2017 Most Dangerous Emerging Risks

Artificial Intelligence Ties Liability in Knots

The same technologies that are driving business forward are upending the nature of loss exposures and presenting new coverage challenges.
By: | April 7, 2017 • 7 min read

Despite dire predictions of an “Automation Apocalypse,” it turns out that automation has only obliterated one job in the last 60 years. (Sorry, elevator operators.) However, the steady encroachment into the workplace of automation, robotics and cutting edge technologies is all too real. Robots aren’t just making cars and widgets and filling warehouse orders. They’re harvesting crops, flipping burgers, making pizza and folding laundry — just for starters.

Advertisement




For businesses, the potential boons are obvious: reduced labor and operational costs, reduced turnover and fewer injuries from repetitive tasks, increased overall safety, production speed and quality. Some economists project that current trends will eventually lead to lower prices and increased demand.

Unfortunately all of that silver lining isn’t without its dark clouds. The potential risks are evolving just as fast as the technology itself, and both insurers and insureds will be hard-pressed to keep up. Questions of liability and coverage and product response are becoming increasingly murky.

Yesterday’s loss scenarios were more or less straightforward. If a truck fails to brake and the resulting crash causes a loss, where does the liability lie? The operator? The truck manufacturer? The brake manufacturer? There might be disputes over fault, but at least the possibilities were limited.

Now you have the same crash in an autonomous truck and the questions can make your head spin.  Was the circuitry at fault? A chip? Was there a fault in the programming? Was there a connectivity issue? Was it hacked? Did the machine choose not to apply the brakes because of a specific set of circumstances presented?

Having a confluence of factors contributing to losses is not anything new in the insurance industry said Gail McGiffin, principal in the EY insurance practice and leader of underwriting, product, policy and billing solutions. What is new “is the breadth of everything that technology touches these days,” she said. The result being that you’re no longer talking about the combination of one or two technologies, it may be more like five technologies or more contributing to the complexity of an exposure.

John Lucker, principal and global advanced analytics market leader, Deloitte & Touche

“You have to think about some of these emerging technologies — that combination of artificial intelligence with machine learning, with semantic web, with predictive models — all being in operation,” she said.

“Dissecting the exposures introduced by individual technologies is challenging enough but understanding the compounded effect of this multitude of technologies and how it’s contributing to exposure and product response — that is the next major challenge area that we’re facing in the industry.”

If a piece of equipment has embedded intelligence, “whether it’s analytics, whether it’s robotic process automation, whatever the case may be — there’s a shift of liability that’s tacit and implicit inside of the underlying product or service,” agreed John Lucker, principal and global advanced analytics market leader with Deloitte & Touche.

What’s unclear at the moment said Greg Hendrick, president of property & casualty insurance and reinsurance at XL Catlin, “is how it’s all going to come together when you actually have something unfortunate happen — who’s going to pay what? That’s the interesting thing about this emerging risk: What normally was perceived as a usual course of action for liability could shift as you see more and more technology, more and more autonomy, enter your vehicles and your manufacturing process.”

Divvying Up Liability

For all parties connected to a loss, the challenge will be not only trying to sleuth out the root cause, but then teasing out an answer to the question of whose policy, and which line will respond to the loss.

“From the insurance side of this, I think the biggest risk is that they just don’t know what the risks are.”   — John Lucker, principal, global advanced analytics market leader, Deloitte & Touche

Let’s say a programming error created a serious security flaw in one piece of software operating a fleet of autonomous industrial vehicles or machines. A hacker exploited the flaw and caused the entire fleet to unexpectedly halt, rendering every unit permanently inoperable.

Multiple crashes arose from the unexpected stalls as well as significant business interruption losses. The manufacturer took a stiff reputational hit for its inability to make good on contracts for days or weeks while trying to get back up and running. How can the company expect their program to respond?

Advertisement




The company’s property policy might not exclude coverage for physical damage and business interruption caused by a cyber attack. But then again, it just might.

On the other hand, its cyber policy might only cover the loss of data in the event of an attack, but not property damage. Would the equipment manufacturer’s product liability policy respond? The software developer’s errors and omissions policy might respond, but maybe not, if the damage was caused by the attacker rather than by the programming error directly.

With each loss scenario composed of its own unique set of variables, questions about where liability rests are likely to result in a lot of finger-pointing between stakeholders.

“If there’s a part that goes bad and it’s just a one-off, then maybe we have a product liability issue,” said Lucker.

