15 Excuses For Not Changing And 5 Reasons To Change The Way We Make Change

Posted on April 1, 2014 by Marc Lanzkowsky

Going Along With How It’s Been Done Is Not The Best Way To Go Through Business

I have a client that is so entrenched in its way of doing things that a significant part of my job has been to manage change. Change is hard for everyone and how and when to change has been debated and discussed in companies since the first company was formed. What is never debated are some of the excuses used for not changing. People are resistant to change and despite the need to move forward people generally prefer to live with what they have. Fast Company put out a list of Reasons Why We Cannot Change and these are my favorite 15:

We’ve never done it before
We’ve been doing it this way for 25 years
It won’t work in our company
Why change — it’s working OK
It needs further investigation
It’s too much trouble to change
Our company is different
We don’t have the money
We don’t have the personnel
You can’t teach old dog new tricks
It’s too radical a change
I don’t like it
You’re right, but….
We’re not ready for it
We’re doing all right as it is

“Men Plan, God Laughs”

This list was originally complied in 1959!!! by E.F. Borish a product manager for a Milwaukee company. Amazingly these excuses are as true today as they were over 50 year ago. So we plan to make change and address the list of excuses to help achieve a positive result. Regardless, in addressing these excuses it is important to accept that change is difficult and also understand that great strategic plans may still not yield desired results. Management must acknowledge during any change process that “culture eats strategy for breakfast” (a quote attributed to management guru Peter Drucker).

5 Changes To The Way We Change

To help address the culture and achieve success, Harvard Business Review’s Bill Taylor suggests changing the way to approach change in his article The More Things Change, the More Our Objections to Change Stay the Same.

Mr. Taylor continues asks – “so what have we learned in the twenty years since Fast Company was created, or the 54 years since E.F. Borisch compiled his list?” He suggests 5 possible principles to consider to change the way we make change:

Originality – For leaders to see their organization and its problems as if they’ve never seen them before, and, with new eyes, they need to develop a distinctive point of view on how to solve them
Break from the past without disavowing it – The most effective leaders…don’t turn their back on the past. They reinterpret what’s come before to develop a line of sight into what comes next.
Encourage a sense of dissatisfaction with the status quo – persuade colleagues that business as usual is the ultimate risk, not a safe harbor from the storms of disruption
Requires a sense of “humbition” (humility and ambition) among leaders – enough ambition to address big problems, enough humility to know you don’t have the answers. When it comes to change, nobody alone is as smart as everybody together.
Be consistent in the approach – If, as a leader, you want to make deep-seated change, then your priorities and practices have to stay consistent in good times and bad times.

Change does not have to be a bad thing but managing the change process must be addressed. Strateigic plans must have an approach to dealing with change to achieve a measured success.

How Do You Address Cultural Issues During the Change Processs?

Part 3 on Leadership: Challenges and Assistance in Leading Change

Posted on March 25, 2014 by Marc Lanzkowsky

Collaborating Can Make The Successful Difference

In Leadership: The Change Process In Claims Requires A Different Approach, I put forth the position that changing a claims organization needs a new brand of leadership skill that does not usually exist in the traditional claims organization. In Part 2 on Leadership: Developing a Strategic Transformation Team, I addressed how to break from existing management process to achieve effective strategic results. In the final installment, I discuss how challenges around leading change make it beneficial to bring in strategic support to help achieve the desired success.

Additional Challenges in Leading Transformational Change

Oftentimes, managers are too close to individual problems to have the necessary perspective to see what needs to be done to benefit the whole organization. As a result, many fail to achieve true Strategic Transformation.

There are three main reasons why building Strategic Transformation can be such a challenge:

Lack of Independence – Management has political ties and history within an organization and are not always free to ask the sometimes difficult questions and make recommendations that are truly in the best interests of the organization.
No Objectivity – Often companies are attached to their existing organizational and procedural structure. Despite very good intentions, it is human nature for individuals to get emotionally connected to a particular method of doing things. Management can be entrenched with emotional or political agendas as to how things are being done. Change requires an objective, fresh viewpoint–without worrying about what people in the organization might think about the results and how they are achieved.
Limited Experience –Strategic Transformation requires a set of skills that combines project management with a strategic sense of determination. Managers have experience and skills on how to execute what has been done but lack the depth of knowledge to execute change that transforms their organization. Most claim managers come from a purely technical claims handling role and may lack experience addressing organizational problems, thus failing to grasp all the process concerns of their own operations.

