Antonella Cappiello PDF
Antonella Cappiello PDF
Antonella Cappiello PDF
AND THE
INSURANCE
INDUSTRY
Re-configuring the
Competitive Landscape
Antonella Cappiello
Technology and the Insurance Industry
Antonella Cappiello
Technology and
the Insurance
Industry
Re-configuring the Competitive Landscape
Antonella Cappiello
Department of Economics and Management
University of Pisa
Pisa, Italy
1 Introduction 1
2 Technology and Insurance 7
1 Introduction 7
2 The Impact of Information Technology on Insurance 8
3 Technology and Insurance Value Chain 12
3.1 Focus on Changes in Insurance Sales and Distribution 15
4 The Regulation of Insurance Distribution: The Directive
2016/97/EU 20
5 Conclusions 26
References 26
Index 117
List of Tables
vii
List of Boxes
ix
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Abstract This chapter introduces the aim of the book and sets its theoretical
framework providing a guideline for the topics included in each chapter.
threat for traditional companies, from Big Data analysis to digital devices,
from personal interactivity to home automation systems development.
However, a drastic disintermediation of insurance companies, which would
imply a strong innovation of business models from incumbents, does not
seem to show up in the short–medium term. The majority of digital com-
petitors, at least at the moment, is not in a disruptive position, and is rather
in an enabler position: thanks to their technological competences, they can
facilitate and improve the efficiency of the traditional insurance business.
Incumbent insurers and InsurTech start-ups have much to gain from their
collaboration. InsurTech start-ups and incumbent insurers have complemen-
tary strengths, with InsurTech offering better value for money and timely
and efficient service, and insurers offering superior security, brand identity,
and support for personal interaction.
The trend to digitisation is most notable on the services side of distri-
bution. The new digitised technologies and the new habits of customers
bring about major changes in the ways insurance services are offered and
used by customers. Digital platforms and systems create direct channels
with the user, increasingly reducing the need for intermediaries like agents
and brokers.
If, on the one side, the new technologies reduce the personal contact
with the customer, on the other side they permit, especially for less com-
plex products, to increase the frequency of contacts with the latter, thus
offering the possibility to increase the customer’s loyalty.
Insurance companies are accelerating the shift to a radically different
delivery model to make their services more available to customers, attrib-
uting an increasingly important role to technology in the majority of inter-
actions. This will have implications for insurers’ business models, in the
way they interact with their customers and the nature of the products and
services they provide.
Surveys highlight that in many countries the traditional intermediaries
still represent the main distribution channel of insurance services. This
happens especially for services with a higher added value and a higher level
of complexity, for which the personal contact or the advice of agents or
brokers are essential. In these areas, technology is being applied to improve
the efficiency and effectiveness of agents and brokers. However, many
consumers want a seamless shopping experience anytime, anywhere. They
are more self-directed in their insurance decisions and want to interact
with their agent across a full range of channels: in person, through mobile
devices, by phone, Internet, and video conferencing, when researching
4 A. CAPPIELLO
Technology and Insurance
1 Introduction
Technological trends and changes in consumer behaviour are encouraging
companies to consider new business models. Digitalisation is destined to
deeply modify the whole financial and insurance ecosystem, impacting all
points along the insurance value chain and consequently reshaping the
strategies that take full advantage of the opportunities they present, while
minimising the risks (Schmidt et al. 2017).
The range of technological innovations that will be likely to affect the
insurance business models is wide. For example, in the field of property
and health insurance, wearable devices capable of tracing various parame-
ters—from vital parameters to the sleep cycle—as well as the ability to
monitor driving style at a distance, allow us to collect a wide range of data
related to risk assessment and premium calculations. Similarly, advanced
medical technology is making healthcare more proactive and reliable,
changing the metrics by which insurers assess health. As the data gener-
ated by these advanced technologies become connected via the Internet of
Things (IoT), the amount of insight that can be developed from the data
grows powerful (Haddud et al. 2017). On the one hand, insurers can use
increasingly advanced tools to quickly analyse volumes of data coming
from various sources and drive actionable insight in real time. On the
other hand, benefits include the use of robotic process automation, which
is ideal for handling insurers’ many rules-based administrative tasks
(Craneld and White 2016; Deloitte 2015; Keller and Hott 2015).
Many of the innovative technologies can be used both in the back end
and in the front end for process optimisation through the value chain
(Porter 1985, 1998).
The first case concerns the use of blockchain, artificial intelligence,
advanced analytics, robotic process automation, and other systems of
record for the core insurance business (the policy administration, claims,
and billing functions) and its support (e.g. risk management and finance).
Decision engines and artificial intelligence support decision-making,
allowing insurers to propose tailored customer-centric services based on
micro-segments and personalised risk profiles. In contrast, legacy systems,
in which core business processes (such as pricing and underwriting) are
“hard coded,” allow for only static decision-making based on broad cus-
tomer segments and statistical patterns. Digital platforms integrate modu-
lar product architectures and “zero touch” processes. The former enables
insurers to package multiple product and service components into a broad
customer proposition, while the latter are completely automated processes
that can be changed with minimal involvement from IT.
On the other hand, another category of technological innovation is
applied in the distribution process of the insurance product: we refer to the
use of devices, context-aware and location aware services that allow insurers
to deal with the customer and offer advice tailored to the needs of the lat-
ter, as well as a rich multichannel, multidevice digital customer experience.
12 A. CAPPIELLO
Product • The use of Big Data facilitates new behavioural, granular data
development collection and enables service personalisation
• Telematics may reduce associated risks but create new ones, such as
cyber risk
Sales and • Comparison platforms present customers with a comprehensive
distribution choice of all kinds of insurance covers and in some cases allow to
buy insurance online
• InsurTech start-ups entry in the insurance market from adjacent
markets
Underwriting • Instantaneous information and Big Data allow more predictive and
evaluative analytics
• Finer segmentation is driven by greater processing capabilities
Claims • Telematics provides instantaneous information which can help
insurers with more accurate claims assessment and reduce fraud
• Technology decreases processing time
TECHNOLOGY AND INSURANCE 13
include (1) the use of data gathered from connected sensors (IoT); (2) the
use of Big Data to enriching the underwriting decision; (3) forward-
looking, sophisticated measurement of risk (cat modelling); and (4) digi-
talisation of insurance, which makes data more readily analysed and
products more readily adapted (Morgan Stanley 2014).
The cost of improving risk selection has to be weighed against the ben-
efits. The question is whether the additional advantages in lower loss ratio
can outweigh the costs of investing in new technology that allows better
risk selection.
Increased digital interaction with consumers has facilitated the capture,
storage, and management of large quantities of data about customers.
Using analytical techniques to extract business intelligence from this infor-
mation is often collectively called Big Data, although the term is not
always used consistently.
For insurers, it offers the opportunity to assess their customers’ needs,
target products and services to individuals and businesses, support under-
writing decisions, and reduce the cost of fraudulent insurance claims
(Laskowski 2013). At the same time, it entails risks relating to the permis-
sible and appropriate use and management of customers’ data as well as
the challenge of designing business processes and products that will pro-
vide a profitable return on investment.
The importance of Big Data lies not just with the collection and storage
of large and disparate pieces of information, but also in the ability to anal-
yse and extract tangible and useful knowledge from that data. Also, some
researchers believe that by combining more and different types of informa-
tion, you can reduce problems related to incompleteness of particular
pieces of data (including the likelihood of errors, inconsistency of formats,
inaccuracy of data processing, etc.) (Cukier and Mayer-Schenberger 2013).
Some insurers have gone as far as to introduce fully automated under-
writing systems which provide final decisions on life insurance applications
without intervention by a live underwriter. Big Data can additionally help
businesses to improve other core functions, including marketing, distribu-
tion, operations, and claims. Real-time predictive analytics offer insurers
the chance to respond rapidly to changing customer behaviour.
3.1
Focus on Changes in Insurance Sales and Distribution
A great impact on technology is on the distribution of insurance products,
where new bid methodologies and new channels deeply change the service
delivery process, the way they are used and, consequently, the customer
relationship (Capgemini/Efma 2016).
16 A. CAPPIELLO
On the other hand, between the costs incurred by the demand in the
buying process and the insurance service use, we detect the costs of
research and processing of information relating to various insurance
options and the detailed information asymmetries.
Having access to the entire market and being aware of a wide range of avail-
able products is a prerequisite for consumers in order to make good purchas-
ing decisions. Consumers may not be sufficiently sure about buying choices
until they think they have explored a sufficiently wide range of options.
Potential transactions may not simply exist due to informational asym-
metries that don’t allow the consumer to have adequate knowledge of the
entire range of available products, and the suitability of certain products to
meet certain risk coverage requirements.
Such asymmetries may be more accentuated in the presence of complex
long-lasting insurance products (e.g. life insurance), where the suitability
of a product can be assessed only with difficulty and, potentially, only at
point in time after the subscription of the policy; even after the policy
expires or when the accident occurs (Shamdami et al. 2008).
Even when access to the entire market is possible, the ability to make an
effective comparison between available options requires time and costs
depending on the nature of the market. In case of relatively standardised
insurance products, where purchasing decisions are primarily attributable
to the price, processing costs can be quite limited. However, these costs
are higher in the case of relatively more complex products (Rawson et al.
2013; McKinsey 2015).
