2222222222

2016 Power Broker

Power Brokers of Negotiation

In a record year for M&As, the 2016 Power Brokers excelled at marrying risk management cultures and firming up carrier relationships.
By: | February 22, 2016 • 7 min read

Spurred on by low interest rates and an appetite for scale, business leaders in 2015 sought to create market heft through mergers and acquisitions.

Advertisement




Winners of the 2016 Risk & Insurance® Power Broker® award were right there with them; marrying risk management cultures, ironing out coverage gaps and redundancies, and getting the insurance carriers to behave on price.

Alex Michon, a Sacramento, Calif.-based senior vice president with Aon, is a 2016 Power Broker® in the health care category. In a health care system merger that came out of the gate as a fire drill and then dragged on for months, Michon was reminded of a key M&A consideration: the human cost in acquisitions is often underestimated.

That’s something commercial insurance brokers need to keep in mind if they are going to build productive relationships and achieve the goals of both the buyer and the seller. Many times the risk manager for the acquired company is losing his or her job. Yet they still have to perform at the top of their game to bring off the deal.

“I think the human cost is usually under-represented in terms of the stress that these people are going through,” Michon said.

In these cases the broker can be a friend to the risk manager, who might not be first in the thoughts of finance executives or other company leadership. The risk manager might be driving in to work every day, knowing that a merger is underway and be unable to tell colleagues about it; even though hundreds of jobs may soon be on the chopping block.

“We are one of the few people who can openly talk to them,” Michon said.

In most cases, Michon said, the risk manager will perform admirably, giving the brokers and carriers all the information they need to be able to write the risk of the combined companies.

But Michon has seen cases where risk managers became so concerned with their futures that they put most of their energy into job hunting.

That tension can also impact dialogues with brokers who are working on a target company account, according to Arthur J. Gallagher’s Amy Sinclair, a 2016 Power Broker® in the pharmaceutical category and a veteran of many merger deals.

Advertisement




“Employees of the target company are concerned about redundancy at the acquisition partner,” Sinclair said.

“There is a good chance they may no longer have a job once the transaction closes,” she said.

Smaller brokerages that don’t have a lot of experience with M&As may dig in their heels a little bit.

“Generally speaking, brokers for the target and acquisition partner work well together,” Sinclair said.

“Regardless of what side of the transaction you are on, you still want to provide the best service to your client. It is not in anyone’s best interest to withhold information or to be uncooperative,” she said.

Carrier Relationships

The broker’s burden of relationship maintenance in the case of an acquisition also extends to those that underwrite the risks — the carriers. There is a lot of work to be done to convince the carrier that the risk they know won’t change when one company acquires another.

Herman Brito Jr., assistant vice president, Marsh

Herman Brito Jr., assistant vice president, Marsh

Marsh’s Herman Brito Jr.,  a 2016 Power Broker® in the marine category who places cargo and inland marine policies, played a part in two blockbuster deals in 2015; the acquisition by General Electric of the French electric railcar maker Alstom and the marriage of global food giants Kraft and Heinz.

Marsh was new to the Heinz account when the Kraft merger loomed. Pre-merger, Brito convinced Heinz to ditch its captive for global cargo exposures and transfer the risk to AIG. Even though Marsh wound up with both accounts, the rules of broker-client confidentiality meant that Brito couldn’t call his colleagues in Chicago — where Kraft is based — and check up on Kraft’s loss history.

Brito is a big fan of AIG’s multinational placements, calling them “best in class.” His challenge was to make sure that Kraft benefitted from the same aggressive terms he was getting for Heinz post-merger. As the cargo broker, Brito knew that the carriers had bigger concerns about things such as combined property exposures than what he was placing.

Advertisement




“Not only am I asking you to make it clear and concise for Heinz/Kraft, let’s make it easy on ourselves by implementing a mergers and acquisitions clause and a multi-year rate agreement,” Brito told the underwriters.

“It took a tremendous effort to change the structure that was in place in August 2014, and to obtain the coverages implemented in May 2015, but when claims occurred they started to see the benefits in certain coverages and why we pursued those,” Brito said.

“I think the human cost is usually under-represented in terms of the stress that these people are going through.” — Alex Michon, senior vice president, Aon

The General Electric/Alstom merger was another kettle of fish.

“GE’s acquisition of  Alstom was the hardest acquisition I have ever done,” Brito said.

The reason?

General Electric has a highly centralized risk management department, four risk managers handling the entire global program. Alstom had up to 30 risk managers, many of them with local authority.

Another difference was that General Electric has a huge retention and Alstom had more of a “trading dollars” philosophy, spending so much on premium against so much in expected losses.

