AI Wisdom Ep. 4: Big Data, Standards and the Insurtech Revolution with Bill Pieroni

Digital Transformation - October 23 2019

Ron Glozman, CEO of Chisel AI and host of the “AI Wisdom – Talking Insurance Innovation” podcast recently spoke with Bill Pieroni, CEO & President of ACORD about the challenges of harnessing big data to better assess and price risk. With the emergence of insurtech and new technologies like artificial intelligence, insurance brokers and carriers now have new tools at their disposal for extracting business insights from mountains of unstructured insurance data, but hurdles remain. The lack of broadly adopted data standards across the insurance industry is an obstacle to innovation and growth. Click the link to listen or read the full transcript below.

 

Some of the questions covered during the conversation include:

  • What is the next big breakthrough in insurance technology that carriers and brokers need to prepare for?
  • How would you rate the digitization and standardization efforts of brokers and carriers?
  • Do you think we’ll see the day when there’s a global data standard for the insurance industry?
  • Can insurers deliver the experience brokers and customers expect/demand without standardization?
  • What do you think the insurance industry will look like in 10 years?

Transcript

Ron Glozman: This week we have Bill Pieroni, the CEO and founder of ACORD joining us. Thank you so much for taking the time, Bill. Please, for those who don't know you, introduce yourself.

Bill Pieroni: Well, thank you very much for the opportunity to be a part of the podcast. I'm not the founder though, the organization is 45 years old. I was alive and had some youth to me, but I've been a part of the organization for probably 20 years having been a part of several organizations who were ACORD members and have been President and CEO for the past three years.

Ron: Love it. My apologies, I did not read my notes, you are correct. For those of you who don't know, obviously the insurance industry continues to wrestle with challenges of harnessing big data to better assess price and risk. And there's a lot of new insurtechs and new technologies coming out like artificial intelligence tools for brokers and carriers to better improve their workflows and provide insights, but there are still many hurdles. And one of the biggest hurdles is the need to adopt data standards. And so, ACORD is one of the leading organizations tackling this massive challenge of getting the insurance industry standardized as it's coming to its time of innovation.

And so, Bill, I’d love to hear from you: ACORD has had a huge hand in spearheading this innovation, especially with its annual Insurtech Innovation Challenge, which we were thrilled to win last year, and it is happening in the next week or so. What is the next big breakthrough, in your view, that insurance carriers and brokers really need to prepare for?

Bill: Well, if I really had to pick a single technology, and there are several on the horizon, I would have to say it's the intersection of artificial intelligence and quantum computing. When you think about what those two technologies together will be able to do is, imagine a scenario where the cost of prediction is zero. Within the property and casualty space, about 30% of premium dollars go into underwriting, and 70% go to claims. Within that 70% for claims, 15% to 20% go for adjustment.  So, when you think about data and how important prediction is, roughly 50% of premium dollars today are used to develop insight and act on it. So, imagine a scenario where 50% of the cost is gone. That will have a profound impact on overall profits, on relevance for the industry, and on sources of competitive advantage. So, if I had to pick one, I can't really pick one, it's really the two of them married together. And I know that Chisel AI is in the AI space. When you merge artificial intelligence with quantum computing, I think it will have a transformational effect.

However, as with most changes in our industry, I think the change will occur just slowly enough that if our industry chooses to ignore it, there'll be able to up to the point where it may be too late for some of them. But when I look at our members – and we have 36,000 members globally; about half of the world's premium goes through ACORD standards – I'm very hopeful, particularly for the ACORD members that are recognizing the importance of data and recognize the importance of decision making and the use of artificial intelligence and advanced computing techniques.

Ron: I love that, and I think you're right. I think we're still early in the process, but it's a change that's coming and there will be companies that are sort of early adopters and the early majority, the late majority and some small group will be laggards. You know, to your point, some of those laggards might not be around because they were failed to adjust in time. One of the things that I really liked was not long ago, you very memorably said that the insurance industry is “predicated on looking at the past.” With the insurtech movement, do you think this is changing at all? Is the ship finally starting to turn?

Bill: Well, you know, when you think about, and that’s an important point that you just made, are they beginning to turn, and have they moved on from the past? In the end, trying to price products today does require a backwards-looking perspective, right, trying to understand what the lost cost has been, what the underwriting expense ratio has been, and what can be done. However, given the volume, variety, velocity, and veracity of the data, there is a distinct set of carriers out there who are, in fact, beginning to look forward, and really have moved from asking the question, “What happened?” to “What's the best thing that could happen?”