There are different ways in which consumers balance quality and price,
and comparisons between differentiated products (i.e. products that offer
a different price/quality mix) can be more problematic. In such cases,
personal interaction with professional intermediaries providing expert
advice can add considerable value to the consumer buying experience;
agents and brokers, especially in the context of commercial lines, can pro-
vide a valuable contribution.
For products that are less complex, consumers expect personalised, self-
directed interactions with companies via any device at any hour, as much
as they do with online retail leaders. Distribution channels are responding
to changes in consumer preferences. Policyholders increasingly demand
digital-first distribution models in personal and small commercial lines,
while aggregators continue to pilot direct-to-consumer insurance sales.
Price comparison websites, which have been around for quite some
time, are providing consumers with more information on products and
costs, especially for more commoditised products like auto and travel
TECHNOLOGY AND INSURANCE 19
strict sense) that, for various reasons, participate in the sale of insurance
products, including direct sales networks of companies and price compari-
son websites that can distribute policies directly or indirectly. With refer-
ence to the latter, it should be noted that in the 2013 European Insurance
and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) had taken note of their
importance in the market, as well as the lack of uniform rules and the vari-
ous demands aimed at bringing those persons among the recipients of the
provisions on insurance distribution.
The purpose of the subjective application extension is to be found, on
the one hand, in the declared need to ensure uniformity of consumer pro-
tection regardless of the proposer of the insurance product, and, on the
other hand, in the need to standardise the treatment of different subjects
involved, to varying capacity, in insurance distribution, avoiding distorting
effects on competition (Box 2.1).
However, it should be noted that the IDD is a minimum harmonisa-
tion directive, while retaining the power of Member States to maintain or
adopt more stringent consumer protection provisions when justified by
the national context.
A topic that deserves study is certainly the one related to the provisions
on organisational requirements for governance and control of the product
(product oversight and governance arrangements [POG]) provided for by
Article 25 of the Directive, which introduces the product governance obli-
gations for producers and distributors who develop and market insurance
products.
These provisions require the existence of consumer protection tools
from the time of design and for the entire duration of the product life
cycle, providing for constant monitoring to ensure that it continues to
meet the purchase objectives of the intended target market.
Specifically, the Directive requires that the company and the intermedi-
aries who, together with the latter, make an insurance product, adopt and
manage a formal process, aimed at the preventive approval and definition
of the relevant content and any eventual, significant change before the
distribution stage. These procedures require a careful analysis of the prod-
uct characteristics, in relation to a specific customer target and to a coher-
ent distribution strategy (agency or ancillary), and the adoption of testing
measures and periodic review criteria both of the products and of the same
procedure, to ensure the ongoing consistency of the strategic manage-
ment of the product/channel/customer relationship.
The adoption of the dispositions set out under the Directive on prod-
uct governance will ensure that the adequacy of the offer to the user’s
characteristics is not addressed exclusively in the distribution phase, with
verification responsibilities borne by the intermediary, but becomes a pre-
cise product development business of the insurance company.
The reference to the target market provides that the product manufac-
turer develops and provides insurance instruments with characteristics tai-
lored to the needs and goals of the customer segment identified as a target.
The product manufacturer will have to consider, in the product study, the
level of knowledge and financial education of the target audience, with the
responsibility to proactively identify groups of users for whom the product
is inappropriate in terms of potential targets or financial characteristics.
The product/policy adequacy evaluation is therefore reinforced in the
upstream phase of the distribution, with direct responsibility on the manu-
facturer to the product formulation level, and responsibility on the part of
the distributors control at the sale stage.
It has to be noted that, in view of the new provisions on POG, for cer-
tain types of life policies of saving investment characterised by apparent
financial complexity, it would be quite difficult to extend the target market
TECHNOLOGY AND INSURANCE 23
5 Conclusions
Insurance has lagged many industries in its adoption of new technology;
however, this is beginning to change. An increasing number of insurers are
making technology a key strategic priority.
Competition is increasing, keeping prices lower and tightening margin.
To help support current income and build revenue opportunities, insurers
are turning to transformative digital technologies.
Digital platforms offer the power to personalise and strengthen connec-
tions with customers with new offerings and services. Insurers also gain
access to deeper insights from data analytics, and commit to new business
models to better identify and reduce risk, improve segmentation, and reduce
fraud. There has been a revolution in how companies can analyse data. That,
combined with the new datasets from connected devices—and potentially
even from social media—should enable insurers to price risk better and in
different ways. We are also seeing a change in the core systems used in policy
administration, claims management, and billings and payments.
Digital capabilities additionally can help meet regulatory requirements
with more accurate and timely reporting, capital adequacy, and financial sol-
vency. In addition, insurers can reduce operational costs by improving pro-
cesses and increasing interactions and collaboration across the enterprise.
In-depth knowledge of current and potential markets, the development
of advanced technologies, the ability to innovate in the product offering,
the constant monitoring of costs and the remuneration methods of distri-
bution channels will, in the near future, be strategic requirements for
insurance industry to continue creating value in a context of continuous
and rapid transformation.
References
ASIC. (2016, August). Regulatory Guidance on Providing Digital Financial
Product Advice to Retail Clients. Regulatory Guide 255.
AXA. (2017). AXA Strategic Ventures: Placing AXA at the Heart of InsurTech.
Biener, C., Eling, M., & Schmit, J. (2013). Regulation in Micro Insurance Markets:
Principles, Practice and Directions for Future Development. Working Papers on
Risk Management and Insurance No 127.
Bughin, J., Berge, L., & Mellbye, A. (2017, February). The Case for Digital
Reinvention. McKinsey Quarterly.
Capgemini/Efma. (2016). World Insurance Report.
Cappiello, A. (2012). L’impresa di assicurazione. Economia, gestione, nuove regole
di vigilanza. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
TECHNOLOGY AND INSURANCE 27
Cavina, M. L., Gentile, N., & Marano, P. (2017, April). Quale futuro per la
distribuzione assicurativa? IVASS. Quaderno n.8.
Colombini, F. (2008). Intermediari, mercato e strumenti finanziari. Economia e
integrazione. Torino: Utet.
Craneld, A., & White, D. (2016). The Rise of the Robo-Insurer. Ninety Consulting
Paper.
Cukier, K., & Mayer-Schenberger, V. (2013, May/June). The Rise of Big Data:
How It’s Changing the Way We Think About the World. Foreign Affairs.
Deloitte. (2015). Tech Trends 2015: An Insurance Industry Perspective.
Douady, R., Goulet, C., & Pradier, P. C. (Eds.). (2017). Financial Regulation in
the EU. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
EIOPA—European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority. (2017,
February). Tecnical Advice on Possible Delegated Acts Concerning the Insurance
Distribution Directive. Eiopa 17/048.
Ernest Young. (2015). Global Insurance Outlook.
Guha, R., Manjunath, S., & Palepu, K. (2015). Comparative Analysis of Machine
Learning Techniques for Detecting Insurance Claims Fraud. Wipro Research Paper.
Haddud, A., De Souza, A., Khare, A., & Lee, H. (2017). Examining Potential
Benefits and Challenges Associated with the Internet of Things Integration in
Supply Chains. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 28(8),
1055–1085.
Hook, L. (2016). Generali Announces “Digital Innovation” Partnership with
Microsoft.
IAIS. (2017). FinTech Developments in the Insurance Industry. Basel: International
Association of Insurance Supervisors.
IHS Markit. (2016, May). Usage-Based Insurance Expected to Grow to 142 Million
Subscribers Globally by 2023. http://press.ihs.com/press-release/automotive/
usage-based-insurance-expected-grow-142-million-subscribers-globally-2023-i.
IIF—Institute of International Finance. (2016, March). Regtech in Financial
Services: Technology Solutions for Compliance and Reporting.
Keller, B., & Hott, C. (2015). Big Data, Insurance and the Expulsion from the
Garden of Eden. Geneva Association Insurance Economics, Newsletter No 72.
Lamberdon, C., Brigo, D., & Hoy, D. (2016). Impact of Robotics, RPA and Ai on
the Insurance Industry: Challenges and Opportunities. The Journal of Finacial
Perspectives: Insurance, 4, 8–20.
Lannoo, K. (2017, May). New Market Conduct Rules for Financial Intermediaries:
Will Complexity Bring Transparency? ECMI Policy Brief No 24.
Laskowski, N. (2013, October). Ten Big Data Case Studies in a Nutshell. The
Data Mill.
Manning, H., Bodine, K., & Bernoff, J. (2014). Outside In: The Power of Putting
Customers at the Center of Your Business. Brilliance Corp.
McKinsey. (2010, March). The Internet of Things.
McKinsey. (2015, December). Insurance on the Threshold of Digitization:
Implications for the Life and P&C Workforce.
28 A. CAPPIELLO
1 Introduction
The insurance industry is at a critical and uncertain inflextion point. The
insurance sector, considered traditional and resilient to change, is now
crossed by a macro trend of digital innovation, which is bringing institu-
tions with hundreds of years of history to rethink the insurance business
The collection and analysis of Big Data will revolutionise the insurance
industry. They facilitate the knowledge of potential customers and the
identification of their risk profile and improve the competitiveness of
products and services offered.
If, in fact, technological progress has fostered access to that precious
good that is information, the Big Data management systems allow those
who own them to achieve a far superior result, namely to elaborate, cor-
relate, and analyse the data available and to draw new information and
forecasts from this process, in real time and with a high level of probability.
In fact, the collection and analysis of these data offer considerable oppor-
tunities regarding knowledge of potential customers, the primary objec-
tive of insurance companies as instrumental to a more efficient identification
of the corresponding risk profile and an improvement in the competitive-
ness of the products and services offered.
