Sponsored Content by AIG

Insurance Solutions for 4 Critical Business Challenges

It's time to think differently about insurance.
By: | March 3, 2014 • 5 min read

SponsoredContent_AIG

“Instead of thinking outside the box, get rid of the box.”
-Deepak Chopra

As globalization and technological innovation continue at a relentless pace, businesses are faced with new and unexpected risks. Companies need to manage these exposures as well as ensure regulatory compliance on a global scale. All the while, heightened competition demands constant innovation and improvement while maintaining financial flexibility and maximizing shareholder returns. It’s not easy.

Insurance is a vital tool that helps companies thrive in this difficult business world. And sophisticated practitioners of advanced risk management strategies understand that insurance can do much more than just cover traditional risks with a standard, annual policy.

At AIG, Global Risk Solutions (GRS) specializes in creating nontraditional solutions to unique risks and strives to be on the forefront of utilizing insurance in new ways. Whether it’s a Global Fronting Program that meets a company’s regulatory requirements for insurance, or a customized Alternative Solution that leverages innovative structures to insure complex or unusual risks, GRS utilizes a consultative approach to understand complicated challenges and structure programs tailored to the requirements.

The following case studies demonstrate how GRS designed insurance solutions to solve four pressing business problems.

1. State Lottery Worried “Lucky Numbers” Will Actually Hit

Some risks are truly unique. And while the risk may not have broad applicability, the approach used to address the challenge often provides insight into the ways that creative insurance solutions can apply to areas far afield from traditional insurable perils.

SponsoredContent_AIG

Example: In state lotteries, certain numbers get played much more often than others. When those “lucky numbers” are drawn as winners, there is the potential for a higher-than-average number of winning tickets.

Insurance Solution: To protect itself against such an outcome, one state lottery group sought catastrophe-like insurance coverage for the amount of the lottery’s annual payout that exceeded a fixed percentage of its annual revenue. By utilizing data collected by the lottery over 20 years, GRS structured a program that protected the state lottery from the adverse cash outflow resulting from one of the popular number sets being drawn. The program’s five-year term assured stable pricing and guaranteed capacity.

2. Prove It

Many risk professionals solely view insurance as a means for transferring risk, which limits their thinking of how insurance can address a wide variety of challenging issues. “This limitation is particularly relevant when risk transfer is not the motivation for the insurance purchase,” said Scherzer. “For example, when the sole need for insurance is to provide evidence of insurance to meet a regulatory requirement, paying to transfer the risk to a third party may be an unnecessary expense.”

SponsoredContent_AIG

“We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”
– Albert Einstein

Example: A food-and-beverage company was comfortable retaining risk rather than transferring it to a third party but faced a requirement for locally admitted policies. The company needed insurance coverage for a number of different lines of business to protect against risks that included strikes, loss of key suppliers, cyber risk, event cancellation, property catastrophe, credit risk and more.

Insurance Solution: GRS designed a multiline fronted program with a substantial limit where AIG companies fronted the insurance policies for the different lines of insurance, and the risk was reinsured back to the company’s captive. This program enabled the company to satisfy the requirement for locally admitted policies, benefit from favorable loss experience and address different types of exposures, some of which were difficult to insure in the traditional insurance market.

3. Don’t Let Risks Hold up a Merger

Negotiating a company’s sale is always a complicated process, particularly in industries with long-tail risk exposures.

SponsoredContent_AIG

Example: A transportation company with three divisions — auto, bus and taxi — was being sold. The buyer estimated the transportation company’s exposure to auto liability to be $10 million higher than the seller’s estimate. In order to avoid reducing the sale price, the seller pursued an insurance solution to address the buyer’s concern.

Insurance Solution: GRS designed a program providing retrospective excess auto liability coverage with $10 million limits funded by the seller. At the end of the seven-year policy term, any remaining money (plus interest) not paid out for claims, is returned to the seller. The structure enabled the seller to get his sale price and potentially benefit financially if the actual losses end up lower than the buyer expected.

4. Un-trap Your Cash

Businesses want to avoid posting collateral that will trap cash because a counterparty doesn’t truly understand the risk created by certain activities. In many cases, it’s better to replace a capital requirement with an insurance policy that will not reduce the company’s liquidity position. The value to the customer may not be in the reduction of costs, but in freeing up lines of credit and releasing working capital for other applications.

Example: For its employer’s liability risks, a manufacturing company’s captive insurer maintained collateral in the form of letters of credit. The parent company wanted to reduce the amount of collateral letters of credit provided by its captive to the insurance companies that front for it.