Facilitated Strategic Transformation to Achieve Success

Bringing in an expert from outside the organization is one way to jump-start the Strategic Transformation process. Independent, objective experts can help facilitate the building of teams and focus the organization on successful, rapid implementations. In addition, the best facilitators will have specific capabilities in managing large scale project management, and insurance industry specific knowledge with proven methodologies in management. Such facilitators can:

Identify Problems – Sometimes employees are too close to a problem inside an organization to identify them. Facilitated sessions can help draw out what many in the company already know but could not see.
Supplement The Staff and Minimize Disruptions – Getting staff to focus on problems is difficult when the call of everyday business comes. Having a dedicated independent resource helps to balance those situations and ensure projects move forward on time and on budget. Delays can have disastrous effects down the chain and across other projects. Supplementing staff can help avoid these pit falls.
Objectivity Allows 3rd Parties to Act as a Catalyst- Most employees resist change. Regardless, change is needed, and an independent may be brought in to “get the ball rolling.” In other words, the facilitator can do things without worrying about the corporate culture, employee morale or other issues that get in the way when an organization is trying to institute change. They can also be there as the independent voice to validate how the change will help improve the organization.
Inject New Ideas – A fresh set of eyes can bring experiences from other transformation projects to inject new change ideas. At one time or another, most businesses need someone to administer “first aid” to get things rolling again.

The Time to Change is Now

In today’s market it is harder for insurance companies to distinguish themselves from competitors. For companies to gain an advantage, carriers must adapt to changing market conditions, embrace technology and further expand their use of data analytics. Moving rapidly to manage change requires new ways to manage multiple initiatives. Strategic Transformation is a method for meeting these challenges and ensuring that projects are rapidly deployed on time and on budget.

How Have You Tried to Move Your Organization Through the Change Proccess?

Leadership: The Change Process In Claims Requires A Different Approach

Posted on March 10, 2014 by Marc Lanzkowsky

Meaningful and Successful Improvements to Claim Departments Require a Different Approach to the Management of the Change Process

Successful organizations are always changing and adopting to improve their operations, lower costs and increase efficiencies. Claims departments are no different and have been under pressure to transform their operations and live by the mantra of doing more with less. Good claims organizations continuously evolve and adapt to ensure they add value to the overall business. Regardless, changing to meet the challenges of the marketplace is often fraught with problems and difficulties. Many initiatives fail to get off the ground or fail in the implementation process. Change can be very successful and if managed and led correctly. To change effectively there must be a strategic approach and a change in how these initiatives are led.

Why is claims transformation so difficult?

One reason claims transformation is so difficult is that claims departments are generally linear organizations. The claims value chain, or the process of moving a claim from first notice to resolution, is always looked at in a straight line. A claim comes in, is evaluated, reserved, and then resolved. Of course there are many steps in between depending on the claim, but generally all claims follow a similar pattern from beginning to end. Claims departments are often structured in a linear pattern as well. From intake units, to claims handlers, adjusters, managers, and operations – the claim moves through the organization in a linear pattern. Claim managers know this pattern and manage it well. However successful transformation does not follow a linear path. As such, many claims managers fail to have the transformational leadership skills needed to move projects to a successful outcome.

Change Leadership is Different Than Management

Management of the claims process is not the same as providing leadership to change processes and the culture that has been entrenched to those processes. Leading change is very different than managing change. Management guru and Harvard Business School Professor Dr. John P. Kotter puts is best when he said that:

[m]anagement makes a system work. It helps you do what you know how to do. Leadership builds systems or transforms old ones. It takes you into territory that is new and less well known, or even completely unknown to you.