“If there are a couple hundred [pieces of equipment affected], maybe it’s a product recall liability issue. It could be errors and omissions — the engineer could have made a mistake, the programmer could have made an error. It could be directors and officers liability — this could have been an issue that was discussed in the boardroom and the board didn’t react appropriately so these other liabilities could flow upwards to the boardroom.

“We’ve shifted something that used to be fairly simple — who’s at fault and who’s going to pay for it — to a complex suite of problems and products that makes either personal or commercial risk management much more complicated,” he added.

In one sense, it’s not that different from a simple failure of a mechanical part, said John Denton, managing director at Marsh USA. The manufacturer of a defective part or the manufacturer of equipment incorporating that defective part have historically been assigned liability for any accidents arising out of that defect.

“In the same way, the developer of the software or the manufacturer of the part that incorporates that software has that same liability from the software defect that the manufacturer of the part previously had,” he said.

The key difference in many cases, he said, may be that the software company or the manufacturer of the part using the software may not have experience with any significant third-party liability, and may not have a program that is designed to respond to that liability.

Claim Development Needed

“From the insurance side of this, I think the biggest risk is that they just don’t know what the risks are,” said Lucker.

Insurers are definitely asking questions, said Denton. But “time will tell whether they’re asking the right questions.”

The brunt of the challenge will necessarily fall to underwriters, who are going to have to become even more technologically savvy than ever before, said McGiffin.

Greg Hendrick, president of property & casualty insurance and reinsurance, XL Catlin

“This is about understanding technology in the world at large, and understanding it as a function of each of the industry segments you might be writing, and each one of the accounts, to be able to identify the proportion of risk introduced by these different elements — to be able to assess the risk, evaluate the mitigation that’s in place, and then make decisions and price the exposure … it’s just taking it to a whole new level of sophistication.”

Claim development is another key piece of the puzzle, she said.

“As we have more and more claim activity, claim adjudication, claim litigation, and we understand how the confluence of technologies and the modern work environment play out through claims, we learn how those losses are settled and the contribution of each technology — as well as the combination of technologies — to the root cause of loss.

“You can’t substitute the years of claim history that still have to happen.”

Even though underwriters will try to manage the exposures with existing policy forms and language, that claim development will be necessary to guide new products, said Hendrick.

“Quite often your best intentions of what you meant to spell out and what you did spell out end up being interpreted differently by a court of law,” he said.

Insurers, said Lucker, will have to “redraft and recraft” policies to create more clarity about the risks they’re taking on.

“Challenge yourself to constantly keep in tune with how your company’s risk profile is changing based on this technology revolution.”    — Greg Hendrick, president of property & casualty insurance and reinsurance, XL Catlin.

As that claims history develops, paths to subrogation may become less clear for insurers, said experts. Difficulties tracing through the supply chain to understand the role of each player will make it more challenging first to sort out which policy is the primary, but then to understand the litigation path to recover from other parties who share blame for the loss.

Advertisement




“In the end, the primary insurance policy, whatever it is … regulators are going to hold that insurer responsible for doing the right thing for the insured — getting a check cut or getting something fixed or making sure that somebody’s medical bills are paid,” said Lucker.

“The consumer has to be made whole in a fair way. How that gets sorted out behind the scenes among all of the various parties — that becomes the insurance companies’ problem or the insurance ecosystem’s problem.”

For their part, regulators, at some point, “are going to have to start thinking more about this tangled web of potential liability and all of this contractual finger-pointing and subrogation, and how the industry is going to sort this all out,” said Lucker.

“It’s going to produce a whole lot of litigation so this is a kind of permanent employment plan for the legal profession and it’s not going to be simple to sort out.”

Risk Managers Must Keep Pace

It’s unclear whether everyone along the chain of those who make and produce autonomous, robotic or intelligent equipment is up to speed on the shifting exposures, said Hendrick. But risk managers employing these technologies are definitely thinking about how this risk is evolving and how it could impact their organizations, he said.

“Whether it’s their commercial fleet of cars or commercial fleet of trucks, their warehouse equipment, their manufacturing equipment, their retail or office buildings … with more and more interconnectivity, they’re definitely starting to think about,  ‘OK where does liability sit, how does it arise, and who’s going to be responsible?’ ”

“There really isn’t an industry out there that’s not exposed to additional risks already as a result of this technology,” said Marsh’s Denton.

“So everybody — whether industrial users, drivers, auto or refrigerator manufacturers — everybody’s got to grapple with this new technology and that potential increase in exposures and risks and how their insurance program will respond to that.”