So, I think you're right to say lots of legacy carriers and capabilities were centered around what happened, but the leaders are really asking, “What's the best thing that can happen?” Then that does really compel you to look forward and to try to understand what's happening and what you can do about it proactively. So, yes, you may have heard me say this as well: “The future is already here. It's just unevenly distributed.” Some have embraced it, some have not.

“I do believe there's a Darwinian evolution occurring in our industry and, for those stakeholders who are obsessed with looking backwards and are mired in legacy and the challenges that entails, some will unfortunately probably be deselected and marginalized,” said Bill Pieroni, CEO & President, ACORD

Ron: I think you’re so right. Let’s just dive a little bit deeper into that. Are there specific organizational barriers, or change management that needs to occur? Maybe there’s a line of thinking that you’d like to offer to our peers in the industry when they try to potentially adopt some of these new things, and they have organizational or other types of barriers that they need to overcome to get there?

Bill: Well, you know, Peter Drucker said, “Culture eats strategy for breakfast.” We can talk about legacy technologies, we can talk about skills and competencies, competitive context, the regulatory nature of our industry, but in the end, I think that any organization, particularly in the insurance industry, is nothing more than the collective capabilities of everyone at that organization.

“It’s really about culture, and insurers have unique cultures. Despite the fact that we’re in the risk business, we're very risk averse. We don't like risk. We want to quantify risk, transfer the risk, manage it, measure it.”

I think, you know, there’s no effective doing without making mistakes. And when you think about the deployment of new capabilities, whether it's processes or technology, it's going to entail risk, it's going to entail mistakes.

“We as an industry are going to have to become more comfortable with taking risks, with failing fast and recovering but learning by doing.”

And my big encouragement is, “Are you attracting and retaining high-skill, high-will talent? Because as important as technology is to our industry, it's still going to be centered around people and their values. Are they aligned to create value for their customers, for their shareholders, for the communities that they operate within? So, I think, in the end, it’s culture and people that represent the truest barrier.

But to be sure, insurance around the world has been an early adopter of technology. And as an early adopter of technology, we’ve got lots of legacy. You know, we were some of the first firms globally to use mainframe computing and client-server technologies and 4GLs and all the rest. And that creates real barriers, right? It’s easy for new and emerging competitors to look at our industry and say, “Look at how old the technology is, but that technology was once state of the market and it’s got lots of embedded knowledge and capabilities within it and it's non-trivial to move off of that. There is a J curve, though: most organizations like to make change and see the benefits accrue immediately. You know, for some of our accumulated legacy across our industry, it may take a few years before you see the benefits. So, patience and timing and culture and all the rest are going to be critical, I think, to help our industry move forward.

Ron: I love your point about culture. I think culture is something that to us at Chisel AI is very important as we work on scaling our team and delivering on our promises to our customers and really building our world-class team and an application along with it. Do you see a link between insurtech innovation and attracting new talent? Which way do you see it flowing? Is new younger talent coming in and requesting this innovation, or is the innovation actually attracting new talent into the ecosystem?

Bill: You know, interestingly enough, there are two types of individuals that find their way into insurtechs. There are those that come from the industry who may have been frustrated, are a bit more innovative, and really do want to have a profound change. And then there’s the other type who really never thought about insurance, maybe had expertise with a certain technology or passion around a certain capability, and they find their way in. I think for the people who move from the industry to insurtech, it gives them a chance to grow, learn, and perhaps return back to the industry. But I’m most excited about the second type: Those that never thought about insurance as a career, right? I often remark that everyone in the insurance industry got here by accident with the exception of actuaries. Actuaries, at a relatively young age, knew about this industry before I even knew what this industry was, and studied it and came into it. But I am excited about the opportunity for our industry to grow the talent base through the technology avenues. I think the technology occurs both ways, people leaving the industry to go and learn and perhaps come back, and those that are relatively new to the industry but came into it through the technology. I think both are true, but I'm probably more excited about the new entrants that are attracted into our industry because I think the insurance industry is incredibly important. It's almost 4% of the global GDP. It puts people's lives back together.

“Without insurance, roads don’t get built, people’s lives don't get put back together, businesses don’t get established – it’s so important. When I think about the millennial and post-millennial generations and their values, the insurance industry really represents an attractive career where you can really make a difference in this world. So, I'm very excited about insurtech and what it’s done in attracting talent into our industry.”