Although most claim managers are well suited to managing core business functions such as staffing, claim volumes, customer satisfaction, budgets, day-to-day process and other operational and technical aspects of running a claims department, they often lack the skills necessary for effectively managing strategic change initiatives. In order to successfully lead change, a strategic vision and a specific program for management of a series of transformational projects to support those visionary objectives needs to be developed. Taking short-term approaches to individual tactical solutions will not create the strategic outcome needed to transform the organization successfully. Achieving this type of Strategic Transformation requires a new paradigm and skillset to deal with managing multiple interconnecting projects.

Another reason transformation is so difficult is that in response to problems, claims executives will initiate a variety of complex transformation projects to improve operations based upon the same linear task based approach to their day-to-day management. Claims executives use this linear approach to identify problems, conceive and implement solutions, manage expectations and results all within an enterprise environment where multiple interdependencies and stakeholder interests may impact outcomes.

Transformation Requires a Different Appraoach

Despite good intentions to improve operations many initiatives become ad-hoc responses to an immediate problem rather than a holistic solution to operational ills. This reactive focus means that projects will often get initiated in a vacuum, not managed fully, delayed or simply never implemented. To transform organizations, and achieve Total Outcome Management, executives need to adopt a proactive holistic Strategic Transformation approach to changing the organization for the better.

How Should Organizations Approach Change?

Claim Files Are Evaluated Using A Form Of Root Cause Analysis So Why Not Do The Same When Evaluating The Department?

Posted on March 5, 2013 by Marc Lanzkowsky

Assessing operational ills requires the same skill needed to evaluate a claim file

We have heard the mantra time and time again about how treating the symptom of a problem doesn’t do anything to cure the cause of the problem. As one of my favorite bloggers Seth Godin recently wrote in Signals vs. causes, “A fever might be the symptom of a disease, but artificially lowering the fever (ice bath, anyone?) isn’t going to do anything at all to change the illness.”

Assessing a claim file is like doing a Root Cause Analysis. Looking at the damages and paying the claim may move a file but it doesn’t tell you whether the claim should be paid in the first place. Analyzing a claim file is learning to know the what, why and how an event happened which is essentially what Root Cause Analysis is.

Root causes are specific problem or faults that create a breakdown in an operation or process. Claim files are a result of some event that causes a claim to arise (i.e. an accident, malpractice, property damage). It is the claims professionals primary job to assess these events and determine what happened and why prior to paying a claim. In general, root causes can be defined as an event that is:

Underlying to the problem
Reasonably identifiable
Within managements control to correct
When corrected will be effective in preventing recurrences

Despite Root Cause Analysis being a core skill in handling a claim file, claims management doesn’t always approach departmental issues with same type of evaluative assessment. Using the same techniques in assessing the root cause of a claim, management can assess operational problems.

Since the techniques are already in use for claims analysis why not use them for operational assessments?

Doing a Basic Root Cause Analysis: The 5 Whys

Similar to a claim file analysis, operational problems require an assessment as to what happened, how it happened, how could it have been prevented, who was at fault, what’s it going to cost to fix the claim and are there any lessons learned. For example, let’s say payments are being delayed resulting in fines being assessed against the department. If one looks at the fines as a claim one would want to determine what caused the fine? how did it happen? and how can it be corrected? An analysis of the “claim” needs to take place prior to making any decisions.

A great technique for getting to the root cause of a problem is to ask the question “Why” question five times. “By repeatedly asking the question “Why” (five is a good rule of thumb), you can peel away the layers of symptoms which can lead to the root cause of a problem. Very often the ostensible reason for a problem will lead you to another question. Although this technique is called “5 Whys,” you may find that you will need to ask the question fewer or more times than five before you find the issue related to a problem.” (Determine the Root Cause: 5 Whys – from www.isixsigma.com)

Going back to our example of a payment delays causing fines, and using the 5 “whys” technique, one could assess the problem this way:

Why are we being fined?
Because payments are being delayed by 5 days
Why are payments being delayed 5 days?
Because they were delayed in getting to finance
Why were they delayed in getting to finance?
Because they were not in the outgoing tray for approved payments
Why were the not in the outgoing tray?
Because they were sitting on a manager’s desk for signature and the manager was on vacation
Why was there no plan to have another manager cover the vacationing manager’s desk?
Because there was not procedure in place

The example above is simplified but it truly demonstrates that similar types of issues can be explored with a series of basic questions. Getting to the root cause is essential to moving a problem to a solution.

