

47:37.919 --> 47:42.179

um We should have a healthier dissatisfaction

with the status quo,

 

47:42.350 --> 47:45.800

Um, and have, you know, smell of perhaps a

little bit more of a burning platform than we

 

47:45.810 --> 47:48.070

do.

Uh, the insurance market is really good.

 

47:48.080 --> 47:50.840

We're an incredible service.

We should be certainly proud of what we do

 

47:50.850 --> 47:54.379

every day.

Um, but there is a need to respond and adapt.

 

47:54.389 --> 47:57.610

Um, and the good times, as difficult as they

sometimes are,

 

47:57.620 --> 48:00.780

won't always be there.

So I think we need to continue to evolve and

 

48:00.790 --> 48:03.719

recognise that as an industry, we need to do

more for customers.

 

48:03.899 --> 48:06.699

We have to leave it there.

Thank you so much for watching Just remains for

 

48:06.709 --> 48:10.800

me to thank our fantastic panellists today.

Jason Chambers of Aviva,

 

48:10.810 --> 48:15.899

David Lewis of TC I Futures Limited and Ashleigh

GWilliam of FullCircl from all of us here

 

48:16.300 --> 48:17.179

goodbye for now.