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:
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
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
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
And, uh, David Lewis tell us a little bit about
01:36.610 --> 01:37.540
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
01:48.889 --> 01:51.779
We're 50 years old.
We're a very successful,
01:51.790 --> 01:53.379
01:53.629 --> 01:56.220
But we've succeeded on the back of very
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
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
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
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
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
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
04:51.839 --> 04:54.920
So at one level, I think we're seeing brokers
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
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
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
06:07.390 --> 06:09.760
and they can make better risk based decisions
06:10.459 --> 06:12.980
That's been going on for nearly a decade in the
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,
08:49.929 --> 08:52.479
the ability to pick up a telephone.
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
20:42.500 --> 20:45.880
But but actually with, uh, again coming back to
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.
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
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
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
Insurance is at the front of their mind at
23:23.540 --> 23:26.319
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
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
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
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
24:55.500 --> 24:57.449
and I don't want to have to think about it for
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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,
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.
35:56.310 --> 35:58.610
I get often asked, you know, Do you want more
35:58.669 --> 36:01.649
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,
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
43:02.169 --> 43:06.229
They're they're much more happy with, uh,
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
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,
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
You know, I think I think experience is
44:09.120 --> 44:10.239
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
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
Um, but personal lines breakers are still
45:10.719 --> 45:14.040
performing very well, and that hasn't eroded
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?
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
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
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
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
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.