Advertisement




That’s why no business can afford to simply renew their insurance program without due diligence, he added. “You can’t just renew your program with the same limits and the same type of coverage. As technology changes … the nature of the risk may increase or decrease or the size of the risk will change. You need to constantly evaluate your program to see if it responds to the potential magnitude of the exposure.”

Risk managers must be continually asking, “Are the products that I’ve historically bought the right ones to buy to protect the risks that I have now?” said Hendrick.

Companies will need to keep assessing their own programs as well as their suppliers’ programs to ensure they have the right amount of coverage in the new technology enabled world, he said.

The goal is to stay ahead of each wave of change and keep adapting, he added.

“Challenge yourself to constantly keep in tune with how your company’s risk profile is changing based on this technology revolution,” he said. &

________________________________________________________________

2017 Most Dangerous Emerging Risks

Cyber Business Interruption

Attacks on internet infrastructure begin, leaving unknown risks for insureds and insurers alike.

 

 

U.S. Economic Nationalism

Nationalistic policies aim to boost American wealth and prosperity, but they may do long-term economic damage.

 

 

Foreign Economic Nationalism

Economic nationalism is upsetting the risk management landscape by presenting challenges in once stable environments.

 

 

Coastal Mortgage Value Collapse

As climate change drives rising seas, so arises the risk that buyers will become leery of taking on mortgages along our coasts.  Trillions in mortgage values are at stake unless the public and the private sector move quickly.

Michelle Kerr is associate editor of Risk & Insurance. She can be reached at [email protected]

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

Risk Manager Focus

Better Together

Risk managers reveal what they value in their brokers.
By: | June 1, 2017 • 11 min read

Michael K. Sheehan, (left) Managing Director, Marsh and Grant Barkey, Director of Risk Management, Motivate International Inc.

Ask a broker what they can do for you and they will tell you. But let’s ask the risk manager.

What do risk managers really need in a broker? And what do the best brokers do to help risk managers succeed in their jobs?

Chet Porembski, system vice president and deputy general counsel, OhioHealth Corp.

Risk managers say it’s a broker who helps them look knowledgeable and prepared to their bosses. It’s someone who sweeps in like a superhero with an ingenious solution to a difficult problem.

Risk managers want to see brokers bring forth better products year after year. They want a broker who shows up at renewal time with new ideas, not just a rubber stamp.

Great brokers embed with the risk management team and learn everything they can about the company and its leaders. They help risk managers prepare and keep tabs throughout the year on changes at the organization with an eye towards planning the future.

“There’s the broker that sees themselves as just a hired ‘vendor,’ or I should say, somebody that basically just does the job at hand,” said Chet Porembski, system vice president and deputy general counsel at OhioHealth Corp.

“And then there’s the broker that views themselves very much as a business partner.  They truly bring added value to the relationship.”

These brokers look at the tough issues the risk manager is facing and bring in the resources to try to help their client in ways even the client might not have thought about yet. They also do advanced planning that makes the risk manager’s job easier when a problem arises.

“That’s the kind of broker I want.” Porembski said.

And that’s the kind of broker many risk managers need more than ever.

“The only way that the relationship is going to be successful is if you build a tremendous amount of trust.” — Frances Clark, director of risk management and insurance, Sentara Healthcare

That’s because risk managers are under increasing pressure these days. They carry more weight as corporations shrink their departments to cut costs.

Advertisement




Climate change, cyber threats and geopolitical shifts are turning what were once unthinkable losses into risks that are almost commonplace. And this is all happening in an under-insured risk environment, according a study by PwC entitled Broking 2020: Leading from the Front in a New Era of Risk.

Thankfully there are good brokers out there, risk managers say, who can bring more value to a client today than ever before and help ease that fear.

Brokers — the traditional intermediary in the risk transfer chain — do in fact have a tangible and growing role in developing viable and innovative solutions for the risk manager, according to PwC’s study.

They are the “global risk facilitation leaders.”

“[Whatever] organizations are doing in the short term — be this dealing with market instability or just going about day to-day business — they need to be looking at how to keep pace with the sweeping social, technological, economic, environmental and political (STEEP) developments that are transforming the world,” PwC said in the report.

Advisors That Are Getting It Done

Cyber risks are just one growing challenge that all organizations grapple with.

Frances Clark, director of risk management and insurance at Sentara Healthcare, remembers when her broker first suggested that she hold a leadership tabletop cyber drill.