In particular, the use of Big Data can guarantee an exact personalisation
of the insurance offer by adapting the services, in terms of quality and
price, the profile of potential customers and their specific needs.
Of course, the vast amount of data collected and the heterogeneity of
the same and its sources make traditional information management tools
entirely inadequate for the administration and analysis of Big Data and
impose, therefore, a new challenge to operators who wish to exploit their
potential. Requirements for new digital solutions are challenging legacy
systems, and new technologies are offering new options for system infra-
structure. The investment of considerable resources in new technologies is
the means to maintain or increase the competitive advantage within their
related markets.
The current context, characterised by a heightened dynamism, both
about the needs expressed by consumers and about the possibilities of
fulfilling their expectations, thanks to the use of advanced technologies,
has seen a type of technological start-up, generically defined “InsurTech”
establish itself in the insurance sector (Box 3.1).
(continued)
32 A. CAPPIELLO
(continued)
DIGITAL DISRUPTION AND INSURTECH START-UPS: RISKS AND CHALLENGES 33
(continued)
34 A. CAPPIELLO
to country. For example, in Germany, three of the top ten insurance com-
panies, including the main one, do not cooperate with these portals, while
in the UK the most important companies are directly involved with the
aggregators to meet the demands and improve the interaction with online
customers and reduce the cost of acquiring new customers.
The second macro group of activities InsurTech comprises different
types of start-up that have developed a specialisation in convenience and
customer-oriented products and services, focusing on the specific needs of
specific customer segments ranging from the mobility and security seg-
ment to health insurance and asset protection. Peer-to-peer (P2P) insur-
ance solutions can also be included in this area.
The digitisation allows for profound changes as compared with the past
in the mobility and security sector. This can be referred to start-ups that
have innovations focused on how to improve the sales act, such as on-
demand insurance. These allow insureds to cover specific risks for a speci-
fied period. For example, travel insurance can only be activated when
tickets are purchased; car insurance can just enter into force at certain
times of the year in which you are using the car.
Compared to traditional coverage, on-demand insurance is more flexi-
ble, transparent, and cheaper for the costumer. Today, many companies
operate successfully in this segment, providing their services also with the
help of mobile apps that allow to set the insurance coverage on “on” and
“off” (Braun and Schreiber 2017).
One of the first start-ups in this sector was Trō v, a Californian company
founded in 2012, with the aim of reinventing the system of policies by
digitising the process of purchase and customer service, making it much
easier, more flexible, and transparent. Thanks to the use of high technol-
ogy, this start-up proposes on-demand policies on a wide range of goods
such as PCs, smartphones, TVs, bicycles, and so on. Both the activation/
deactivation of the policy and the management of claims can be managed
via smartphone and a live chat (Roland Berger 2017).
In October 2017, on-demand insurance has also landed in Italy with
“Yolo,” a start-up that proposes micro-insurance policies, also lasting for
one single day, covering four sectors: travel, goods, people, and health.
The model is structured on a direct channel, the platform “Yolo,” and on
an indirect distribution through partners. “Yolo” does not use physical
channels; it is necessary to access the online platform (already active) or
through the mobile app (available from 2018).
There are also many examples of InsurTech developed in the health
segment. In this context, the offer is enriched with ancillary services such
DIGITAL DISRUPTION AND INSURTECH START-UPS: RISKS AND CHALLENGES 39
For minor damages, the traditional insurance cover is not activated and
the insured policyholder are firstly paid out of this common fund, while
for claims above the deductible, the ordinary procedure with the insurance
company is initiated. Thanks to the inclusion of the deductible, the insur-
ance company is willing to grant a discount that can reach up to 50% of
the price of the policy. The number of members allows to share and bear
the cost of the possible deductible and, at the same time, to enjoy the
reduction of the premium every year (IVASS 2017).
At the end of each year, the sums of the common account remaining
unused are redistributed to the group’s users (claims-free bonus) or rein-
vested into the renewal of the coverage. If the common account is zeroed or
insufficient, another insurance will cover the loss, with a stop-loss mecha-
nism. In any case, customers are never exposed beyond the initial premium.
This approach not only increases customers’ satisfaction and their loy-
alty, but also significantly lowers the risk of moral hazard and fraudulent
behaviour. In fact, the knowledge and mutual trust of the members of the
group means that there is a natural disincentive to fraud.
The P2P insurance was launched in 2013 by the German company
Friendsurance which introduces an innovative model of car insurance
inspired by the sharing economy, developing policies aimed at small groups
of friends and acquaintances (up to a maximum of 15 people) connected
through Facebook.
In recent years, the P2P insurance formula has undergone an evolu-
tionary process of its business model, which goes beyond the pure distri-
bution model and sees its leading exponent in the US company Lemonade.
This does not only work as a distributor, but it takes the risk, thus config-
uring itself as a real digital insurer.
The third macro sector of InsurTech includes start-ups whose activity is
aimed at the process optimisation and customer selection. These start-ups,
thanks to the use of the most advanced technologies, help to automate
and innovate some stages and/or the entire value chain of insurance.
In this context, blockchain technology will increase the level of auto-
mation and thereby further improve process efficiency. However, this
technology may not only limit itself to the process level, but may also be
able to support other management aspects.
In a recent study by Boston Consulting Group (2016), it is empha-
sised that blockchain is destined to represent a disruptive trend for the
insurance industry as it can revolutionise the way transactions are man-
aged, linking the different parties involved in a safe and efficient way
DIGITAL DISRUPTION AND INSURTECH START-UPS: RISKS AND CHALLENGES 41
enterprises and the life sector, which had attracted less interest at the begin-
ning. This can be seen, for example, by observing the US market, where
the InsurTechs are also growing in the segment of pure life-risk policies,
which presents a relevant magnitude and a high level of maturity.
As a first approximation, we can state that the expansion of investments
in technology of recent years, on the one hand, and the spread of the use
of technologies among the public, on the other hand, greatly increase the
probability of survival and expansion of the InsurTech segment.
The context seems to favour a further growth of the InsurTech, despite
the high level of regulation characterising the insurance sector. Conversely,
the very presence of entry barriers hinders the access to the market of digi-
tal world giants, such as Google, Facebook, or Amazon. Without players
in a strongly dominant position, the sector has the possibility to gradually
and widely develop, giving the InsurTech the time and room for manoeu-
vre to gather funding and develop new solutions.
However, the difficulties that a start-up may encounter are manifold, so
that some tech-led initiatives in insurance will inevitably fail. Factors of
disadvantage are due to a poor knowledge of the market, the lack of an
appropriate business model, as well as the high level of competition in the
insurance sector, characterised by many complexities and a high level of
technical content (Celent 2017; Fitzgerald 2017; Dietz et al. 2016;
Fitzgerald and Macgregor 2016). In fact, if the new players generally have
strong competences in terms of customer experience, simplification, and
speed of processes, traditional companies have an important advantage, as
compared to the competitors entering the sector, which is the huge pool
of information about the customers, in terms of biographical data and,
above all, risk profiling.
Recent surveys also report that customers do not seem ready to aban-
don the traditional insurance providers, as they consider them more reli-
able in terms of safety and protection against frauds, attaching a great
value to the brand reputation and to the personal interaction (Capgemini
and Efma 2017).
InsurTech and BigTech do not pose, therefore, an immediate competi-
tive threat to established insurers. A drastic disintermediation of the insur-
ance companies, which would also imply a deep innovation of the business
models carried out by the incumbents, does not seem to lie ahead in the
short–medium term.
The majority of digital competitors, at least for the moment, are not in a
disruptive position, according to Christensen’s theory (Christensen et al. 2015;
DIGITAL DISRUPTION AND INSURTECH START-UPS: RISKS AND CHALLENGES 45
Braun and Schreiber 2017). They can rather be considered enablers, who are
able, thanks to their technological competences, to facilitate and make the
traditional insurance business more efficient.
Historically, most innovation in insurance tends to happen incremen-
tally, influenced by gradual shifts in consumer behaviour, risk-absorbing
capabilities, and the regulatory framework. Nevertheless, insurers do need
to keep on top of developments because over time, future market entrants
could build on the infrastructure currently being created to offer new risk-
protection solutions, which can have a strong disruptive nature.
An increasing number of insurers now regard investment in digitalisation
as a priority, especially considering the sector has lagged behind its finan-
cial services peers in adopting digital technologies owing to regulations,
reluctance, and costs (Willis Towers Watson 2017; Naylor 2016, 2017).
Many incumbent insurers are seeking to upgrade their digital capabili-
ties, especially in order to boost customer engagement and collect data
about new risk pools. In some cases, insurers have increased spending on
research and development to foster innovation in-house. Some are work-
ing with BigTech, while other insurers are investing directly in and/or
partnering with start-ups. Furthermore, the majority of the entrants also
seems to be willing to adopt a collaborative strategy with incumbent
companies (AXA 2017; PWC 2016; Bartoletti 2014).
The development of alliances with the new competitors (such as
InsurTech suppliers) allows the incumbents to take advantage of the com-
petences, dynamics, and ways of doing business which, for its very nature,
the insurance industry could not have developed. Big Data Analysis and
blockchain projects are now the most interesting developing areas in the
medium term for the insurance sector (Braun and Schreiber 2017).
If insurance has, as its core business, the risk selection and the price
determination to take them, the current evolution towards a full usage of
Big Data will radically alter the data type itself, the way they will be anal-
ysed, the claim management, and the relationship with customers.
