Insure TV Broker Trends Masterclass: Digital Innovation

In a recent Broker Trends panel with Insure TV, Jason Chambers, Head of Underwriting Automation, sits down with David Lewis, Managing Director of TCi Futures and Ashleigh Gwiliam, Insurance Success Director of FullCircl.

The panel discuss the increasing trend of data and technology being used to help place the right levels of commercial insurance, what benefits and challenges they’re facing and where they see digital data and technology trends taking them in the next 5 years.

You can watch the Masterclass back here:

Please enable your browser JavaScript to view the video

Transcript  for video 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



00:40.889 --> 00:42.729


Let's start with you from an underwriting


00:42.740 --> 00:45.020


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


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



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



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


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


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


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



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



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


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


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


There could be a point where data becomes too


08:05.980 --> 08:09.299


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



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


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


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


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


You need to then review that and machine


10:16.049 --> 10:18.789


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



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



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



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



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



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



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



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?



15:43.200 --> 15:45.000


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


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


This can be really efficient for smaller


16:26.190 --> 16:30.150


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


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


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


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.



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


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%



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



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


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



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.



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



22:53.760 --> 22:56.719


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


22:56.729 --> 22:59.819

has asked itself a few questions in that space



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,



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



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



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



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



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


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


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



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



30:19.569 --> 30:22.560

well held beliefs that you need to obtain the



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



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


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


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


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



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


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



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



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



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


As you can imagine, lots of insurance companies,


36:38.629 --> 36:40.889

particularly Aviva, are seeing customers over



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


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



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



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


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


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



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


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



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



43:26.709 --> 43:29.590


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


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


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


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



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


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


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


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.