Insurance Solution: GRS structured a buyout of the captive’s underlying insurance policies, which eliminated the need for the company to post collateral to cover the risk.

The Takeaway

It’s time to think differently about risk and insurance. The examples above show that the world is changing and businesses need insurance solutions that are adaptable, creative and meaningful for companies to thrive in this interconnected, globalized world.

AIG’s GRS is more than a traditional insurance provider — it’s a problem-solver with a wide array of resources to address risk. Learn more about GRS here.

SponsoredContent_AIG

SponsoredContent
BrandStudioLogo

This article was produced by the R&I Brand Studio, a unit of the advertising department of Risk & Insurance, in collaboration with AIG. The editorial staff of Risk & Insurance had no role in its preparation.




AIG is a leading international insurance organization serving customers in more than 100 countries.

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

Lead Story

Improving the Claims Experience

Insureds and carriers agree that more communication can address common claims complaints.
By: | January 10, 2018 • 7 min read

Carriers today often argue that buying their insurance product is about much more than financial indemnity and peace of mind.

Advertisement




Many insurers include a variety of risk management services and resources in their packages to position themselves as true risk partners who help clients build resiliency and prevent losses in the first place.

That’s all well and good. No company wants to experience a loss, after all. But even with the added value of all those services, the core purpose of insurance is to reimburse loss, and policyholders pay premiums because they expect delivery on that promise.

At the end of the day, nothing else matters if your insurer can’t or won’t pay your claim, and the quality of the claims experience is ultimately the barometer by which insureds will judge their insurer.

Why, then, is the process not smoother? Insureds want more transparency and faster claims payment, but claims examiners are often overburdened and disconnected from the original policy. Where does the disconnect come from, and how can it be bridged?

Both sides of the insurer-insured equation may be responsible.

Susan Hiteshew, senior manager of global insurance and risk management, Under Armor Inc.

“One of the difficult things in our industry is that oftentimes insureds don’t call their insurer until they have a claim,” said Susan Hiteshew, senior manager of global insurance and risk management for Under Armour Inc.

“It’s important to leverage all of the other value that insurers offer through mid-term touchpoints and open communication. This can help build the insurer-insured partnership so that when a claim materializes, the relationships are already established and the claim can be resolved quickly and fairly.”

“My experience has been that claims executives are often in the background until there is an issue that needs addressing with the policyholder,” said Dan Holden, manager of corporate risk and insurance for Daimler Trucks North America.

“This is unfortunate because the claims department essentially writes the checks and they should certainly be involved in the day to day operations of the policyholders in designing polices that mitigate claims.

“By being in the shadows they often miss the opportunity to strengthen the relationship with policyholders.”

Communication Breakdown

Communication barriers may stem from internal separation between claims and underwriting teams. Prior to signing a contract and throughout a policy cycle, underwriters are often in contact with insureds to keep tabs on any changes in their risk profile and to help connect clients with risk engineering resources. Claims professionals are often left out of the loop, as if they have no proactive role to play in the insured-insurer relationship.

“Claims operates on their side of the house, ready to jump in, assist and manage when the loss occurs, and underwriting operates in their silo assessing the risk story,” Hiteshew said.
“Claims and underwriting need to be in lock-step to collectively provide maximum value to insureds, whether or not losses occur.”

Both insureds and claims professionals agree that most disputes could be solved faster or avoided completely if claims decision-makers interacted with policyholders early and often — not just when a loss occurs.

“Claims and underwriting need to be in lock-step to collectively provide maximum value to insureds, whether or not losses occur.” – Susan Hiteshew, senior manager of global insurance and risk management for Under Armour Inc.

“Communication is critically important and in my opinion, should take place prior to binding business and well before a claim comes in the door,” said David Crowe, senior vice president, claims, Berkshire Hathaway Specialty Insurance.

“In my experience, the vast majority of disputes boil down to lack of communication and most disputes ultimately are resolved when the claim decision-maker gets involved directly.”

Talent and Resource Shortage

Another contributing factor to fractured communication could be claims adjuster workload and turnover. Claims adjusting is stressful work to begin with.

Advertisement




Adjusters normally deal with a high volume of cases, and each case can be emotionally draining. The customer on the other side is, after all, dealing with a loss and struggling to return to business as usual. At some TPAs, adjuster turnover can exceed 25 percent.

“This is a difficult time for claims organizations to find talent who want to be in this business long-term, and claims organizations need to invest in their employees if they’re going to have any success in retaining them,” said Patrick Walsh, executive vice president of York Risk Services Group.