Clark said her broker kept saying, “I know this is going to be a painful experience, but you are going to come out so much better in the long run.”

Frances Clark, director of risk management and insurance, Sentara Healthcare

Her broker was right, and went so far as to help arrange a system-wide drill that included representatives from the legal, finance, security, communications, marketing and medical teams.

They reviewed the many ways a cyber attack can happen and then practiced a response.

“We benefitted greatly from that exercise,” Clark said.

When Doctors on Demand developed a telemedicine app to offer mental health services through mobile devices, the company ran up against insurance limitations across state lines. All states require that the physician giving the advice be licensed in the same state where the patient is located.

The concern was for patient encounters where the patient actually crossed state boundaries during the encounter, due to the utilization of a mobile phone. The patient may have started with a properly licensed physician in the original state, but then crossed into a neighboring state where the physician was not licensed.

Larry Hansard, a regional managing director at Arthur J. Gallagher & Co., and a 2017 Power Broker®, worked to secure medical professional liability coverage without the traditional licensure exclusions placed on medical professionals by insurance carriers.

Advertisement




The initiative he helped develop actually changes how health care can be delivered to patients. It allows the emerging telemedicine sector to now offer services around the world.

Two-thirds of the risk managers in the PwC Broker 2020 survey labeled their brokers as “trusted advisors.” But the same survey found that some participants see their broker as more of a straightforward service provider rather than as a source for solutions.

The survey results indicate there is plenty of room for brokers to bring more value to clients.

OhioHealth’s brokers meet each year with OhioHealth’s risk management team to review insurance coverages.  And when the health system holds quarterly risk management retreats, the brokers attend. They bring with them education and insights on a broad range of topics, from property insurance markets to cyber solutions.

Porembski’s brokers also collaborate with the risk managers when there’s an upcoming presentation on risk issues to senior management. Sometimes the brokers help prepare the presentation, he said.

“We end up looking exceptionally good to our senior leaders and our board,” he said.

Involving the broker in interactions with leaders outside the traditional risk management team has benefits beyond selling products, he said. It extends the relationship circle.

Clark tries not to think of her brokers as outside vendors just providing a service. She wants them to be as committed and knowledgeable about the organization as she is.

“The only way that the relationship is going to be successful is if you build a tremendous amount of trust,” Clark said.

“You have to be completely open and honest about everything, no matter how bad it is, or how bad it may look to the market or underwriters.”

“Once you establish that trusting relationship, I think everything else falls into place,” she adds.

Sentara underwent significant growth recently, acquiring five hospitals in about six years. The expansion required a vast amount of integration on insurance programs and a merger of risk management departments and claims.

Clark said her brokers rolled up their sleeves and expertly navigated her through the consolidation.

“I can’t reiterate enough how most risk managers don’t know how to deal with an M&A unless you’ve gone through it.”

She said she wouldn’t have been able to manage the risk of the mergers without her broker’s counsel.

Grading the Broker

Mike Lubben, director of global risk management at Henry Crown & Co. in Chicago, sets standard expectations of his insurance brokers: know the exposures, understand how a risk manager has to sell ideas internally and understand the urgency of requests.

He lets his brokers know his expectations with regular report cards, complete with letter grades. And he isn’t shy about giving out Fs.

  • How did the broker service the EPLI coverage?
  • Did the broker provide expertise and coverage analysis?
  • Was there anything creative?
  • Did the broker recommend new endorsements based on the previous exposure?
  • Did the broker recommend any risk mitigation programs?
  • How well did he communicate and help with presentations?

“A good broker will think this is fantastic,” Lubben said.

This method starts the conversation. It helps Lubben establish long relationships with some stellar brokers.  But if the broker misses the mark, Lubben can have a talk with them about ways to do better in the future. Some brokers he has sent away.

Recently a broker failed on what Lubben calls “blocking and tackling,” the basics like returning phone calls within one day and responding promptly to emails.

Advertisement




Lubben gave him an “F” on those subjects and told him why. The broker still didn’t improve his game and was eventually replaced.

For many people, insurance can seem very routine from renewal to renewal. But a really good broker will break from routine and come back with some kind of enhancement or improvement.

If the renewal is flat with no change in premium, then Clark says she’ll ask, “What are you going to do for me this year?”

The best brokers are always striving for better, she said.

“Without the brokering community, you would be hard pressed to do your job. I really appreciate what the brokers do, they bring a level of expertise that we can’t possibly have on all lines of coverage.” — Mike Lubben, director of global risk management at Henry Crown & Co.