The growing proliferation of data about insureds, be it collected via
dedicated sensors, smart mobiles, or other devices, provides an opportu-
nity for more granular underwriting of individual risks. Smart analytics,
predictive modelling, and connected telematics devices assist insurers in
designing products and setting premiums based on how insureds actually
behave, rather than using general proxies (Schanz 2015).
46 A. CAPPIELLO
5 Conclusions
A series of technology changes and adoptions, many of which are inter-
connected, is having a significant impact on the insurance sector. They are
profoundly changing the strategic context: altering the structure of com-
petition, the conduct of business, and, ultimately, performance across
industries. Digitisation often lowers entry barriers, causing long-established
boundaries between sectors to tumble.
This complex scenario leads to the identification of the digital innova-
tion as a necessity, and only when this necessity is considered an opportu-
nity, it will be able to create value for the insurance industry as a whole.
The relatively slowness of the insurance sector in adopting these tech-
nologies is mainly due to a cultural resistance, which will have to be over-
come in order for the sector to maintain its competitiveness. The
organisational systems that are rigid and unable to take full advantage of
the possibilities connected to the digitalisation and the Big Data are con-
demned to a competitive decline.
DIGITAL DISRUPTION AND INSURTECH START-UPS: RISKS AND CHALLENGES 47
References
Acord & Surely. (2016, February). AI—The Potential for Automated Advisory in
the Insurance Industry.
Agarwal, R., Guodong, G., DesRoches, C., & Jha, A. K. (2010). Research
Commentary—eDigital Transformation of Healthcare: Current Status and the
Road Ahead, Inform. Systems Research, 21(4), 796–809.
AXA. (2016, October). Verso le Assicurazioni 4.0? Il settore assicurativo e la riv-
oluzione dei dati, Italian Axa Paper, no.8.
AXA. (2017). AXA Strategic Ventures: Placing AXA at the Heart of InsurTech.
48 A. CAPPIELLO
Schanz, K. U. (2015, May). The Technology and Data Revolution in Insurance: A
Brave New World? Middle East Insurance Review.
Startupbootcamp InsurTech. (2015). So, What Is an InsurTech Startup?
Stuart, R. (2013, October). Analytics and the Analytical Insurer. Society of
Actuaries.
Swiss Re Institute. (2017a). Technology and Insurance: Themes and Challenges,
June.
Swiss Re Institute. (2017b, May 3). World Insurance in 2016, Sigma.
Venture Scanner. (2016). Insurance Technology Market Overview–Q4.
Venture Scanner. (2017a, September). Startup Market Reports and Data.
Venture Scanner. (2017b). Where in the World Are Insurance Technology
Startups?
Willis Towers Watson. (2017, January). How Diverse Growth Strategies Can
Advance Digitisation in the Insurance Industry.
CHAPTER 4
1 Introduction
The distribution variable assumes a fundamental role in the insurance
industry field, where the intangibility of the supply ensures that there is a
close link between the insurance company on the one side, and the cus-
tomer on the other, within the delivery process of the service, consisting
must be produced, delivered, and consumed at the offer unit, since it can-
not assume autonomous identity from the company producing it. As the
mobility of users cannot be regarded as unlimited, the provision of an
adequate distribution network is essential to allow and facilitate the meet-
ing between the company and its market.
If the above can be agreed with in its general lines, it is necessary to
point out, more specifically, that the insurance product can be considered
to be transferable in space to the extent that it is possible to separate the
delivery process into a stage of contact and a stage which is to be carried
out by the customer at a distance. In fact, the presence of the customer
becomes necessary at the time of sale and often in the distribution, whereas
the stages of production do not necessarily require the intervention of the
customer itself.
This means that the different “processing stages” prior to obtaining the
“finished product,” and which do not involve direct contact with custom-
ers, can also be managed at considerable distance from the latter, accord-
ing to operational efficiency objectives.
It is possible to hypothesise organisational solutions envisaging the pro-
duction of the service in legal entities other than those involved in the dis-
tribution of the same. This circumstance may seem to contradict the
theoretical need to configure direct channels for the distribution of the
insurance service, based on the intrinsic peculiarities of the same. However,
it is not to exclude the possibility of configuring indirect solutions, in case
it is necessary to delegate the function of service selling to third parties,
which does not have any dissimilar characteristics from the marketing of
any other good. It seems plausible, moreover, to refer to indirect channels
also for the physical distribution of the service when the producer delegates
some stages of the production process, and, in particular, the phase of cre-
ation of the finished product.
The non-demonstrability of the service in tangible terms, finally, means
that the benefits related to it may seem difficult to understand by the cus-
tomer. The service, in fact, assumes the character of the concreteness only
at the time of its use; in that moment only, the customer can evaluate its
usefulness and quality (Normann 2001). If we take account of the fact
that, once it has been delivered, and therefore consumed by the customer,
the service cannot be returned, it is understandable that the demand unit
can assume attitudes of distrust and mental reserve towards the providing
company.
THE NEW FRONTIERS OF INSURANCE DISTRIBUTION 55
market have led to the emergence of the favourable conditions for diversi-
fication, as well as for a certain specialisation, of the delivery systems
(Heinhuis and de Vries 2009).
As is obvious, this tendency leads to a careful assessment of the prob-
lems inherent in the composition and coordination of the entire distribu-
tion system related to the products offered and to the market segments
served.
However, it is useful to underline that these distribution channels have
different functional characteristics that depend directly on the type of ser-
vice offered and the peculiarities of the market segments served. The dif-
ferent nature of the needs expressed in the various market segments, and
the consequent specificity of the services offered, therefore, require special
methods of delivery, which relate to certain distribution channels (Coelho
and Easingwood 2008).
The choices for the design of differentiated delivery systems are
therefore closely linked to the analysis of the peculiarities and the com-
petitive dynamics related to the strategic business areas of where the
company is to operate. These areas of business are defined by three key
elements such as (1) customer segments; (2) the needs they expressed
(types of services); and (3) the ways for satisfying these needs (production-
distributive technology).
In this regard, it is worth mentioning that insurance services are placed
between an extreme of simplicity and low unit added value, and an extreme
of high complexity and significant added value; in this regard, elementary
services and complex services are identified.
To the first category belong all those services which, characterised by the
execution of simple operations, have a minimum content of personalisation,
and are easily standardised (e.g. motor insurance, home insurance, etc.).
For the distribution of such services, whose demand is determined, in
particular, by the price and comfort, understood by the latter as proximity
of the point of delivery and speed of execution of transactions, the insur-
ance company may have systems of relatively inexpensive delivery, and
based on the use of advanced technologies.
The use of technology, allowing the standardisation and capillary distri-
bution systems, permits to achieve advantages of cost structure (and to
develop, consequently, competitive strategies based on price) and to
respond effectively to customer expectations to increase the distribution of
sales points, to reduce waiting times, and to expand service hours (Black
et al. 2002; Thornton and White 2009).
THE NEW FRONTIERS OF INSURANCE DISTRIBUTION 61
services as to the speed and precision of performance, but above all with
reference to the possibility to satisfy the needs of the customers increas-
ingly close to the place where they manifest themselves (Normann 2001).
the use of banks as a distribution channel of life insurance has itself consti-
tuted an important trend, whose success is to attribute, in a context of
institutional and regulatory liberalisation, to the capillary presence of the
bank in the territory, to the availability of detailed database of the custom-
ers, to advantages in terms of scale economies. The broker channel has
remained stable over time or has lost market shares, especially in the area
of non-life insurance products (Accenture 2015).
On the other hand, in the area of elementary products, for which the
reasons for choosing the insurance company based mainly on comfort and
price, there have been widespread solutions of innovative type, whose pro-
duction is linked to technology progress in the area of electronics and
telecommunications.
It is registered at European level, especially in the UK and the
Netherlands markets, a huge expansion of digital channels for the distribu-
tion of non-life insurance, whose distance selling takes place via the tele-
phone, websites, and, more recently, emerging aggregators’ sites, aimed at
the orientation and purchase of non-complex and standardised insurance
products such as motor insurance and home insurance (European
Commission 2016; Barret 2017).
5.1
Price Comparison Websites
Price comparison websites are Internet-based platforms that offer con-
sumers the possibility to quickly and easily compare the estimates of a
given product. Quotes are personalised in terms of the individual’s main
characteristics and simplify the execution of a purchase based on the search
results.
Because of this, a growing number of insurance companies are com-
mitting to adopt this channel, implementing a mix of low-cost products
specifically dedicated to price aggregators. The approach to using aggre-
gators varies significantly on basis of the geographic location and branch
of activity. In 2015, 83% of British insurers were considering launching
their own comparison portal over a three-year period, compared to 49%
in the rest of Europe and 58% in the USA. Companies operating in the life
insurance sector are more open to this approach than their counterparts
in the non-life sector (Accenture 2015).
It is possible to classify the business models of price comparison web-
sites based on how revenue is generated (Box 4.2), although these models
often show a mix of the different formulas.
THE NEW FRONTIERS OF INSURANCE DISTRIBUTION 65
From the customer’s point of view, the main advantage of price aggre-
gators is to reduce the search costs of the best buying solution. These
platforms, in fact, provide a quick system to compare quotes, simplifying
and reducing the process of comparing the prices offered by the different
insurance companies.