The claims field — like the insurance industry as a whole — is also strained by a talent crunch. There may not be enough qualified candidates to take the place of examiners looking to retire in the next ten years.

“One of the biggest challenges facing the claims industry is a growing shortage of talent,” said Scott Rogers, president, National Accounts, Sedgwick. “This shortage is due to a combination of the number of claims professionals expected to retire in the coming years and an underdeveloped pipeline of talent in our marketplace.

“The lack of investment in ensuring a positive work environment, training, and technology for claims professionals is finally catching up to the industry.”

The pool of adjusters gets stretched even thinner in the aftermath of catastrophes — especially when a string of catastrophes occurs, as they did in the U.S in the third quarter of 2017.

“From an industry perspective, Harvey, Irma and Maria reminded us of the limitations on resources available when multiple catastrophes occur in close succession,” said Crowe.

“From independent and/or CAT adjusters to building consultants, restoration companies and contractors, resources became thin once Irma made landfall.”

Is Tech the Solution?

This is where Insurtech may help things. Automation of some processes could free up time for claims professionals, resulting in faster deployment of adjusters where they’re needed most and, ultimately, speedier claims payment.

“There is some really exciting work being done with artificial intelligence and blockchain technologies that could yield a meaningful ROI to both insureds and insurers,” Hiteshew said.

“The claim set-up process and coverage validation on some claims could be automated, which could allow adjusters to focus their work on more complex losses, expedite claim resolution and payment as well.”

Dan Holden, manager, Corporate Risk & Insurance, Daimler Trucks North America

Predictive modeling and analytics can also help claims examiners prioritize tasks and maximize productivity by flagging high-risk claims.

“We use our data to identify claims with the possibility of exceeding a specified high dollar amount in total incurred costs,” Rogers said. “If the model predicts that a claim will become a large loss, the claim is redirected to our complex claims unit. This allows us to focus appropriate resources that impact key areas like return to work.”

“York has implemented a number of models that are focused on helping the claims professional take action when it’s really required and that will have a positive impact on the claim experience,” Walsh said.

“We’ve implemented centers of excellence where our experts provide additional support and direction so claim professionals aren’t getting deluged with a bunch of predictive model alerts that they don’t understand.”

“Technology can certainly expedite the claims process, but that could also lead to even more cases being heaped on examiners.” — Dan Holden, manager, Corporate Risk & Insurance, Daimler Trucks North America

Many technology platforms focused on claims management include client portals meant to improve the customer experience by facilitating claim submission and communication with examiners.

“With convenient, easy-to-use applications, claimants can send important documents and photos to their claims professionals, thereby accelerating the claims process. They can designate their communication preferences, whether it’s email, text message, etc.,” Sedgwick’s Rogers said. “Additionally, rules can be established that direct workflow and send real time notifications when triggered by specific claim events.”

However, many in the industry don’t expect technology to revolutionize claims management any time soon, and are quick to point out its downsides. Those include even less personal interaction and deteriorating customer service.

While they acknowledge that Insurtech has the potential to simplify and speed up the claims workflow, they emphasize that insurance is a “people business” and the key to improving the claims process lies in better, more proactive communication and strengthening of the insurer-insured relationship.

Additionally, automation is often a double-edged sword in terms of making work easier for the claims examiner.

“Technology can certainly expedite the claims process, but that could also lead to even more cases being heaped on examiners,” Holden said.

“So while the intent is to make things more streamlined for claims staff, the byproduct is that management assumes that examiners can now handle more files. If management carries that assumption too far, you risk diminishing returns and examiner burnout.”

Advertisement




By further taking real people out of the equation and reducing personal interaction, Holden says technology also contributes to deteriorating customer service.

“When I started more than 30 years ago as a claims examiner, I asked a few of the seasoned examiners what they felt had changed since they began their own careers 30 year earlier. Their answer was unanimous: a decline in customer service,” Holden said.

“It fell to the wayside to be replaced by faster, more impersonal methodologies.”

Insurtech may improve customer satisfaction for simpler claims, allowing policyholders to upload images with the click of a button, automating claim valuation and fast-tracking payment. But for complex claims, where the value of an insurance policy really comes into play, tech may do more harm than good.

“Technology is an important tool and allows for more timely payment and processing of claims, but it is not THE answer,” BHSI’s Crowe said. “Behind all of the technology is people.” &

Katie Dwyer is an associate editor at Risk & Insurance®. She can be reached at [email protected]