Advertisement




Brito needed to convince the carrier that when GE bought Alstom, the cargo risk management programs would become one. Initially, the insurer wasn’t buying it. But eventually Brito convinced the underwriters that once the companies were married, Alstom’s standards would come up to GE’s.

Part of Brito’s job was to make sure he was available at any hour of the day to answer questions from Alstom risk managers around the globe and help them buy into the GE program.

“If you demonstrate that you are willing to have conference calls at a time that is most convenient in India, people are more willing to do what you are asking them to do,” Brito said.

The GE/Alstom deal closed in November of 2015. Brito was still spending a lot of time on it when we spoke to him in January.

Odd Couples

Marrying risk management cultures in a merger is a must; having the tools and the drive to convince carriers to take on the combined risk is crucial; and so is conducting enough due diligence to manage risk and provide adequate employee benefits when two very different company cultures get together.

Consider the challenges faced by Eric Wittenmyer, a 2016 Power Broker® in the health care category.

Eric Wittenmyer, senior vice president, Aon

Eric Wittenmyer, senior vice president, Aon

Wittenmyer, a senior vice president with Aon based in Chicago, was tasked with ironing out employee benefits for a large hospital system merger involving thousands of employees. One of the organizations classified hundreds of their employees as executives, eligible for a special category of benefits. The other organization counted slightly more than a dozen executives in a similar category.

“What we did was a tremendous amount of benchmarking, and an awful lot of cost modeling,” Wittenmyer said. That science determined that the hospital with the smaller group of employees classified as executives was closer to the norm.

Then came the art. That was figuring out how different employees perceived the value of certain ancillary benefits, such as life insurance and disability benefits.

Once that was determined, the in-house benefits team, with Wittenmyer’s guidance, offered one-time cash payments to employees who felt they were having a guaranteed benefit taken away, while still offering them access to an employer supported program; just not one in which the employer paid for the whole nut.

Advertisement




“So once we had done all of the plan design work, we had to manage significant transitional coordination issues,” Wittenmyer said.

Because coverage of certain benefits for the merged entities was taking effect on a staggered schedule, with some benefits being in place Jan. 1, for example, and others March 1, Wittenmyer had to earn the trust of underwriters who were being asked to stay on certain programs for a few months — some of them involving high potential life insurance pay-outs — without the corresponding premium income.

In the end, Wittenmyer was able to convince the carriers to work with him, with no price increases, because of the attractive size of the merged accounts.

“I think everything was as transparent as it could be and the vendors understood that,” Wittenmyer said.

See the complete list of 2016 Power Broker® winners.

Dan Reynolds is editor-in-chief of Risk & Insurance. He can be reached at [email protected]

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

Risk Report: Manufacturing

More Robots Enter Into Manufacturing Industry

With more jobs utilizing technology advancements, manufacturing turns to cobots to help ease talent gaps.
By: | May 1, 2018 • 6 min read

The U.S. manufacturing industry is at a crossroads.

Faced with a shortfall of as many as two million workers between now and 2025, the sector needs to either reinvent itself by making it a more attractive career choice for college and high school graduates or face extinction. It also needs to shed its image as a dull, unfashionable place to work, where employees are stuck in dead-end repetitive jobs.

Advertisement




Added to that are the multiple risks caused by the increasing use of automation, sensors and collaborative robots (cobots) in the manufacturing process, including product defects and worker injuries. That’s not to mention the increased exposure to cyber attacks as manufacturers and their facilities become more globally interconnected through the use of smart technology.

If the industry wishes to continue to move forward at its current rapid pace, then manufacturers need to work with schools, governments and the community to provide educational outreach and apprenticeship programs. They must change the perception of the industry and attract new talent. They also need to understand and to mitigate the risks presented by the increased use of technology in the manufacturing process.

“Loss of knowledge due to movement of experienced workers, negative perception of the manufacturing industry and shortages of STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) and skilled production workers are driving the talent gap,” said Ben Dollar, principal, Deloitte Consulting.

“The risks associated with this are broad and span the entire value chain — [including]  limitations to innovation, product development, meeting production goals, developing suppliers, meeting customer demand and quality.”

The Talent Gap

Manufacturing companies are rapidly expanding. With too few skilled workers coming in to fill newly created positions, the talent gap is widening. That has been exacerbated by the gradual drain of knowledge and expertise as baby boomers retire and a decline in technical education programs in public high schools.

Ben Dollar, principal, Deloitte Consulting

“Most of the millennials want to work for an Amazon, Google or Yahoo, because they seem like fun places to work and there’s a real sense of community involvement,” said Dan Holden, manager of corporate risk and insurance, Daimler Trucks North America. “In contrast, the manufacturing industry represents the ‘old school’ where your father and grandfather used to work.