What are other techniques used for assessing a claim file can be used to assess the operation?

4 Areas Of Concern From The Latest Insurance Executive Conference

Posted on December 12, 2012 by Marc Lanzkowsky

Gaze into your crystal ball and predict the issues of the past year to be addressed in the coming one!

It’s that time of year. The top 10 lists, the reflections, the can I possibly attend another holiday party and survive through to New Years? Well I will not give you a top ten list but I will list out 4 key issues that seemed to highlight the sentiments of the speakers at the 23rd annual Executive Conference recently held in New York.

The title of the conference was “Driving Growth in the Life and Property-Casualty Insurance Markets.” The annual event brought together several key executives in both the Life, Health and Property & Casualty Insurance arena. This year the audience heard from the likes of Starr Insurance, Endurance Specialty, Aspen Insurance, Lincoln Financial, ING, and Zurich Global Life among others.

Nothing too shocking with these 4 issues to address

While the topics of discussion varied from panel to panel, a set of themes emerged from the various discussions. When looking back over the last year, and forward into the future, it seems that there were consistently 4 areas that these business leaders seemed to be concerned about. Each issue impacted each company differently, however, the the themes permeated throughout the program.

Technology and the use of data. A somewhat mixed statement about technology seemed to emanate from the various speakers. On the one hand it was acknowledged that the industry lags behind in adopting and using technology. Many companies still are working off antiquated systems that could use an overhaul. On the other hand it was noted thatthe industry is filled with valuable data that needs to be analyzed and used to improve outcomes. Companies that can use their data more effectively will have a critical differentiator in the future. Predictive analytics and modeling will be the key to increasing underwriting profit needed in these times of continued low interest rates.
Climate change and catastrophes. With the conference so close to the events and location of Sandy, the talk of underwriting and managing CAT losses was on the mind of many. There is a clear belief that climate change has affected weather patterns and will continue to create larger storms for the foreseeable future. The importance of getting the appropriate rate for risks, being better prepared from a continuity perspective, and looking to opportunities to underwrite new risk and innovative risks were just some of the topics discussed. Some of the issues around CAT management also related to governmental intervention that effectively re-wrtie contracts making it more challenging to underwrite.
Increased regulations. Solvency II, the fiscal cliff, the impacts of Dodd-Frank legislation, Systemic Risk (systemically important financial institution (SIFI) designation), the Federal Insurance Office’s (FIO), unclaimed property, tax compliance with SSAP 101 and FATCA are just some of the many potential compliance issues that could increase costs and expose companies to additional fines for non-compliance. While the general feeling was increased regulation was not going to change the industry for the better, the need to deal with changing regulations was going to have a real impact.
Social media as in customer relations as well distribution. Social media is here to stay and many have begun to address how to use this medium in both dealing with customer complaints or improving customer relations. There was a clear acknowledgement that social media can be the genesis of grass roots negative campaigns unless managed correctly. A few panel members spoke of how they have created new ways to communicate with customers and create more positive images around their products and services.

Looking ahead to 2013

I think the themes expressed by the insurance leadership at the conference need to be dealt with in the foreseeable future. Addressing technology and using data analytics will be the key to building productive, profitable and efficient organizations. That is all well and good, but the industry must also work to improve its image. For some reason the message gets lost that during castrophe’s the industry rapidly pays out billions of dollars in a relatively short period of time without any complaints. Adopting social media and engaging customers will help.

The future seems bright to me and I am looking forward to another year.

What do you think are the key industry issues from 2012 and what needs to be focused on for 2013?

Insanity: Claim’s Departments Can’t Expect Different Results Without Changing Their Organizations

Posted on May 9, 2012 by Marc Lanzkowsky

Why do we keep traveling in circles?

Maybe I care too much about our industry or am just frustrated by the lack of attention to quality claims handling, but this is annoying. Why should claims make up half of the most frequent market conduct issues for the Property & Casualty industry as listed by Wolters Kluwer for the 5^th straight year? As part of their review they track and analyze the results from state market conduct examinations. As with their prior studies, claims issues continue to dominate the list of state concerns.

