TOP 5 explanations, why the digitalisation is not relevant for the insurance industry

In the last month I had the possibilities to discuss the „insider“ status with insurance managers (CEO`s and leaders from insurance companies). What is their opinion and mindset from the digital transformation?

I have collected for you my experience with the top 5 five explanations or excuses from insurance CEO’s and leaders, why the digital transformation is not relevant for their insurance company. I realised my mindset, my community, you as my Social Media friends are more motivated to understand and create a new way, new possibilities for the next generation. Sorry for my honestly words, but this is the reallity as well.:-)

Here you can find some insights from the „other world“ of insurance, but as real world as well.

  1. 1. „digitalisation is not something else than automatisation“ – in the last 5-6 years, I try to motivate the insurance industry, that this „journey“ is not only to buy a software, not only to install artifical intelligence or chatbot, this are more activities. E.g. to find new business models, to create amazing real time processes, marketing campagne and solutions, transforming the organisation and to understand the „exponentional thinking“.
  2. 2. „we are not interested in digitalisation, because, the IT colleagues -software engineer and data sciences are very expensive, our back office colleagues are cheaper“ – yes, this is true, but as leaders of a company, is this really a vision?
  3. 3. this topic is related to point 2: „unfortunatly IT colleagues is very difficult to find, because if you are talented, they will found own companies as a startup. Because founding a startup is a hype in our country.“ Of course, because some goverment recover the power of startups from the economic side too.
  4. 4. „Mrs. Krizsan, I have 3 years to get retired, why should I innovate? My results, premium, profit are going very well. It`s not necessery to change“. But I would ask, do you have the same situation in 10 years as well? Because the decision from today, can make results only some years later (or earlier:-).
  5. 5. „we don`t want to be „first mover“, because the insurance as a product you can`t protect by patent and we have to check, is the solution good or not. We are in a waiting position“ – yes, this is true as well. But if you want to be in the business tomorrow, you have to be different, you have to do other, creative solutions for your clients.

And, and, and…I could continue the stories, but I don`t want to demotivate you, because you are a future oriented manager with the right mindset about the future of insurance.

Let`s innovate with my personally motto: „the way to create your innovative insurance“  See you again by #MOI2018 in Vienna!

 

Innovation Talk „Regulatorik&Innovation“

  „Letztlich ist das ein Zu-Tode-Regulieren“

Einerseits nimmt die hohe Regulierungsdichte Freiräume, verzögert Abläufe und verursacht Kosten. Andererseits zwingt ebendieser Kostendruck zu mehr Effizienz an anderer Stelle und kann dadurch zum Katalysator für neue Ideen werden. – Das waren unter anderem Thesen in einer Diskussion über das Spannungsverhältnis von Regulierung und Innovation. Auf dem Podium respektive Sofa tauschten Thomas Hajek (Netinsurer), Roman Kudrna (Ergo), Christoph Neubauer (GPVM Versicherungsmakler) und Ludwig Pfleger (FMA) ihre Standpunkte aus.

Dichte Regulierung und Innovation – geht das zusammen? „Killt“ die Regulierung gar den Fortschritt in der Versicherungswirtschaft? Oder vielleicht umgekehrt?

Es kommt darauf an, um welchen Punkt in der Wertschöpfungskette es geht, meinte Ludwig Pfleger von der Finanzmarktaufsicht (FMA) am Montagabend bei einer Diskussionsveranstaltung in Wien, zu der Insurance Factory und der Versicherungssoftware-Dienstleister Netinsurer IT Services (HKR GmbH) geladen hatten.

Soweit es Schadenbearbeitung und Underwriting betrifft, glaubt Pfleger, dass die Regulierung Vorteile bringen kann. Sie verursache zwar auf der einen Seite Kosten, dies zwinge auf der anderen Seite aber zu (größerer) Effizienz in anderen Bereichen. So könne sie zum Treiber für innovative Ideen werden.

Hemmschuh im Vertrieb

Anders beurteilt Pfleger die Auswirkungen im Vertrieb. Die Regulierung, wie sie derzeit aussieht, sei gewiss ein „Hemmschuh“, der schon in Bezug auf den zeitlichen Ablauf des Versicherns Grenzen setze.

So werde ein „schneller, kurzer, knackiger Abschluss“ durch die bis zur finalen Vertragserklärung vorgeschriebenen Verfahrensschritte nicht so einfach möglich sein. „Das macht Spot-Versicherungen (situationsbedingte Kurzzeit-Versicherungen; Anm. d. Red.) nicht so sexy.“

In Summe sei es eine Frage der Abwägung zwischen dem Konsumentenschutz auf der einen Seite und dem, was an Bremswirkung durch Regulierung akzeptabel ist, auf der anderen. Mehr lesen

Magic of Innovation Conference in Vienna

…where insurance experts from North, South and East Europe meet

What do „insurance“ and „innovation“ have in common? Besides the place in the dictionary probably not much, one could say. In addition to the place dictionary one thing – in my opinion – is important to add: the Magic of Innovation Conference in September each year in the beautiful city of Vienna, Austria.

This year I had the privilege to participate at a panel, moderated and led by Frank Genheimer, Actuary and MD of New Insurance Business. The panel discussed about „Product Time“ and aimed at several topics on the future of insurance products. It was great to talk with renowned experts such as Timo Dreger, Dr. Axel Wachsmann and Ales Tomazin – even though some tough arguments and opposite views were exchanged.  Mehr lesen