The insurers, on the other hand, have the possibility to reach a large
number of customers without having to rely on the traditional and more
expensive distribution channels. In addition, they can benefit from the
massive advertising campaigns put in place by the aggregators, whose
charges, however, are partly transferred to the insurers, reducing the actual
advantage.
A limit to the use of such portals concerns the presence of possible
conflicts of interest with the user if the comparative site exerts an influence
on the comparative activity aimed at favouring a company at the expenses
of another (listing bias) or uses expressions that tend to sponsor a particu-
lar product. In this case, a prejudice is created for the user, resulting from
the conditioning of his decision-making autonomy, and a disparity of
66 A. CAPPIELLO
5.2
The Use of Mobile Apps: Trends and Perspectives
Mobile devices have now become a pervasive element in everyday life.
These devices have changed the way consumers find information,
choose and buy products of all kinds. The use of the computer is increas-
ingly limited, replaced by smartphones and tablets. A survey highlights
that in October 2016 the use of the Internet through mobile devices
has in fact surpassed the desktop one for the first time all over the world
(StatCounter 2016).
The impressive rates of diffusion of smart phones and tablets show how
today, and even more in the near future, insurance companies are forced
to fully embrace the logic of mobility, implementing technologies suitable
for satisfying consumer expectations. Mobile devices, thanks to the devel-
opment of new applications, become more and more “smart” and all this
will increasingly affect the approach to the market, offering new opportu-
nities both to insurers and to customers.
Consumers who take out an insurance policy may request the activation
of a reserved area within the company’s Internet site to consult in real time
the terms of coverage and receive periodic communications. The evolu-
tion of this service involves the use of apps for smartphones and tablets
that offer additional services and in some cases cost savings compared to
traditional delivery solutions (Carney et al. 2015).
Mobile technology changes the way in which the company interact with
the customer, creating an additional point of contact, in a sector like the
insurance one where interactions with customers are not very frequent.
Besides innovating the traditional mode of underwriting a police,
replacing the use of the card with electronic or graphometric signature
solutions, mobile apps modify many other aspects of the insurance delivery
system, also offering a new distribution channel for consumers that cannot
be served by traditional agents.
68 A. CAPPIELLO
6 Conclusions
The changes that have taken place in recent years on the supply side, as
well as on the demand side, have meant that a delivery system character-
ised by traditional networks of an undiversified type could be inadequate
to meet the expectations of customers about the type and quality of the
services offered. It is essential to adopt strategies of distribution according
to the different segments/products that provide for the presence of
differentiated distribution channels according to the degree of complexity
that characterises the product–customer relationship.
70 A. CAPPIELLO
Over the last years, insurance companies have been investing in their
processes to make their services more available to customers. This has been
driven not only by customer expectations and a desire to increase their
convenience and control but also by the need to reduce distribution costs.
However, a deeper transformation is inevitable, since a dizzying succes-
sion of technological and other innovations are challenging the traditional
insurance business model.
Over the next five years, sensors, the cloud, connected smart devices,
and real-time analytics will combine to deliver a new layer of connected
intelligence that will revolutionise the ability of insurers to offer interest-
ing and increasingly indispensable digital services to consumers. Insurers
are moving steadily towards a digitally enabled omnichannel distribution
model. Every stage of the sales process is affected, from discovery of infor-
mation through to advice and purchase.
In this regard, problems may arise in relation to the possible overlap of
distribution channels which are accompanied by inconsistencies of differ-
ent natures, not least those relating to a possible disorientation of some
customers. These, in fact, if not properly informed, can show some dis-
comfort in the face of an innovation, which becomes too accentuated by
the ways of service distribution.
Moreover, it should be remembered that there are user segments
that are particularly prone to the use of self-service structures and oth-
ers, on the contrary, that prefer the use of more traditional channels also
for the enjoyment of elementary services. As is obvious, these prefer-
ences are a strong conditioning in the choice of different options at the
operational level.
Therefore, most insurers expect physical channels to endure in the digi-
tal age. They envisage a vital role for agents and brokers, albeit one that is
markedly different than that which most of them fulfil today.
Finally, the effects in terms of image and reputation that the introduc-
tion of such technological solutions tends to produce towards the public
should not be neglected, allowing it to bring the idea of efficiency and
considerable capacity of renewal and continuous adaptation to the evolu-
tion of the market and the needs of the customers. In this sense, the objec-
tive pursued by the introduction of new solutions can be the consolidation,
if not even in the increase, of the market share.
The decisions the insurers make today will determine not only the kind
of customer experiences they will provide to remain competitive but in
fact the kind of businesses they will be in the years to come.
THE NEW FRONTIERS OF INSURANCE DISTRIBUTION 71
References
Accenture. (2015). Digital Insurance: Reimaging Insurance Distribution.
Accenture. (2017). The Future of Insurance Distribution. New Models for a Digital
Customer.
Allmendinger, G., & Lombreglia, R. (2005). Four Strategies for the Age of Smart
Services. Harvard Business Review, 83(10), 131–145.
Arnold, M. A., Li, C., Saliba, C., & Zhang, L. (2011). Asymmetric Market Shares,
Advertising and Pricing: Equilibrium with an Information Gatekeeper. Journal
of Industrial Economics, 59, 63–84.
Barret, C. (2017, September 29). Price Comparison Websites Are Far from Epic.
Financial Times.
Baye, M. R., Morgn, J., & Scholten, P. (2004). Price Dispersion in the Small and
in the Large: Evidence from an Internet Price Comparison Site. Journal of
Industrial Economics, 52, 463–496.
Baye, M. R., Morgn, J., & Scholten, P. (2006). Information, Search, and Price
Dispersion. In T. Hendershott (Ed.), Handbook on Economics and Information
Systems. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Belleflamme, P., & Peitz, M. (2010). Platform Competition and Seller Investment
Incentives. European Economic Review, 54, 1059–1076.
Black, N. J., Lockett, A., Ennew, C., Winklhofer, H., & McKechnie, S. (2002).
Modelling Consumer Choice of Distribution Channels: An Illustration from
Financial Services. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 20(4), 161–173.
Brady, T., Davies, A., & Gann, D. M. (2005). Creating Value by Delivering Integrated
Solutions. International Journal of Project Management, 23(5), 360–365.
Brown, J. R., & Goolsbee, A. (2012). Does the Internet Make Markets More
Competitive? Evidence from the Life Insurance Industry. Journal of Political
Economy, 110, 481–507.
Caillaud, B., & Jullien, B. (2003). Chicken & Egg: Competition Among
Intermediation Service Providers. RAND Journal of Economics, 34, 309–328.
Carney, E., Ensor, B., Ask, J. A., Berdak, O., Causey, A., & Blumstein, A. (2015,
February). The Future of Insurance Is Mobile. Forrester.
CMA—Competition and Markets Authority. (2017, September). Digital Comparison
Tools Market Study. Final Report.
Coelho, F., & Easingwood, C. (2005). Determinants of Multiple Channel Choice
in Financial Services: An Environmental Uncertainty Model. Journal of Services
Marketing, 19(4), 199–211.
Coelho, F., & Easingwood, C. (2008). An Exploratory Study into the Drivers of
Channel Change. European Journal of Marketing, 42(9/10), 1005–1022.
Coelho, F., Easingwood, C., & Coelho, A. (2003). Exploratory Evidence of
Channel Performance in Single vs Multiple Channel Strategies. International
Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 31(11), 561–573.
72 A. CAPPIELLO
De Cornire A., & Taylor, G. (2014). Quality Provision in the Presence of a Biased
Intermediary. Working Paper.
Dumm, R. E., & Hoyt, R. E. (2003). Insurance Distribution Channels: Markets
in Transition. Journal of Insurance Regulation, 22(1), 27–47.
Easingwood, C., & Storey, C. (2006). The Value of Multi-Channel Distribution
Systems in the Financial Services Sector. The Service Industries Journal, 16,
223–241.
Eiglier, P., & Langeard, E. (2003). Il marketing strategico nei servizi. Milano:
McGraw Hill.
European Commission. (2016). European Economic Forecast, Winter.
Fürst, A., Leimbach, M., & Prigge, J. K. (2017). Organizational Multichannel
Differentiation: An Analysis of Its Impact on Channel Relationships and
Company Sales Success. Journal of Marketing, 81(1), 59–82.
Gorodnichenko, Y., Sheremirov, V., & Talavera, O. (2015). Price Setting in Online
Markets: Does IT Click? Berkeley Working Paper, University of California.
GPEN—Global Privacy Enforcement Network. (2016). Annual Report.
Heinhuis, D., & de Vries, E. J. (2009). Modelling Customer Behaviour in Multi-
Channel Service Distribution. Enterprise Applications and Services in the
Finance Industry, 35, 47–63.
Kabadayi, S., Komarova, L. Y., & Carnevale, M. (2017). Customer Value Creation
in Multichannel Systems. The Interactive Effect of Integration Quality and
Multichannel Complexity. Journal of Creating Value, 3(1), 1–18.
Klotzki, U., Gatzert, N., & Muenstermann, B. (2017). The Cost of Life
Distribution in Europe. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance, 42(2),
296–322.
Kotler, P. (2001). A Framework for Marketing Management. Upper Saddle River:
Prentice Hall.
Kotler, P., & Pfoertsch, W. (2011). Ingredient Branding: Making the Invisible
Visible. New York: Springer.
Nightingale, P. (2003). Innovation in Financial Services Infrastructure. The
International Handbook on Innovation, 3, 529–547.
Normann, R. (2001). Service Management: Strategy and Leadership in Service
Business (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley & Sons.