In the 2010 incarnation, claims departments are being exposed to market conduct fines for:

Failure to properly acknowledge, investigate, pay or deny claims within specified time frames
Failure to provide required disclosures in the claims process
Improper documentation of claim files
Failure to process total loss claims properly
Failure to pay the appropriate claim amount
Failure to respond to the department of insurance and/or produce records requested during the exam process

I went back over the last 5 years of this study and the same issues keep coming up. Figure 1 charts all the issues and how many times they showed up on the study. These findings can be prevented with some focus on identifying issues and working to correct the problems.

Figure 1 * Five Year Market Conduct Claims Issues

For the individual result, see years 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009

It’s time to raise the game!

Why are the same things coming up as issues year after year? We are now in an era of useful technology that should give companies an advanced look into their operations. Through oversight and a quality review program, claims departments are truly in the best position to prevent many of the issues raised on the top ten list. So whys has nothing changed?

I am sure every company is different and there are a lot of reason, but I feel there has been less and less attention to internal claim reviews and audits. When times are tight operations are thinned and doing an internal claim review is considered a luxury. Claim departments need to get back to preventing issues before they occur as the consequences for not doing it will result in increased claim costs.

So how does a claims department put themselves back on track? Here are a few suggestions:

Create standards: I know people are reluctant to create claim manuals for a variety of reasons, but there have to be some best practices in place that can be measured. Best practice documents can be drafted appropriately to minimize the risks of them being take out of context in a law suit. (Also if you are concerned, see our prior post of 7 Consideration When Drafting Claims Guidelines). Setting the standards and having staff work to those standards is a good starting place to ensure consistent results.

Audit for compliance: You can’t just sit there and expect everything will be fine you must review the work and ensure compliance. Audits are sometimes looked at with disdain, but when managed correctly they are a wonderful tool for training and improving the operation. Don’t just audit the old way, but instead collect data with a tool like The Audit Portal and understand where the breakdowns are (see Claim Reviews Empower Better Decisions By Putting Critical Information In Hand). From there you can truly assess how to correct the problem.

Fix and track problems: Getting all the information collected nice and neatly is a good start but now you have to improve on what was learned. Gather the information and look for trends and attack the problems. Is there a systemic problem or was it isolated? Can it be fixed with training or is there a technology solution that needs to be addressed? Analyze the issue and then develop a game plan for correcting the problem. Then – re-audit.

As a claims community we can do better. Let’s start a quality campaign to get claims issues off this list! Send this along to others in the industry and let’s start a trend.

What Would Steve Jobs Do In A Claims Organization?

Posted on March 15, 2012 by Marc Lanzkowsky

Innovation can be learned from the master

Thank you Bill Schoeffler and Catherine Oak of the Oak & Associates Consulting firm for the idea for this article. They wrote a wonderful piece for Insurance Journal called, What Steve Jobs Would Do In Insurance, where they so aptly lay out how Mr. Jobs would change the insurance world. They pick out several ways a Steve Jobs run insurance agency would be different and innovative.

Like many, I am a huge fan of Apple products and have been for a long time. Clearly there has been a revolution in the computer industry as a result of innovation led by Steve Jobs. One thing that is most interesting about Apple is how they not only changed computing, with the iPod and iPad, but also changed the way people listen to music, access the internet and buy and use software applications. The iPod and iPad were perfect examples of thinking outside the box. (And I like thinking outside the box – Improve bottom-line outcomes on claims by thinking outside-the-box!)

As they wrote:

Steve Jobs’ primary focus was to create great products. All else was secondary. The product of an insurance agency is the service it provides to clients. The direction Steve Jobs would take would be to provide a seamless, integrated experience for the client. People have too many things to worry about and not enough time to be able to focus on their insurance needs and problem. They want to be taken care of.

