About Emily Holbrook

Emily Holbrook is a former editor of the Risk Management Monitor and Risk Management magazine. You can read more of her writing at EmilyHolbrook.com.
Игроки всегда ценят удобный и стабильный доступ к играм. Для этого идеально подходит зеркало Вавады, которое позволяет обходить любые ограничения, обеспечивая доступ ко всем бонусам и слотам.

Q&A With David Hollander, Ernst & Young’s Global Insurance Advisory Leader

On the heels of Ernst & Young’s recently released 2012 Global Consumer Insurance Survey, I spoke with David Hollander, Ernst & Young’s global insurance advisory leader, to ask a few questions the report brought up.

The report states that, in regards to younger P/C consumers, the brand can command a higher premium. Do you find this surprising and why?

DH: Initially, yes. We thought many of the millennials would be active in price competitive shopping and that price would be dominant. However, when considering the findings, we realized that this segment is accustomed to massive ad campaigns focusing on the importance of brand across all industries and the finding became less of a surprise.

What do you see for the future of online P/C business? Will it eventually be completely online or will customers always demand face time?

DH: There are many products within the P/C spectrum. Many of those products will fit and move more quickly to a web-based sales mechanism. For some products, we do see a continued shift to more “direct to company” or “aggregator” usage over the next five to 10 years. However, in no way will consumer interaction be completely web based. Companies will counteract by bundling products prompting consumers to seek more info from a live person. Also, in our study, consumers resoundingly stated that when it comes to servicing, especially when making a claim or purchase they want personal interaction.

The report states that a mere 31% of P/C consumers in Brazil are satisfied with their claims experience, as compared to 71% in the U.S. and 68% in Mexico. Why do you think there is such a vast difference?

DH: The difference in Brazil can be attributed to several factors. While in the Americas the top three measures insurers can take to improve the claims experience were: Dealt with my claim more quickly (33%), provided a better level of communication with me during the claims process (32%) and provided a more personal service (23%).

In Brazil, the same top three measures were noted, but all were mentioned by more than 40% of the customers. For instance, more than 50% of the customers expect quicker service.

Additionally, as a response to the low interest rate environment in Brazil, some insurers directed their focus on efficiency gains. One of the steps some Brazilian insurers took was to tighten their negotiations with claims services providers resulting in a reduced quality of claims servicing to customers.

In your opinion, what was the most surprising finding of the Global Consumer Consumer Insurance Survey 2012?

DH: Actually, we found three. The first being the favorable position of the insurance industry overall as a trusted provider of insurance and other investment products. The second being the degree to which consumers desire to purchase multiple products from the same product provider. And the third is the degree to which the insurance industry is behind others in rewarding loyal customers and conducting customer retention programs.

Former Players Sue the NFL

Risk Management, along with numerous other publications, have covered the serious problem of concussions — and their repercussions — within the NFL. From the sad stories of Andre Waters, Terry Long and Tom McHale, the bad press surrounding the situation has worsened as science has begun to link frequent, recurring concussions to brain damage.

Many feel the NFL is to blame. Fingers have been pointed and now papers are being served as 11 ex-players filed a class-action lawsuit Friday in federal court in New Orleans. According to the documents, each has developed mental or physical problems from concussions suffered during their professional football careers. As the lawsuit states:

“Wanting their players on the field instead of training tables, and in an attempt to protect a multibillion dollar business, the NFL has purposefully attempted to obfuscate the issue and has repeatedly refuted the connection between concussions and brain injury to the disgust of Congress, which has blasted the NFL’s handling of the issue on multiple occasions.”

And it’s not only the NFL that is being taken to court over these allegations. Helmet maker Riddell was also named as a defendant in the suit. According to a recent report, the company marketed its football helmets as reducing or preventing concussions despite having no scientific or medical evidence to support the claim.

It is certainly easy to put the blame on the league and the maker of helmets worn during play, and in no way should they be considered innocent. But what about personal responsibility? What about risk management for thy self? Football is inherently a dangerous sport to be played at the players own risk. Should others be held fully responsible for a game that has, since the first game was played in 1869, been known to cause various injuries and even death (mostly indirectly)?

 

More Bad Press for Apple

Here we go again.

In response to Apple’s bad reputation for its alleged unethical working conditions and treatment of employees at its manufacturing plants in China, users of Apple products are fighting back. Local customers are planning to deliver a quarter of a million petition signatures to Apple stores in headquarters such as Washington, DC; New York City; San Francisco; London; Sydney; and Bangalore. The petition demands that the consumer electronics giant make the iPhone 5 “ethical.”

This Thursday, February 9 at 10am, local consumers plan to deliver a signed petition to the Apple store in Manhattan’s Grand Central Terminal. The movement was started by Mark Shields and his site, Change.org.

“I have been a lifelong Apple customer and was shocked to learn of the abusive working conditions in many of Apple’s supplier factories,” Shields. “At Foxconn, one of Apple’s biggest manufacturers, there is a history of suicides, abusive working conditions, and almost no pay. These working conditions are appalling, especially for Apple.”

The conditions at Apple’s Foxconn plant are hardly news as the topic has been in the national press for several months (we covered the issue last year in Risk Management and have written about it extensively on this blog). It seems, however, that Apple is being less-than-forthright in correcting a wrong that has been made public and, in doing so, has scarred the company’s reputation. What will it take for Apple to get a hold of a risk that is affecting their image and, possibly to come, their bottom line? Their recent, minimalist damage control methods may not be enough.

January/February Issue of Risk Management Now Online

 

The January/February issue of Risk Management is now online here.

Included are features covering:

This issue’s columns cover:

If you enjoy what you seen online, you can subscribe to the print edition to enjoy even more content.

Please let us know what you think in the comments below. And stay tuned to the blog for even more coverage in the future. Lastly, you can follow the magazine on Twitter, “like” us on Facebook and join our LinkedIn group.