State of the Broking Nation

Insurance Times Broker Forum: State of the Broking Nation, 14 July 2010

From my point of view, it was good to gain an insight into some of the current issues affecting the Insurance Profession at the Insurance Times State of the Broking Nation meeting last week. I took from the meeting the following:

• Clive Nathan dispelled some myths surrounding the Towergate story and approach. Clearly, as an organisation, Towergate is not as successful at delivering these messages as Clive is.
• Both Clive Nathan and Ashwin Mistry focussed on client service levels as being key to success with Ashwin stressing that we should be striving for the “WOW!” factor in managing claims.
• Theo Duchen showed that commission rates in commercial business remain highly competitive and the market isn’t showing signs of hardening yet.
• All were agreed that there should be a renewed focus on ‘growing our own’ talent through better entry level recruitment practices and structured training programmes, with ACII qualification being a minimum standard for Board membership.
• Jeff Herdman’s comment that “..our only differentiators are our people...” is indeed food for thought.
• Martin McLachlan’s amusing delivery clearly demonstrated that embracing technological change early on (ie now) rather than fearing its introduction to the commercial insurance arena is a must and left me wondering whether or not PowerPlace and imarket are the only real games in town.
• Graeme Trubgill’s summary of the situation with regard to the FSA and FSA fees was rather chilling!
• Clear agreement was demonstrated between broker (Richard Gurney), Insurer (David Williams) and Loss Adjuster (Richard Turner) in terms of the need for strong working ties across the Claims arena.

These are interesting themes which emphasise that this is a “people business” where treating everybody in the loop (whether client, underwriter, broker, supplier, third party) fairly, transparently and respectfully should be the starting-point rather than the aspiration. Secondly, we must embrace technological change and lead its development, rather than wait for it to lead us. And finally, regulation is not going to go away whichever way we vote: it is here to stay and we must back our trade bodies in their efforts to educate the regulators and work with them to produce more realistic boundaries, costs and frameworks within which we can thrive.