Ron: I love the passion that you have for that answer. I definitely come more personally from the second bucket, being a technologist at heart, somebody who was very passionate about, in my case, you know, being a student, how can I make studying faster? What if I can teach a computer to read textbooks and create summaries? And then I was approached by one of the big brokers who had heard about my app for students and said, “I know you’re not in insurance today, but I think the insurance world can really benefit from some of this automation technology.” And so, for the past three and a half, four years, I've been loving being in insurance. It’s a place I never thought I'd be, but it's given me more passion than I could have ever expected. One of the questions that I personally love to ask, whenever I go to conferences is, “How did you get into insurance?” Everybody has a different story but one of my favorites was, “It’s sort of like a black hole. Once you get close enough, and you get sucked into the eye, you never get out.”

Bill: I tell you; it was a random accident for me as well, but I feel truly blessed and fortunate to have found my way in. I didn’t mean to, but for those that aren't familiar with insurance, it’s truly a wonderful career with wonderful people, great values of integrity and doing the right thing for people. And I feel very fortunate because it didn't have to happen. Sometimes the best strategy of all is to have some luck and I do feel very lucky that I found my way in.

Ron: Recently, we published a blog post talking with a mutual connection of ours, Frank Sentner, an insurtech pioneer and a 40-year veteran of the industry. From his perspective, he gave the insurance industry a D+ on their data standardization efforts, yet he still remains optimistic. Being the leading person, the leading organization in this, how would you rate the digitization standardization efforts of brokers and carriers?

Bill: Well, as I said, half the world's premium goes through the ACORD standard. The half that we don’t have tends to be very localized in certain geographies. So, is it where I’d like it to be? No, but I do feel we’re progressing, but things go very slowly. Our industry, as I said, we’re very conservative, we’re risk averse. I think as the legacy gets replaced and as organizations come to the realization that every single part of what you do isn’t a source of competitive advantage, it’ll happen.

You know, the shape of the electric plug is not the source of the advantage, the logical and physical data model is not your source of advantage. I think, increasingly, carriers, brokers and other stakeholders around the world are understanding that. So, I’m hopeful. Clearly, it’s not where we need to be, but every year ACORD grows, the premium base grows, our stakeholders grow, the extensiveness of the use of the standards grow. So, you know, I'm a little more optimistic than Frank and hopeful that as I pass ACORD on over the next decade to the next leader, we’ll be that much better. But in the end, you know, ACORD is only where it is because I’m standing on the shoulders of the previous CEO. So, everybody has to do their part.

Ron: That’s right. Everybody has to do their part. That applies to everything in life. We find in our work with clients that, yes, ACORD is global and it's everywhere, but to your point, there are sometimes regional standards. So, for example, because we’re based in Canada, one of those is CSIO. I'd love to hear how ACORD views them, whether you guys are looking to partner with them and if you ever think that there’s going to be a single global standard of the insurance industry?

Bill: Well, that’s interesting that you bring up the Canadian organization. Those are ACORD standards. They're a member of ACORD and every one of the Canadian standards are, in fact, the ACORD standards. Now, you know, we’re happy that there's a Canadian organization that represents all the provinces. Canada's certainly an important insurance country. I spend a great deal of time up there. Some of the world’s greatest insurers are based in Canada, but those P&C standards, the general insurance standards in Canada, are in fact ACORD standards.

Ron: I'm with you. Do you find that the ecosystem is centralizing? So, are there regional offices on CSIO and in other countries, I assume, they're working off of ACORD? Or do you find that there's still companies and organizations out there that are saying, “We think we can do maybe not better, but we can do it differently,” and rather than starting with the ACORD forms, they're coming up with a completely separate, potentially competing standard?

Bill: No, we're finding that, again, organizations, carriers, brokers and other stakeholders are recognizing that there are scale and scope economies in a consistent set of standards. So, if anything, we see some of the country-based standards coalescing around the ACORD standard because, in the end, if a standard isn't standard, if it’s been changed and modified, well, it loses its impact. Imagine if we had one global electric plug, you know, for the industry, how much easier for appliance manufacturers would it be for individuals who travel around the world? So, I would say that organizations are recognizing the power of a consistent global standard. If there are unique, discreet variations, well, it’s not a standard anymore, is it? Right. It’s similar but not the same and it really does impair the use of data and analytics for competitive advantage. So, I find them coalescing around ACORD if anything.

Ron: And from our perspective, the more people that start using ACORD the better because it makes, I think, everybody's life in the insurance industry easier. Do you find that there are potentially regulatory and compliance regulations that differ, you know, state to state, obviously in the U.S., states have different laws, requirements, and then across countries? How do you look at integrating some of those regional-specific compliance standards into the ACORD standard?