Pires, C. P., Sarkar, S., & Carvalho, L. (2008). Innovation in Services—How
Different from Manufacturing? The Service Industries Journal, 28(10),
1339–1356.
Ronayne, D. (2015, October). Price Comparison Websites. Warwick Economics
Research Papers Series, 1056.
StatCounter. (2016, November). Mobile and Tablet Now Gets More Usage than
Desktop.
Stepanek, L., & Roman, P. (2017). Urban Insurance Industry Ideas of Second
Millenium. Ecoforum, 6(1), 10.
THE NEW FRONTIERS OF INSURANCE DISTRIBUTION 73
Su Chen, M., & Chang, P. L. (2010). Distribution Channel Strategy and Efficiency
Performance of the Life Insurance Industry in Taiwan. Journal of Financial
Services Marketing, 15(1), 62–75.
Su Chen, M., & Lai, G. C. (2010). Distribution Systems, Loyalty and Performance.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 38(9), 698–718.
Thornton, J., & White, L. (2001). Customer Orientations and Usage of Financial
Distribution Channels. Journal of Services Marketing, 15(3), 168–185.
Thornton, J., & White, L. (2009). Financial Distribution Channels: Technology
Versus Tradition. Journal of Professional Services Marketing, 21(2), 59–73.
Trigo-Gamarra, L., & Growitsch, C. (2010). Comparing Single and Multichannel
Distribution Strategies in the German Life Insurance Market: An Analysis of
Cost and Profit Efficiency. Schmalenbach Business Review, 62(4), 401–417.
CHAPTER 5
1 Introduction
The relationship between an insurer and its policyholders is typically infre-
quent, fleeting, and of a financial nature. Because of this historical interac-
tion model, for a long time insurers didn’t need to adopt cutting-edge
technologies. In fact, at a time when many other businesses have migrated
from legacy systems to mobile and cloud solutions, insurers are still some
3.1
Direct Marketing Tools
The increase of consumer’s loyalty, according to the logic of direct
marketing, can be achieved using interactive media, used in a synergistic
way and integrated with the other communication tools available to the
company. The techniques of direct marketing therefore assume equal
respect to the means of the traditional communication mix, thus going to
form a global communication mix of the company (Delanote et al. 2013).
The media available to the company to implement a direct marketing
strategy can be divided into mass media, however used interactively, and
properly interactive media (Holtz 1986).
Newspapers, periodicals, radio, television, billboard, the cinema, and so
on belong to the first group.
If, as is often the case with insurance products, we do not have suffi-
ciently large mailing lists regarding a specific product, it is advisable to use
the press or radio and television (especially in the first phase of market
screening). These means of communication achieve a good level of effec-
tiveness in the context of direct marketing strategies if it is possible to
activate a response process by the public.
The mass media used interactively have the advantage of reaching a
large part of the market at a much lower cost per contact than that of the
properly interactive means; it is also possible to reach specific geographic
areas—for a company, for example, the own area of activity—or particular
demographic categories. On the other hand, it should be noted that these
means have habitually lower levels of affinity, understanding the latter as
the logical connection between the supply and the potential customer to
which it is addressed.
The media that are properly interactive include, in addition to direct
mailings and telemarketing, all the electronic media that offer the possibil-
ity, to the one who receives the message, to activate a response behaviour.
These means are therefore marked by the possibility of a dialogue, as they
reproduce the human characteristic of communication, namely the
biuniqueness of the flow of information.
When it is not possible to establish a personal relationship for technical
or economic reasons, we can switch to the technological approach of com-
munication that involves relatively minor costs and can cover larger areas.
Direct mailing consists of sending booklets, flyers, printed advertise-
ments, and several other types of texts, all accompanied by a letter of
presentation, which is in any case indispensable.
82 A. CAPPIELLO
should not overlook the fact that the use of telemarketing implies the loss
of that strictly personal contact which is often a decisive element in the
various marketing policies. It can therefore be assumed that telemarketing
techniques should not be used indiscriminately for any type of service,
especially when a face-to-face contact is certainly more profitable which, in
any case, must be constantly urged.
Other media characterised by communication interactivity can be used
in direct marketing techniques. We are hereby referring to tools that com-
puter technology continually puts on the market, from social networks
(Facebook, LinkedIn, etc.) to the different types of mobile apps and so
on, through which the banking company can activate a direct channel of
communication with its own audience.
It is evident that there is a close correlation between interactivity and
the cost of the different media; this means that the cost per contact rises as
the communication becomes more effective on the response behaviour. If
we wanted to exemplify the assumption by using a diagram, the maximum
values would be relative to the personal sale, while the lower ones would
concern the radio and television communication.
Also in relation to that aspect, it is necessary to fix an appropriate
communication mix. In the market screening phase, for example, it may
be sufficient to have a communication carried out by means of press or
radio and television (used, of course, always with the possibility of
response) which have a lower cost (per contact); in an early phase it is
important, in fact, to be able to reach a market coverage as wide as possible
(Nash 1995).
Later, when a relationship is established with the customer, it is advis-
able to start using a range of more interactive media, even if more expen-
sive. At this stage, the relationship becomes productive and there is security
of a return of the investment; moreover, only through the biuniqueness of
the communication it will be possible to carry out a customer loyalty
action (Bloemer et al. 2009).
3.2
Direct Marketing Opportunities and Limitations
The consideration outlined above confirms that direct marketing has
an enormous potential, and certain limitations, when applied to insurance
management.
The primary advantage that is connected to direct marketing strategies
is the possibility of establishing direct, interactive contact with the market,
INSURTECH AND CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP 85
contact between the deliverer and the user of the service. In this way, it is
possible to carry out a more massive action of information and advice
regarding the different technical ways of use of the service itself, as well
as the economic advantages of the various possible alternatives (Rust and
Zahorik 1993).
However, such information is all the more valuable the more the cus-
tomer does not know certain services or feels an unmotivated mistrust
towards them.
Finally, it should be noted that with direct marketing it is also possible
to carry out an effective cross-selling action. In fact, once in possession of
certain lists of customers satisfied of the relationship with the company,
the latter, after an accurate segmentation according to parameters deemed
to be more convenient, is able to propose and therefore to sell comple-
mentary, alternative, or simply distributed services to the same customers
through the insurance channel. It is certainly easier to develop an existing
link than to create a new one.
It cannot be neglected, however, that a too massive use of direct mar-
keting techniques may result in a further reduction of contact with the
customer, in cases where the latter would have preferred meeting an agent
personally (Wang et al. 2017). It is therefore necessary to have a suitable
programming of direct marketing communication which must be reserved
for contacts that could not be implemented otherwise, without sacrificing
the personal insurer–client relationship whenever this is necessary or
requested by the customer.
Another problem that needs to be carefully assessed is the risk of seeing,
in the customer’s mind, the company’s direct marketing activity associated
with promotional selling campaigns carried out, and sometimes incor-
rectly, by companies belonging to different market sectors (e.g. commer-
cial companies) (Mela et al. 1997; Bird 2007).
Due to this, it is possible to find a certain degree of inurement to this
kind of marketing. This disinterest can only be overcome with a direct
marketing strategy whose main requirements are transparency and profes-
sionalism, and which indicates, at least at the initial stage of the market
survey, an activity of information and completion of other communication
strategies.
It should also be stressed that the adoption of a concrete direct market-
ing strategy by the insurance companies requires, consequently, the
organisation of human resources, not only those that are required to carry
out the activity in question.
88 A. CAPPIELLO
It does not seem obvious to remember, once again, that direct market-
ing cannot and should not be identified only with the activation of the
toll-free number or by sending hundreds of customer messages, since
these do not represent the only aspects, albeit important, of that strategy.
The absence of real coordination, at all hierarchical levels, may become the
cause of failure, in fact, even of a campaign of sure success.
Another factor of development, which can represent a limiting aspect,
is given by the availability of technological equipment and their diffusion.
The technological resource, which will become an increasingly propulsive
factor for the direct marketing techniques in the future (which will also be
transformed by it), can be analysed as an internal variable in the company
or as external variable.
It is necessary to acquire highly flexible and specific technologies, which
enable, on the one hand, the collection, interpretation, and use of infor-
mation for the elaboration of personalised promotional campaigns and
which promote, on the other hand, the streamlining and improvement of
the communication networks with the market.
As far as the technology intended as an external variable is concerned,
we are hereby referring to the diffusion of technology, particularly IT, to
the public.
From the identification of the main advantages and limits associated
with the direct marketing strategy, it is evident how the latter, if intro-
duced in close correlation with other marketing strategies, can produce
good results.
In practice, the insurance company, with the use of personalised, inter-
active, and loyal communication, can achieve a twofold series of objec-
tives: on the one side, the increase in demand by already acquired
customers, and, on the other side, the promotion of the first contact with
potential customers in order to transform it into effective customers
(Javalgi and Moberg 1997; Iacobucci 1999; Butcher et al. 2001).
If appropriately included in the planning of the different distribution
modalities, direct marketing can also contribute to the rationalisation of
the production and delivery of the service processes.