Motivate International Inc., which operates more than half of the bike share fleets in North America, went through a recent renewal.

Their broker, Marsh, explored more than 10 options with different strategies and programs. In the end, after all of that, they decided the expiring coverage was the best fit.

“Those exercises are very valuable for risk managers,” said Grant Barkey, Motivate’s director of risk management.

“As an innovative company committed to delivering best-in-class services, we believe thorough exploration leads to informed decision-making.”

A good broker understands that a company’s day-to-day operations and a highly effective risk management program have implications for what type of policy should be procured, he said.

Brokers need to partner with risk managers to figure out what those options are, and what the markets are saying and then succinctly relay the information to management.
They also need to have the tact and curiosity to inquire about future plans and figure out what resources might be needed to better serve their client.

When PwC surveyed risk managers, most put their insurance carriers and industry groups ahead of their brokers as the primary source of cyber and supply chain risk solutions; yet these areas are still cited as risk managers’ top concerns.

“Becoming the go-to partners for developing and coordinating innovative and effective solutions in these priority risk areas is at the heart of the commercial opportunity for brokers.” PwC said in its report.

“Yet, our survey suggests that these are important areas where brokers are falling short of the market’s demands and therefore need to adapt.

For example, less than a third of respondents are very satisfied with brokers’ analytical and modelling services across a range of areas.”

When participants were asked how their brokers could be more efficient, respondents put risk analysis at the top of PwC’s survey list. Significantly, more than a third also cited ‘big data’ analysis.

Finding the Right Fit

Paul Kim, Co-CBO of U.S. Retail at Aon Risk Solutions, helps match brokers to risk managers. He keeps in mind that insurance companies tend to sell product, while the clients are looking to manage risks. The right broker assists in mapping risks to existing products and also customizing broad solutions, he said.

“The risk manager’s job has become more complex in the current environment, but there are so many tools available for those individuals to make better informed decisions that truly help protect the overall risk profile of their companies,” Kim said.

Paul Kim, Co-CBO of U.S. Retail, Aon Risk Solutions

That’s why finding the right broker should be first and foremost, he said. Look for an individual with strong industry knowledge, product expertise and market relationships. A strong broker is able to effectively communicate what the risk manager’s goals are to the marketplace to be able to execute and achieve those goals.

“Not every broker can do that,” Kim said.

“Not every broker is the right broker.”

PwC said those brokers who quickly master the art and science of identifying ambiguous threats and then mobilize a broad private/public stakeholder pool to economically manage those risks over time will pull ahead of their competition.

“We’re really generalist,” Lubben said.

“Without the brokering community, you would be hard pressed to do your job. I really appreciate what the brokers do, they bring a level of expertise that we can’t possibly have on all lines of coverage.”

When selecting a broker, the risk manager should also take into account the entire organization behind the broker. Ask about the additional support systems that are available to the broker’s clients.

The company should have a deep bench so when the primary broker is out of the office there’s someone else to rely on who is almost as knowledgeable. The broker organization should also be able to assist you with your budgeting and forecasting from a financial risk perspective.

In PwC’s survey of risk managers, nearly three-quarters want analytics from their broker to help inform their decisionmaking, with concerns over new and emerging risks being a strong driver for this demand.

Clark also thinks it is vitally important for a broker to offer a claims advocate, somebody on the outside, when you are dealing with a carrier on a complicated claim.

“Otherwise you are vulnerable to what the carrier says,” Clark said.

Advertisement




To lead in this new era of risk, it’s also important that brokers forge close relationships with a broader set of stakeholders that includes governments, academia, specialist risk consultancies and even their industry peers, PwC said in the report.

It’s also going to be important to develop shared databases and research capabilities.

In turn, brokers need to assure this diverse stakeholder group that they are the right party to lead.

Clark, at Sentara Healthcare, said she knows what her risk exposures are today, but she’d like her brokers to anticipate her needs before she does.

“It’s kind of crazy, but amazingly some of them do it,” Clark said.

The broker will also use past experience and industry knowledge to anticipate where policy terms and conditions can be tweaked and improved upon.

“They will, say, advise us that we need to change this policy language, and then a year later you have a claim on that and you thank your lucky stars that they changed it,” Clark said.

“It is amazing to me every time it happens.”  &

Juliann Walsh is a staff writer at Risk & Insurance. She can be reached at [email protected]