Bill: Well, in the U.S. alone, we've got 53 legal jurisdictions. The U.S. is one of the more complex regulatory regimes, but there are certainly other countries around the world. And I’m a great supporter of unique requirements, especially when those unique requirements are driven by market needs. It’s the random and arbitrary requirements that I don’t like. But I like the fact that we’ve got unique organizations watching out for their local constituents. So, despite the fact that globalization is increasing, I like the fact that we've got regulators advocating for their individual stakeholders. We don't find that is a particular problem. If anything, I find it liberating.

You know, rather than having a tabula rasa sheet in front of us, those regulatory requirements help to form guardrails for us. And in the end, regulations are there to be advocates for the industry, for the insureds, for the brokers and agencies. So, I find them liberating. It may be a bit counterintuitive, but I like them. We more than accommodate them, we work with them very closely. So, I'm very supportive of the regulatory regimes around the world and I don't think that they’re forming any real barriers to us. They make our work more interesting sometimes and make for a bit more work, but I find all of the regulators globally to be great partners who work very closely with us. They’re advocates for the industry and are really trying to help our industry. So, I’m grateful that they're out there and I’m grateful for the partnership that they provide to ACORD and our members.

Ron: I liked your viewpoint on that, especially the fact that sometimes the differences actually makes the work more interesting. And we find the same thing. If we’re doing the same thing over and over every day, it becomes monotonous. It's actually sometimes those minutia details that cause the work to be the most interesting. Now before joining ACORD, you held senior roles at Marsh, State Farm, you did some work at IBM and Accenture. Can you share some real-world experience of where you saw the lack of data standardization costing time, effort, money, and just adding friction to the entire value chain?

Bill: Well, again, using P&C as an example, you think about 30% of the premium dollars are underwriting; 70% are in claims. And you think about the value chain in between. I think the lack of standards really limits an organization’s ability to truly leverage data for insight, identification of implications, execution, and all the rest. You know, it can become very difficult, if every time you're interacting with a different part of the value chain, you have to have a translation. I liken it to an organization that is made up of individuals who speak 20 different languages in different informational silos. How do they share information? Does it mean the same thing? Can they believe in the data? How quickly does the data move around?

I mentioned earlier what AI and quantum computing can do. Well, it can only really help with insight and truly making the cost of prediction to be zero if, in fact, there are standards that increase the fungibility of that data, that increase the transparency, the veracity, and move it around quicker, that can be augmented with outside data sources. So I think it has impacts around productivity, around informational sharing, around the conversion of data, the insight that can’t be ignored around true digitalization of the value chain, around acting in the moment of value – all of the things that you can imagine around efficiency and effectiveness from a tactical standpoint. But also, around strategic intent, products, geographies, channels, experience management. All of those things can be improved through increased use of standards.

And all of that really is about the data, right? Can you do something with that data in real-time fashion, right? Not looking at it 90 days later, 120 days later, but at the moment of value when a customer has a claim, when a customer is on the phone with an experience problem, when you’re trying to rate or price something quickly.

“Again, access to that data improves the free flow of information and, I think, raises the ability to act on it quickly and accurately for value.”

Ron: I would say we've experienced much of that. We talked quite a bit up to this point about commercial lines. How would you view the difference in the adoption of standards across personal lines versus commercial lines?

Bill: Well, look, I don’t think anything we do is a commodity, right? I don't like competing on price because if you compete on price, you lose on price. And I’m a real advocate for product differentiation, customer experience differentiation, innovation, operational efficiency as a baseline need to have. But when I think about personal lines, the products are a bit more standardized, they're a bit more consistent. So, clearly the pervasiveness of standards in the personal line space for P&C or individual life is the corollary for the life insurance industry. Those standards tend to be a bit more widely adopted.

“As you move from small commercial to mid-market to large commercial, you move from more standardized products to bespoke or custom products. Clearly, when a product is manuscript or bespoke or customized, it becomes a bit difficult to standardize it.”

However, claims, certificates of insurance, contract terms, those things do have an opportunity for standardization and ACORD had a rich portfolio of standards for them. But I would say personal lines is a bit higher on the maturity level in terms of standardization. Small commercial is there, mid-market is getting there. Large commercial is maybe more back office, but again, as brokers, carriers and large commercial buyers seek more standardization around terms and conditions, I think we stand ready to help with standardizing some of those more complex, more traditionally bespoke types of products. We have the standards. We just need pull demand from them. ACORD is member-owned, we serve our members, so we don't push things, we look for pull demand from the industry to use our standards.