Schoeffler and Oak suggest that a Steve Jobs run agency would:

Seamlessly integrate the customer experience
Capture data about client needs easily to analyze and allow products to be tailored to individual customer
Innovative at it’s core providing products clients didn’t even know they needed
Create teams would work collaboratively at all levels
Hire only the best talent passionate about providing services

Steve Jobs in Claims

So what would Steve Jobs say about our claims industry? Well, having heard about his reputation I think I will leave what he would say out of this post. Regardless, I think Mr. Jobs would see an industry with tremendous opportunities to innovate and improve the way they deliver and manage claims services.

Following the lead of Shoerffler and Oak, I would agree that Jobs would likely create a seamless way to integrate external claims information with internal business related data. Underwriting and policy information would easily flow into claims systems and be available to the customer and claims professional easily. Claims filed through a variety of input sources would simply display information needed for all those touching the claims. The claims department, management teams, outside providers, underwriters, and of course the claimants, would have easy to understand graphical representations of relevant information. Apps would help direct those particular parties to help move the claim to resolution and seamlessly provide analytics to the company in real time. And of course there would be beautifully designed hardware to deliver this integration in the sharpest possible way.

Claims teams would work collaboratively with other parts of the organization to deliver better claims products to customers and real time relevant data to assist in underwriting. Good companies understand the relationship claims has to the health of the organization way before a claim even comes into the office. Steve Jobs would ensure underwriters would understand the claims process and how policies sold end up yielding claims. He would make sure that claims people understand how the claims organization’s activities affect the financial health of the company on pricing and expense ratios.

Steve Jobs was a brilliant marketer. He seemed to know how and when a product was going to change the world reshaping whole industries (when was the last time you actually psychically bought a CD?). Claims departments could benefit from a little marketing as well. Whether to internal or external customers, claims departments can certainly do a better job of getting their “brand” out to their market place.

The reality is that a Steve Jobs led Apple and its success can be obtained in claims departments. It takes a little more focus and the ability to step outside “what’s always been done” to innovate the future.

Tell us how else do you think Steve Jobs could have changed the claims world?

You Can’t Wait Till The Last Minute To Improve You Operation – Planning Starts Now!

Posted on June 22, 2010 by Marc Lanzkowsky

Don’t let the lily pads take over the pond. The time to deal with the problem is now.

I had the pleasure of recently attending an executive summit presented by ACS A Xerox Company in Hartford Connecticut. The conference theme was centered on insurance issues and looking forward to 2015. It was a great meeting with executives from a variety of insurance companies and industries.

Looking to the future is a difficult task, especially when day-to-day issues make it hard to stop and be strategic. Unfortunately, trying to plan for the future takes time, and thinking it can be put off will only create larger problems.

Before you know it that little issue will grow into a big one – the lily pad problem

James Hatherly, one of the guest speakers at the conference, gave a great analogy about putting off minor issues. James is the author of Daring to Be Different, A Manager’s Ascent To Leadership and he discussed the importance of having to think about problems sooner rather than later with the following story:

One morning a farmer observed that a lily pad had sprung up on his pond. The following day there were two lily pads, and on the third day there were four. Since they did not seem to be doing any harm he took no action. However, the number of lily pads continued to double every day until the pond was completely covered on the thirtieth day.

James questioned the audience as to how long did it take for the pond to be covered 50%? Or even 25%? The answer was that the pond was 50% covered on the 29th day and 25% covered on the 28th day.

His point? Managers and executives can’t wait until the 29th day to solve problems.

With time slipping away, what should claims departments be thinking about in the next 5 years? That question, of course, will be answered differently from company to company. Regardless, there have been certain trends that exist today, being addressed by other industries, which should be looked at in today’s modern claims department.

Two suggestions for beating the lily pads to the pond

There is nothing too forward thinking about the concepts I address here. There are plenty of cases in the insurance industry where solutions have been adopted successfully. Nonetheless, if you have not addressed either of these because you felt it was not appropriate for your organization it may be time to reconsider and see how they may apply in the future.

Social Media – I know it’s the buzzword in business wherever you go. You are probably aware of the powers of social media or you would likely not be reading this blog. Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook and a variety of other services are being incorporated into businesses more and more each day. How will the insurance industry, and more specifically claims, adopt these outlets? Will you use Twitter to tweet claims alerts to customers? Are you creating a Facebook fan page to learn more about, and solve customer problems? How about an internal social network to share claims information amongst departments and partner organizations. How can these applications make your claims department more efficient?