“But nothing could be further from the truth: We offer almost limitless opportunities in engineering and IT, working in fields such as electric cars and autonomous driving.”

To dispel this myth, Holden said Daimler’s Educational Outreach Program assists qualified organizations that support public high school educational programs in STEM, CTE (career technical education) and skilled trades’ career development.

It also runs weeklong technology schools in its manufacturing facilities to encourage students to consider manufacturing as a vocation, he said.

“It’s all essentially a way of introducing ourselves to the younger generation and to present them with an alternative and rewarding career choice,” he said. “It also gives us the opportunity to get across the message that just because we make heavy duty equipment doesn’t mean we can’t be a fun and educational place to work.”

Rise of the Cobot

Automation undoubtedly helps manufacturers increase output and improve efficiency by streamlining production lines. But it’s fraught with its own set of risks, including technical failure, a compromised manufacturing process or worse — shutting down entire assembly lines.

Advertisement




More technologically advanced machines also require more skilled workers to operate and maintain them. Their absence can in turn hinder the development of new manufacturing products and processes.

Christina Villena, vice president of risk solutions, The Hanover Insurance Group, said the main risk of using cobots is bodily injury to their human coworkers. These cobots are robots that share a physical workspace and interact with humans. To overcome the problem of potential injury, Villena said, cobots are placed in safety cages or use force-limited technology to prevent hazardous contact.

“With advancements in technology, such as the Cloud, there are going to be a host of cyber and other risks associated with them.” — David Carlson, U.S. manufacturing and automobile practice leader, Marsh

“Technology must be in place to prevent cobots from exerting excessive force against a human or exposing them to hazardous tools or chemicals,” she said. “Traditional robots operate within a safety cage to prevent dangerous contact. Failure or absence of these guards has led to injuries and even fatalities.”

The increasing use of interconnected devices and the Cloud to control and collect data from industrial control systems can also leave manufacturers exposed to hacking, said David Carlson, Marsh’s U.S. manufacturing and automobile practice leader. Given the relatively new nature of cyber as a risk, however, he said coverage is still a gray area that must be assessed further.

“With advancements in technology, such as the Cloud, there are going to be a host of cyber and other risks associated with them,” he said. “Therefore, companies need to think beyond the traditional risks, such as workers’ compensation and product liability.”

Another threat, said Bill Spiers, vice president, risk control consulting practice leader, Lockton Companies, is any malfunction of the software used to operate cobots. Then there is the machine not being able to cope with the increased workload when production is ramped up, he said.

“If your software goes wrong, it can stop the machine working or indeed the whole manufacturing process,” he said. “[Or] you might have a worker who is paid by how much they can produce in an hour who decides to turn up the dial, causing the machine to go into overdrive and malfunction.”

Potential Solutions

Spiers said risk managers need to produce a heatmap of their potential exposures in the workplace attached to the use of cobots in the manufacturing process, including safety and business interruption. This can also extend to cyber liability, he said.

“You need to understand the risk, if it’s controllable and, indeed, if it’s insurable,” he said. “By carrying out a full risk assessment, you can determine all of the relevant issues and prioritize them accordingly.”

By using collective learning to understand these issues, Joseph Mayo, president, JW Mayo Consulting, said companies can improve their safety and manufacturing processes.

“Companies need to work collaboratively as an industry to understand this new technology and the problems associated with it.” — Joseph Mayo, president, JW Mayo Consulting

“Companies need to work collaboratively as an industry to understand this new technology and the problems associated with it,” Mayo said. “They can also use detective controls to anticipate these issues and react accordingly by ensuring they have the appropriate controls and coverage in place to deal with them.”

Advertisement




Manufacturing risks today extend beyond traditional coverage, like workers’ compensation, property, equipment breakdown, automobile, general liability and business interruption, to new risks, such as cyber liability.

It’s key to use a specialized broker and carrier with extensive knowledge and experience of the industry’s unique risks.

Stacie Graham, senior vice president and general manager, Liberty Mutual’s national insurance central division, said there are five key steps companies need to take to protect themselves and their employees against these risks. They include teaching them how to use the equipment properly, maintaining the same high quality of product and having a back-up location, as well as having the right contractual insurance policy language in place and plugging any potential coverage gaps.

“Risk managers need to work closely with their broker and carrier to make sure that they have the right contractual controls in place,” she said. “Secondly, they need to carry out on-site visits to make sure that they have the right safety practices and to identify the potential claims that they need to mitigate against.” &

Alex Wright is a U.K.-based business journalist, who previously was deputy business editor at The Royal Gazette in Bermuda. You can reach him at [email protected]