Ron: I don’t know who to attribute this to, but in the age-old wisdom, the customer is always right. The pull analogy, I think it hits the nail on the head and it’s the same way that we develop our features and our products. We go to the market and we listen and, you know, whatever the customer says is right, and at the end of the day is typically what they need.

Bill: I can tell you Marshall Field, a famous retailer from Chicago said, Give the customer what they want. Right? So that probably comes close to it. unfortunately, they were bought out by Macy's over the last decade as many retailers have been, but that adage does work.

Ron: So it's interesting because I think, to your point, you know, Macy's is a B2C customer brand but, if we look at people like Henry Ford or Steve jobs, they were very much visionaries and they said the people don't know what they want. Henry Ford famously said, If I’d asked people what they want, they would have said faster horses. Would you say that the insurance industry falls more into the category of, you know, we need to listen to what they want, or is there an opportunity for an innovation that nobody would expect?

Bill: So, look, I mentioned Drucker earlier. Peter Drucker would say incremental change is oxymoronic. However, our insurance industry has a rich legacy, brand, relationships, balance sheets, technology, business processes, and all the rest. I think there are selective opportunities for transformational change. But I do think that the bulk of change in our industry will occur by incumbents. This industry is so capital-intensive, highly regulated, very technical. Yes, there is certainly room for new entrants that are delivering transformational activities. but when I think about how change will occur, if you think about Max Planck, he had this idea, it's called Planck's Principle. I'll quote him here, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually move out and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”

The average age of insurance executives is well over 50 years old, right? Over the next decade, you’re going to have a significant majority of insurance leadership retiring as Gen Ys, Gen Z, millennials, post-millennials begin to take these leadership positions, I think we are going to, in fact, see fairly significant change within the incumbents. Now, most pundits would look at our industry and say, that's not transformational, but for our industry, it will be transformational. And I think when I look to the next generation of leaders, that's really how this will occur because many of the technologies and capabilities are nearing end of life. So, I think that we'll see the change occur as a natural evolution of the organizations within our industry and by new entrants prodding and maybe pulling some of them into a transformational change.

“The way that I think change will occur in our industry is precisely through insurtech, precisely through young people,” says Bill Pieroni, CEO & President, ACORD

Ron: So, if you had to of dust off your crystal magic ball and look 10 years down into the future, what do you see?

Bill: Well, I can tell you the biggest thing that I see, the biggest piece of advice that I give to our members is that, historically, there were four mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive strategies. As I mentioned earlier, you can compete on operational efficiency, compete on price, right? I don't like that strategy, but many organizations do it. The next one is customer intimacy. You compete based on the interaction, the superior experience that you deliver as a carrier or broker or agent. Then product leadership, you’re competing based on the solution, the quality of what you're selling. And lastly, you compete based on innovation. So, competing on discontinuous change, you know, competing based on speed.

These strategies were historically mutually exclusive, but because of digitalization, because of innovation around technology, process and organization, this is changing. What we're finding is that those trade-offs where you picked one of the four strategies and operated in a T-shape, if you will, so you did a reasonable job for the other three but were deep on one won’t work. I think winners in a decade will no longer have to pick one of those strategies. We'll simultaneously execute all of them.

At the core, you have to be customer intimate. Who are you selling to? What do they value? How do they want to interact with you, right? Then products, are you selling that customer unique differentiating products, perhaps not mass-customized but ones that are relevant for that customer segment? Then are you doing it in an innovative way? How do you identify, screen and deploy innovation? And lastly, wrapping all of those three around operational excellence. So, process, organization and technology excellence. The biggest advice and biggest prediction I make is you won’t see carriers, brokers and other stakeholders saying of competitors: You know, they are clearly delineating on price, they are competing based on product, they are competing based on innovation. No, the winners will have to develop the capability and infrastructure to simultaneously execute against all of those four dimensions in a best-in-class way. I think those will be the true winners who make it in the long-term.

Ron: I think that has to be, if not the best, for sure, one of the best analogies I've heard for this. Now the one piece that I'd like to dig into just a little bit is you talked about customization and you sort of what I would call straddled the horse, one foot on both sides. On one side of customization, I've heard a lot of people sort of talk about, they call it Tinder for Insurance, where you’ll be able to go in and sort of quickly swipe through the different options and those options are in some way tailored to you. And then there’s the other approach, which is a more standardized product offering set. I don't have enough insight, at least today, to say which strategy I think is going to work, but I’m curious to see if you, through your conversations with some of these companies that are looking at this stuff, have a gut feel on whether we’ll get into a little bit more of a customization product or if the amount of products that they offer will remain roughly the same, although the client experience and the other things that you've talked about will increase?