Mobile Technology – Everyone has a phone that can handle such an array of tasks that it’s amazing we ever functioned without them. Better bandwidth, and more coverage, allows access to an amazing amount of information from the palm of your hand. What is your company doing to adopt this technology? Are your claims adjusters able to assess claims on the road and instantly pass the information into systems for analysis? Are customers able to file a claim from their phone attaching photographs and other information like GPS locations? Will new devices, such as an iPad be used in the future claims organization? How will your organization respond to these devices? Lead or follow?

Like most industries, adopting and changing with the times can be a difficult proposition. It takes time to think of issues, come up with solutions and implement the changes. Insurance companies have added legal, compliance and regulatory concerns, to say nothing of complex, and sometimes outdated, information technology systems. Regardless, it’s not too late to address issues to create a social media or mobile strategy.

Think back five years and ask yourself how many lily pads would be on the pond had you stopped to deal with the first one on day one. The trends we see in technology, and in how people work around the world, are changing rapidly. To stay ahead of the curve, and take advantage of solutions that can help your organization, start thinking out-of-the-box now. Take a lesson from an article I wrote a few posts ago about changing hats outside your industry and see how others are adopting their operations to the changing times.

Now is the time to consider change. Before the pond gets too filled with lily pads attack the problem and look for solutions. Five years from now – you won’t be wondering what could have been.

What kind of lily pad can you see on the pond that can be dealt with today?

Does Hiring More Staff Improve Claims? How To Know When The Time Is Right

Posted on May 3, 2010 by Marc Lanzkowsky

The Age Old Question: If I Add More Resources Will It Solve The Problem?

Alright, maybe the above is a little exaggerated, but it did remind me of how difficult the question of hiring more staff is. Whether it’s today’s or any economy, the decision to bring on more staff is one that needs to be watched closely. Often there is a knee-jerk reaction that taking on additional staff will solve problems and improve your operations. As Dilbert points out so well, hiring more does not always solve the problem. As I wrote about in With old claims systems come old claims processes – You can’t change one without the other!, knowing what you have in place first is important before making an investment on more. This is true with staffing as it is with claims systems.

Before you bring on more staff review your staffing model, see if there any trends affecting file loads and take a quick look inward at your operation. Once these assessments are completed, you will be in a better position to know if hiring is the right decision.

What – No Staffing Model? Here Are Suggestions For Creating One

Having a staffing model will allow you to objectively look at your operation and help determine if it’s a good time to hire more staff. How do you know what model to choose? Here are 3 suggestions for creating one:

What kind of organization are you? Are you highly technical with low frequency, or are you in a high volume business? Are you a “touchy feely” organization that wants to be in the customers face often, or not? Understanding the strategic position of your claims organization is critical to understanding what kind of staffing model is relevant
Decide on a metric to develop your model: The metric you choose will help to determine the model, but will be wholly based upon the types of claims organization you are. If you are an excess carrier that is sharing risks and attaches at a high level, then you may not be concerned about the number of new claims that come in. Maybe your claims settle quickly, as in some property matters, so the number of new claims a handler receives in a month is a more critical metric. It will depend on you business and needs – come up with a number an live with it.
You now have the metric – test the staff and come up with the model: Once you settle on a metric, check your top performers against the new metric you have selected. How many files are they handling and still managing files within best practices? At what point does their ability to manage those files well breakdown? Take an average of the top performer’s metrics and you will have a staffing model to give you a benchmark.

Just remember that models are models and they tend to always look good on paper and in photographs – there is always the subjective that needs to be addressed. Regardless, the staffing model is a good management starting point.

So You Have A Staffing Model, How Do I know If It’s Time To Hire?

I am all for the staffing model, but sometimes it just isn’t enough to know when you hire. Don’t forget other claim metrics and trends. Is there a recent influx of claims due to a change in underwriting or because of a CAT loss? Understanding the rest of your organization is just as important when deciding to hire or not hire additional staff. Speak to your underwriters and learn if there has been some new marketing initiatives. Did they write some new account that explains an increase, or decrease, in claims frequency or severity? A blip in the numbers may be just that, a blip. Regardless, ask around and dig into your numbers to see if there is a short term explanation or whether it is the beginning of things to come.