Obviously, direct marketing techniques cannot be used for all insurance
services in an indistinct way. Certainly, direct marketing can find a good
application regarding the promotion and sale of products services of non-
complex type; for products that have a higher level of complexity, direct
marketing can be useful as a marketing tool supporting other actions,
and to increase the awareness of the potential customer through direct
INSURTECH AND CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP 89
Different social platforms will be used, with respect to the different objec-
tives to be achieved. For example, Twitter can be usefully adopted for
customer service activities, while Facebook can be exploited not only to
respond to customer requests, but also to strengthen the relationships
with the community through advertisements, surveys, and the organisa-
tion of events. It is crucial to manage the interactions, in order to identify
the factors that affect the reputation of the brand, by establishing an effi-
cient auditing and reporting system, as regards both the on-board and the
off-board activities (Kaur and Singh 2017). It is necessary in this regard to
elaborate a careful governance structure, able to define the tasks of each
company function involved (customer service, marketing, sales and
recruiting team) on the different social platforms concerned.
It is also crucial to optimise the use of social channels according to a
customer relationship management programme, as is already the case for
traditional marketing channels. The optimised use of social media enables
companies to extend the scope and flexibility of marketing campaigns
aimed also at niche consumer groups, including those with specific inter-
ests or special needs.
5 Conclusions
The traditional contrast between the agency channel and the direct chan-
nel will have to be tackled in a different way in the years to come, leverag-
ing a greater strategic awareness of technological and computer innovation.
But social media are not additional sales channels: they are rather like a
huge opportunity to increase corporate visibility, to innovate the relation-
ship with the market along all phases of the customer lifecycle, from the
estimate phase to post-sales management, and also to innovate the way in
which functions within the enterprise are carried out.
New digital channels are considered increasingly important and prefer-
able when it comes to comparing products, accessing contract information,
comparing prices, and quickly enabling simple service requests. The 2.0
Web is therefore destined to deeply influence the organisational models of
companies and agencies, both on the internal side and in the relationship
with customers and with the realities outside the company.
However, the use of social media itself does not constitute the real
change, nor can it give satisfactory results if it is freed from a logic of
coherence with the values of the company.
INSURTECH AND CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP 95
The insurers who will take the greatest advantage are those who are
able to integrate the use of social media within a global communicational
approach, which includes all the media available to the company.
It is necessary to connect social media to organisational processes
(production and distribution) and ensure that they do not become the
target, but the tool. Social media are a new reality that is still largely unex-
plored. In order for them to become business opportunities, it is neces-
sary to bring about a cultural paradigm change, which can be translated
into a new way of understanding the relationship between company,
channels, and customers. Once the integration phase is complete, the real
challenge will be to elaborate and correctly interpret the large mass of
information that comes from the web and is useful for the development
of the insurance business.
References
Badoc, M. (1986). Marketing pour le banque et l’assurance europeennes. Paris: Les
editions d’organisation.
Baier, M. (1985). Elements of Direct Marketing. New York: McGraw Hill.
Bezza, Y., & Giammario, F. (2015, July). Assicurazioni e social media. La presenza
social delle compagnie e l’evoluzione del rapporto con il cliente, KPMG.
Bird, D. (2007). Common-Sense Direct & Digital Marketing (5th ed.). London:
Kogan Page.
Bloemer, J., de Ruyter, K., & Wetzels, M. (2009). Linking Perceived Service
Quality and Service Loyalty: A Multi-Dimensional Perspective. European
Journal of Marketing, 33, 1082–1106.
Boulding, W., Kalra, A., Staelin, R., & Zeithaml, V. (1993). A Dynamic Process
Model of Service. Journal of Marketing Research, 30(1), 7–27.
Brasini, S., & Tassinari, G. (2014). Dalla Customer Satisfaction Alla Customer
Loyalty. Statistica Applicata, 16(4), 443–468.
Brian, T., & Housden, M. (2017). Direct and Digital Marketing in Practice.
London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Brioschi, E. T. (1990). la comunicazione d’azienda: caratteri fondamentali e prob-
lematiche di gestione. Milano: Vita e Pensiero.
Butcher, K., Sparkes, B., & O’Callaghan, F. (2001). Evaluative and Relational
Influences on Service Loyalty. International Journal of Service Industry
Management, 12(4), 310–327.
Capgemini. (2014, April). World Insurance Report 2014: Leading with Digital for
Better Customer Experience.
Cummins, J. D., & Venard, B. (2007). Handbook of International Insurance:
Between Global Dynamics and Local Contingiences. Cham: Springer.
96 A. CAPPIELLO
David Shepard Associates. (1995). The New Direct Marketing, How to Implement
a Profit-Driven Database Marketing Strategy Inc (2nd ed.). Huntersville: Irwin.
De Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M., & Bloemer, J. (1998). On the Relationship Between
Perceived Service Quality, Service Loyalty and Switching Costs. International
Journal of Service Industry Management, 9(5), 436–453.
Delanote, S., Leus, R., & Nobibon, F. T. (2013). Optimization of the Annual
Planning of Targeted Offers in Direct Marketing. Journal of the Operational
Research Society, 64(12), 1770–1779.
Donnelly, J., Berry, L. L., & Thompson, T. W. (1985). Marketing Financial
Services: A Strategic Vision. Huntersville: Dow Jones, Irwin.
Dumm, R. E., & Hoyt, R. E. (2003). Insurance Distribution Channels: Markets
in Transition. Journal of Insurance Regulation, 22(1), 27–47.
Eiglier, P., & Langeard, E. (2003). II marketing strategico nei servizi. Milano:
McGraw Hill.
Goodman, E. (2014). Design and Ethics in the Era of Big Data. Interactions,
21(3), 22–24.
Hänninen, N., & Karjaluoto, H. (2017). The Effect of Marketing Communication
on Business Relationship Loyalty. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 35(4),
458–472.
Holtz, H. (1986). Direct Marketing. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Iacobucci, D. (Ed.). (1999). Handbook of Services Marketing and Management.
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Insurance Europe. (2017, May). Annual Report 2016–2017. Brussels.
Javalgi, R. G., & Moberg, C. R. (1997). Service Loyalty: Implications for Service
Providers. Journal of Services Marketing, 11(3), 165–179.
Kaur, R., & Singh, G. (2017). Internet Marketing: The New Era of Innovation in
E-Commerce. International Journal of Scientific Research in Computer Science,
Engineering and Information Technology, 2(1), 253–258.
Kotler, P. (2001). A Framework for Marketing Management. Upper Saddle River:
Prentice Hall.
Kotler, P., & Pfoertsch, W. (2011). Ingredient Branding: Making the Invisible
Visible. New York: Springer.
Kroll, K. (2016). Direct Marketing of Personal Insurance. Gen Re. Risk Insights,
No. 6.
Mela, C. F., Gupta, S., & Lehmann, D. R. (1997). The Long-Term Impact of
Promotion and Advertising on Consumer Brand Choice. Journal of Marketing
Research, 34, 248–261.
Nash, E. L. (Ed.). (1995). Direct Marketing: Strategy, Planning and Execution
(3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Normann, R. (2001). Service Management: Strategy and Leadership in Service
Business (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley & Sons.
INSURTECH AND CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP 97
1 Introduction
Insurance distribution channels have evolved over the years in response to
changes in customer behaviour and technological developments.
The distribution, once represented mainly by the agency network, has
progressively evolved with new channels such as brokers, financial promoters
(for life and annuity products), banking channels, and direct sales, thanks to
the application of digital technology that is becoming widespread.
Internet and social media penetration have grown significantly, and an
increasing share of online activity is executed via mobile phones. If tradi-
tional intermediaries remain the main protagonists of the distribution in
many segments, it is possible to assume that technological innovation will
shortly play a vital role in this area, especially for what concerns easily stan-
dardised and low-consulting content products.
For the moment, the widespread diffusion of digital technology has not
revolutionised the role of traditional intermediaries within the entire
insurance value chain. These, in fact, are still the leading operators in the
global insurance distribution.
Agents, brokers, and other intermediaries such as banks account for a
relatively stable share of around 60–70% of premiums in most insurance
markets (Bain 2014; Swiss Re 2017; Power 2017).
Online sales of insurance remain relatively small in many countries,
both compared with other distribution channels and e-commerce penetra-
tion in other sectors. In the European Union, for example, e-commerce
sales by non-financial firms amounted to 16% of aggregate turnover in
2015 (up from 12% in 2008), and for some activities such as booking
accommodation, the share of Internet sales is over 25%. This compares
with an average share of direct online insurance of probably less than 5%
(Eurostat 2017).
The causes of the limited spread of e-commerce insurance are manifold.
In emerging countries, this can be due to the lack of adequate technolo-
gies; in advanced economies, on the other hand, insurers can be poorly
prepared and not inclined to use digital technologies for the distribution
of their services. An example thereof are small, community-based insurers
in North and South America that, in particular, have a high affinity with
traditional agent/broker distribution, perhaps linked to budget con-
straints on the necessary IT upgrades for digital distribution as well as
potential worries about channel conflict. The diffusion of new technology
into some wholesale insurance markets also remains patchy and here too,
manual processes still dominate (Swiss Re 2016).
SURVEY ON THE DIGITISED INSURANCE DISTRIBUTION IN EUROPE… 101
purchase insurance for particular activities at specific times (Bcg and Nice
2016; Swiss Re 2017).
If in the past the consumers turned to their agent or broker for all
insurance needs, they are now more self-directed and use several tools to
seek information, research, and purchase the insurance solutions they con-
sider the best. Consumers are embracing innovation in financial services,
mainly where it makes their interaction more convenient and improves
communication. They want new products and services that respond to
their needs and the added convenience of interacting with their insurers
when, how, and where they want. No longer an annual transaction, the
consumer/insurer relationship becomes more of a day-to-day experience
(Christensen et al. 2015; McKinsey 2016).