Bill: So, I believe when I look at the average carrier, right, and by the way, if you've seen one carrier, you've seen one, they're all unique and special in their own way. But the average carrier within their portfolio of products in terms of deductibles, limits, terms and conditions, probably have enough permutations and combinations as to how they could be differentiated for customers.

I think you just said it, I think the experience and how it's sold, and insurance is sold, not bought, right? Insurance tends to be a low engagement category in most geographies for most product lines. So, I would argue if I was going to invest in uniqueness, customization, it would be around the experience dimension, not product. Because it's not as if customers don't need unique products but deductibles limits, terms, and conditions, periods that you're insured for…. there are enough dials within the average insurance company and there are exceptions, but those exceptions prove the rule, right? That by and large carriers have a rich portfolio of products. Again, the average carrier, right? Clearly there are some specialty lines writers and some that may be overboard in terms of product innovation, but I think the customization will occur around experience and how you choose to interact with the carrier, that's the opportunity, I think, for real differentiation. I don't know that there’s going to be a significant amount of product proliferation or discrete changes to products. When I look across our 36,000 members, I see a very rich set of product portfolios out there.

And I see leading products having, for the bigger carriers, relatively low barriers to look at what’s being done and emulate or have a discrete take on their own. So, I don't think it's going to be our own product differentiation but rather experience will be the true source of meaningful differentiation. And when you think about meaningful differentiation, well, what makes it meaningful? That a customer will switch, a customer will come to you, and pay for it, and not leave based on price, because you’re making them an offer, an experience, a product, a bundled solution that truly is something special.

“I don't know that the product part is enough alone. It has to be bundled with that experience to make it real and to make it really engage them at a deeper level than a commoditized price which I loathe.”

Ron: And I think to your point, we can dig up the research and probably include it in the blog post, but research is showing that customers are willing to pay for a better experience. So, I think you’re hitting the nail on the head here that the customer experience will be the main driver. In the past, yes, price used to very much be the first and potentially the most important thing people looked at. I believe that times are changing, to your points, and that the experience is now going to be the big differentiating factor.

86% of buyers will pay more for a better customer experience, according to a survey commissioned by RightNow.

Bill: And you know, no one wins with price. Maybe initially people can feel better, some customer segments, but in the end, we as an industry don’t make excessive profits, those profits go into superior claims, reserved claims-paying ability and superior experience. When I looked at some geographies around the world where there's intensive price competition, they have some of the highest customer dissatisfaction levels. That’s not a scenario where people win, that’s not a good thing for anyone. It’s not good for the customers. It’s not good for the communities. It’s not good for the carriers or the brokers, right?

These products need to be sold. Customers want a good experience, they want claims-paying ability, they want a balance sheet. You know, insurance is a promise and that promise does require adequate payment for premium. So, I'm hopeful that we're swinging away from this price competition. It's not a good thing for anyone.

Ron: As you said, it’s a promise. I've heard stories about companies that will win a customer for life, especially on the life insurance side, when, you know, somebody's family member, whatever the relationship to them might be, passes away. That is obviously a very traumatizing time for them. And so, having to file that claim and making that experience as easy as possible for the person goes a long way. I once heard a story about, you know, them sending flowers and a box of chocolates and this was before they even filed a claim because they saw the posting, for example, in the local newspaper and they knew that it was one of their policyholders. I think that's something. They've won that client for life. And their children or their spouse, or whatever the relationship might be, that person will then get policies themselves.

And that to me is heartwarming because it's a promise and when you get called upon to act on that promise, you need to make sure that you do it right and you stand by the customer and you support them as needed.

Bill, thank you so much for taking the time. Where can people find you? Where are you active? Twitter, LinkedIn, let us know where?

Bill: My age may be showing, but I'm LinkedIn only. So, I'm easily found on LinkedIn and I’m sitting here with my head of marketing and public relations. So, Rich, you may have want to make a comment about where else they can find us.

Rich: On Twitter @ACORD_Standards or LinkedIn/company/ACORD.

Ron: Awesome. Thank you so much for taking the time. It was a pleasure speaking with you and I believe that listeners will really enjoy this podcast, so thank you.

Bill: Thank you again for hosting it.

 

Browse different topics

Recent Posts