Hold On, A Model Is Good, Knowing Current Trends Is Good, Understanding If You Really Need More Staff…..Priceless!

Even though you have the staffing model in place, and have looked at the metrics for the operation, there is more to explore before jumping in with new staff. Take a regular operational pulse of your entire organization. There is always room to look for waste and improve efficiencies. There are also ways to improve handler efficiency at a more minimal cost, as I wrote about in 2 Cost-Cutting Solutions To Get Work Done Without Overloading Claims Handlers and Cutting Costs Without Overloading The Claims Handler – Part 2 Of The Series.

Do a quick assessment of your operation and determine if there is some issue preventing claims handlers from getting their core job function completed. Maybe some older internal report that no one is using can be eliminated and free up a handler’s time. Are they being asked to take on tasks that can be done more efficiently, and if so, what would the impact be in eliminating that task. As organizations grow, process grows, and not always for the right reason. The potential need for more staff is a good opportunity to explore those processes.

Hiring more staff is an expensive proposition for any organization. Take time to truly explore what is needed. Once this done, and you can objectively know the need is there, then hire away.

(For good advise about hiring – check out my fellow blogger Jay D’Aprile in Talent Tracks)

What types of models does your organization use?

5 expense reduction opportunities insurance CEOs should not overlook

Posted on January 27, 2010 by Marc Lanzkowsky

Increase your profits with efficient claims operations

Take a look at the annual reports of top performing insurance companies and you will see a similar message from their CEO’s. Expense management and efficiency is a principal driver of profitability. As the Ward Group noted in the Ward’s 50 2009 Property-Casualty Benchmark Report “‘Top performers understand that efficient operations result in pricing advantages passed on to the consumer and keep the customer at the center of the business decision.’ In 2008, expenses relative to revenue were 5.5% lower for the Ward’s 50 property casualty group of companies.” According to the Ward Group, net premiums grew 10.1% for top performing companies compared to 1.8% for the industry as a whole.

In a tight market, doing less with more without sacrificing quality or customer service is the edge needed to be a top performer. The claims department is the perfect place to lower costs and improve the customer experience at the same time. Here are 5 key areas that should be looked at for cost savings:

Control what you can control: You can’t control the types of losses that can come in, but you can control allocated loss costs with effective oversight programs. Establishing litigation management guidelines can easily save 10% as well as improve outcomes through better communication. Control non-legal vendors with a program to “vet” providers and subsequently rate their performance. Audit your Third Party Administrators to catch harmless, but costly, errors.
Utilize your technology to its full capabilities: Do you have the right technology and has it been implemented correctly? Failing to incorporate technology appropriately can increase costs. Procedures must be coordinated with new or existing technology so claim adjuster’s jobs are easier and the customer, not repetitive tasks, are the focus (also see our post on implementing claims technology and processes).
Create strong reporting tools and use them: Comprehensive reports and analysis are essential to profitable business. You can’t manage growth without accurate benchmark reports and a good reporting tool will allow your claims department to look for trends. Using these reports to work closely with actuaries and underwriters will help ensure pricing is accurate. Good trending will also improve underwriting decisions around expanding or contracting in specific lines of business.
Review your current operational procedures: Old process can equal costly operations, but change for the sake of change is not always a good thing. If you are performing tasks because you have “always done them that way” it’s probably a good time for a check-up. A regular assessment will almost always find cost savings and improve efficiencies (for an example see, Case Study: Improving file set-ups).
At the very least meet minimum expectations: Customers will complain about problems when they arise, but will rarely complain when basic needs are not met. Before you can dazzle your customers with new services make sure you are first providing the basics. Regular communications and flexible reporting capabilities are minimum standards that must fulfilled or you will lose in the renewal process. You are in a competitive environment and providing mediocre performance is a non-starter.

Follow the example of the top performers, and don’t just talk about cutting costs. Take affirmative steps to reduce spending and improve your customer experience. There is no better place to do this than in the claims organization.