Although the use of traditional channels remains predominant, it is still
possible to detect that the digital technology is having a significant impact
on the whole distribution process: that is, both regarding how products
and services are delivered and more generally how companies interact with
their customers (Swiss Re Institute 2017). This has been driven not only
by customer expectations and a desire to increase their convenience and
control, but also by the need to reduce distribution costs. Key features of
this trend have been a renewed focus on the contact centre, the redirec-
tion of agents to handle more complex service transactions, and a contin-
ued shift towards a full self-service capability (Accenture 2015).
New digital offerings may merely provide alternative communication
channels, such as email, website live chats, social media, online forums, or
may make choosing or buying insurance more efficient, by using website
self-service or mobile app (Nice-Bcg 2016).
The customer relationship will change even more in the future, because
generational effects may also be significant in fostering Internet sales, with
surveys indicating that younger policyholders are more likely to embrace
new distribution channels (Yu and Portera 2015). This suggests that as
the younger cohorts age and buy more insurance, online sales will likely
increase.
While the agent–broker model may suit existing customers, new gen-
erations of insurance buyers will demand omni-channel, multitouch distri-
bution (Capgemini/Efma 2017).
If this trend among millennials (born in 1980 to 1996) continues to
grow, it could substantially change the way insurance companies interact
with customers in the coming years.
SURVEY ON THE DIGITISED INSURANCE DISTRIBUTION IN EUROPE… 103
However, millennials are the least satisfied of all generations with the
online experience, and this can be a reason why this tech-driven age group
has an overall low engagement with their primary insurer. For insurance
company leaders, this means that improving the interactions with custom-
ers online is a smart investment towards building strong relationships
within this future mainstream customer base.
Insurance companies 25 10 35
Level of automation
Pure 12 7 19
of which with live chat 2 2 4
Hybrid 13 3 16
of which with live chat 1 0 1
Property
Insurance company 21 6 27
Mutual insurance 2 2 4
Bancassurance 1 0 1
Financial services company 1 2 3
The main service offered online
Motor insurance 18 5 23
Travel insurance 2 0 2
Life insurance 1 3 4
Health insurance 2 1 3
Supplementary health insurance 1 1 2
Legal protection 1 0 1
Table 6.2 Main evident features from the website of the sample companies
Features Europe North America Sample
Results
5 Analysis and Assessment
The final score reported by each company belonging to the sample anal-
ysed is the result of the summation of the scores assigned to the qualitative
evaluation of the profiles of accessibility, transparency, and quality of ser-
vice (Graph 6.1).
Both the maximum registered score, equal to 44 points, and the mini-
mum, of 27, are referred to a European company. In fact, although
European companies have registered, on average, a higher value (37.1
points) than the American ones (36 points), it is to note that the European
subsample has a higher variability in the scores, with a higher standard
deviation (equal to 4.09) compared to North America (2.05), which con-
firms a greater dispersion of the recorded values than the average value
(Table 6.6).
This variability is explained by the fact that the European companies
analysed reflect the features of heterogeneity that characterises the insur-
ance distribution at European level where, alongside technologically
evolved realities, there are traditional companies that have only recently
implemented digital solutions. The latter, if we exclude the major
European insurance groups, which approach the digital world more rigor-
ously, show a certain backwardness compared to the American competi-
tors, especially as far as the variety and quality of services offered online
are concerned.
It seems useful to better study the breakdown of the final score through
the analysis of its three components related to accessibility, transparency,
and quality of service, as shown in Table 6.6.
110 A. CAPPIELLO
50
EU
45
AM
40
AM
35
30 EU
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
6 Conclusions
Although the survey is based on a statistically unrepresentative sample, it
can be considered a valuable reference point for digitised distribution mod-
els that are currently being adopted in the analysed insurance markets.
The analysis shows that the American insurance companies have a
higher average level of accessibility and quality of the services offered.
However, they demonstrate shortcomings about the quality of informa-
tion transparency. In fact, the simple surfing among the pages of the sites
does not allow access to the information files of the products offered, in
case you have not yet requested a quote or registered to the service.
Compared to the European reality, regulated by strict rules on informa-
tion transparency, this leads to a loss of informative immediacy and makes
the intercompany comparison activity more difficult.
On the other hand, European companies are the ones that have
obtained the best average score although, as already mentioned, there is a
SURVEY ON THE DIGITISED INSURANCE DISTRIBUTION IN EUROPE… 113
Appendix
Table 6.7 The survey sample
Country Insurance companies
References
Accenture. (2015). Reimaging Insurance Distribution.
ASIC. (2016, March). Providing Digital Financial Product Advice to Retail
Clients.
Bain. (2014). Customer Loyalty and the Digital Transformation in P&C and Life
Insurance, Global Edition.
Boston Consulting Group (BCG) and NICE. (2016, May). Digital Technologies
Raise the Stakes in Customer Service.
Capgemini/Efma. (2017). World Insurance Report 2017.
Christensen, C. M., Raynor, M. E., & McDonald, R. (2015, December). What Is
Disruptive Innovation? Harward Businnes Review.
Eurostat. (2016). Survey on ICT Usage and E-Commerce in Enterprises.
Eurostat. (2017, March). Statistic Yearbook, Statistic Explained.
GSM Association. (2015). Mobile Insurance. Savings and Credit Report, London.
Hassenzahl, M., & Tractinsky, N. (2011). User Experience—A Research Agenda.
Behaviour & Information Technology, 25, 91–97.
III—Insurance Information Institute. (2017). Facts + Statistics: Distribution Channels.
Insurance Europe. (2017, August). Insurance Data.
Marsh. (2016, May). United States Insurance Market Report 2016.
SURVEY ON THE DIGITISED INSURANCE DISTRIBUTION IN EUROPE… 115
A Customer
Artificial intelligence (AI), 2, 4, experience, 2, 11, 44, 46, 70, 113
10–12, 16, 32, 33, 35, 42 loyalty, 4, 79–89
Automation, 3, 4, 11, 13, 40, 42, 47, relationship, 2, 4, 5, 12, 15, 22,
62, 78, 79, 103, 104, 106 36, 52, 62, 75–95, 102,
103, 105–109
Customised marketing, 78
B Cyber risk, 12, 13
Bancassurance, 63, 101
Big Data, 3, 12, 15, 17, 19, 30, 31,
41, 45, 46 D
Blockchain (technology), 2, 11, 13, Decision support system (DDS), 10
33, 40, 41, 45 Delivery system, 5, 52, 55–62, 67, 69,
Broker, 3, 4, 16–18, 36, 37, 56–58, 76, 77, 90
63, 64, 70, 99–103 Digital
brokers, 36, 37
consumers, 90
C disruption, 5, 29–47
Claims (process), 13, 34, 68 technology, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 26,
Clientelisation, 80 36, 45, 47, 69, 100–102, 113
Communication mix, 81, 84 Digitalisation, 2, 5, 7, 12, 14, 15, 45,
Comparison portal, 37, 64 46, 113
Complex services, 16, 60, 79, 102 Direct mailing, 81–83
Consumer behaviour, 7, 45, 76 Direct marketing, 5, 79–89
I
Incumbent, 3–5, 8, 30, 35, 42–45, 113 N
Information asymmetries, 14, 16–19, 68 Non life-insurance, 23, 61, 64, 101
Information technology (IT), 2, 8–11,
47, 57, 59, 77, 88, 89, 100
Insurance, 2, 7–26, 29, 51–70, O
76, 99–113 Off-board social media, 92–94
agency, 22, 47, 53, 57, 59, 61, 63, Omni-channel distribution, 102
79, 85, 91, 94, 99, 101 On-board social media, 92–94
company, 2, 3, 5, 9, 14, 19, 22, 24, On-demand insurance, 35, 38
30, 31, 35, 37–41, 44, 51–53, Outsourcing, 62
55, 60, 63–65, 67–70, 76, 78,
82, 83, 85, 87, 88, 90–93, 102,
103, 105, 106, 108, 112, 113 P
Distribution Directive, 5, 20, 21 Peer-to-peer (P2P) insurance, 38–40
distributive channels, 4, 46 Price aggregators,
product, 5, 11, 14, 15, 17, 18, 37, 64, 65
20–24, 52, 54, 56, 58, 63, 64, Price comparison website, 4, 18, 21,
81, 86, 101 63–67, 103
value chain, 2, 7, 11–19, 30, 34–36, Privacy protection, 69
40, 47, 100 Process innovation, 59
InsurTech, 2, 3, 5, 31, 32, 34–36, Product innovation, 59
38–45, 47, 75–95, 103
start-ups, 3, 5, 12, 29–47, 113
Interactive media, 81, 84, 86, 89 R
Internet of Things (IoT), 11–13, 15, Robo-advice, 2, 4, 16,
30, 39 32, 33, 35
IT, see Information Technology Robo-advisors, see Robo-advice
INDEX
119
S T
Service delivery system, Technological innovation, 1, 2, 9, 11,
56, 77 57–63, 76–79, 100, 101
Servuction, Telemarketing, 81–84
55, 56 Telematics, 8, 12, 14, 17, 39, 45, 86
Smart analytics,
14, 45, 47
Social channels, 92–94 V
Social media, 26, 94, 95, Value chain, see Insurance value chain
100, 102
strategy,
5, 89–94 W
Start-up, 2, 5, 31, 34, Wearable device (wearables),
35, 37–42, 44, 45 10–12, 14, 34–39, 69