Close this search box.

How carriers can transition to a Digital Customer Service experience

Deconstructing the Confusion The “Contractual Liability” (12)

How carriers can transition to a Digital Customer Service experience

Customers have become accustomed to digital experiences with other industries. Insurers will need to keep up, or risk falling behind and losing them to the competition.

Customer expectations have been reshaped in recent years as digital technologies have enhanced the experience. This is no less true of insurance. In fact, 50% of insurance customers rank personalized digital communications as a high priority. But while customers are increasingly turning to carrier websites and portals for support, a majority of customer service today is still provided over the phone or by email.

Dan Michaeli, CEO of Glia, says that while offline customer service is sometimes the preferred channel for customers, when customers are forced to disengage from the digital experience to receive support it leads to a frustrating experience and inefficiencies. And for carriers looking to transform fully to Digital Customer Service, an effective strategy can make or break the implementation.

Developing an interaction strategy

Michaeli notes that when customers interact with customer service, it’s a time when customer loyalty is most under stress. It’s crucial that the digital process remains seamless.

“Inefficiencies come into play when the customer begins online and is forced to move offline to have their needs met,” says Michaeli. “This means restarting the process on a call with a service rep who doesn’t know where the customer is in their journey. This may lead to a poor experience due to inefficient and ineffective customer service, in turn translating to higher      risk of policyholder churn.”

Carriers transitioning to a greater emphasis on digital interaction can begin by simply reiterating their long-established principle — that customers are the No. 1 priority. Michaeli      recommends establishing an “interaction strategy” that keeps this principle in mind at every touchpoint.

With an interaction strategy, Michaeli says each customer’s needs are recognized at the beginning of their digital journey and the carrier pairs the right interaction type with the needs of the customer. For routine questions, this might mean having a virtual assistant available 24/7 to provide an answer, without requiring human assistance. And for more complex questions or needs, the policyholder can interact by their preferred digital channel — text, chat, voice or video — with collaboration features such as CoBrowsing available when needed. With an interaction strategy in place, carriers can determine the optimal mix of digital, phone and automation to increase customer satisfaction while optimizing operational efficiency.

Taking the fear out of transformation

Michaeli notes transformation may strike many carriers as overwhelming, but it doesn’t have to be. He recommends a step-by-step approach, testing digital interactions within workflows and then expanding when ready.

“It’s best to begin with a workflow where a customer begins their experience online but has to finish over the phone,” says Michaeli “This statistically has the most significant impact on satisfaction. Forrester suggests this, seemingly minor, ‘digital disconnect’ of moving from on-screen to phone drops NPS by 29%.”

Michaeli notes that carriers who don’t invest in digital interaction capabilities risk falling behind competitors who are making the investment. Meanwhile, customer expectations continue to evolve beyond the experience they’ve traditionally delivered, making the need to transition more urgent.

“Customers typically buy on price and leave on experience,” said Michaeli. “So, they need to invest in Digital Customer Service now to complete the end-to-end digital experience. If they don’t, there’s a good chance their customers will leave to find a carrier that does.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related posts


Specific Technologies Driving Insurtech Investment in 2024

Understanding the Funding Decline The decrease in funding does not necessarily spell trouble for the insurance sector but instead highlights a strategic shift, the report suggests. “The insurance industry, like many sectors, is focusing on the most promising ventures with substantial insurance potential,” the report explains. “Insurers are directing their investments toward key areas and current trends such as embedded insurance, employee benefits, and cyber risk management. This strategic investment approach signals a forward-looking mindset within the industry.” Three Key Insurtech Trends for 2024 The report identifies three major trends shaping insurtech investments in 2024: Public Insurtech Companies: Financial and Growth Strategies The report also notes that public insurtech companies are prioritizing revenue growth as their main goal. These firms are restructuring their financial strategies to boost cash flow and capitalize on rising revenue streams. Their growth prospects are supported by expanding asset portfolios and strong market demand. “Public insurtech companies are focusing on revenue growth and optimizing their financial frameworks to increase cash flow,” the report states. “The growth potential for these companies is driven by increasing revenue opportunities, broadening asset bases, and a robust market for their services.” In summary, while global insurtech funding saw a decline in 2023, the industry’s focus on GenAI, digital process management, and connected insurance technologies is setting the stage for a dynamic and forward-looking 2024.

Read More

Insurer Secures Unanimous Supreme Court Victory in New York Choice of Law Dispute

In the world of sports, a clean sweep, a shutout, or a perfect game is the ultimate achievement. In the legal arena, a unanimous decision from the U.S. Supreme Court is equally rare and significant. In a notable legal triumph, Great Lakes Insurance SE achieved a unanimous 9-0 victory in the Supreme Court on February 21, 2024. This victory follows a protracted legal battle that began in the District Court of Pennsylvania, advanced to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and culminated in the Supreme Court’s decisive ruling. Background of the Case: Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Company The heart of the dispute was the insurance contract’s clause selecting New York law to govern any future legal conflicts. Although the financial implications of this case were relatively minor compared to the broader marine insurance industry, the insurer’s determination to uphold a crucial maritime legal principle has significant long-term implications for marine insurance. Faced with the insured’s counterclaims—including allegations of breach of fiduciary duty, insurance bad faith, and violations of Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices Law—the insurer was confronted with serious risks. Such claims could lead to the shifting of attorney’s fees, treble damages, and more, which might normally encourage insurers to settle rather than risk pursuing justice. However, Great Lakes Insurance, supported by The Goldman Maritime Law Group, opted to challenge the Third Circuit’s decision and seek clarity from the Supreme Court. Supreme Court Ruling: A Landmark Decision In a landmark ruling, Justice Brett Kavanaugh affirmed that choice of law provisions in maritime contracts should be upheld by default. This ruling is a major victory for establishing a consistent federal standard in maritime law and avoiding a patchwork of state laws that could complicate marine insurance disputes. The Supreme Court’s decision overturned the Third Circuit’s earlier judgment, which had questioned whether Pennsylvania’s public policy concerns might override the insurance contract’s choice of New York law. By upholding the New York choice of law clause, the Supreme Court eliminated the extra-contractual bad faith claims under Pennsylvania law, thereby ensuring that the dispute could be resolved based on the merits of the insurance claim itself. Significance of the Supreme Court’s Decision This ruling represents a significant advancement in maritime law, affirming that choice of law clauses in maritime contracts are generally enforceable. The decision establishes a clear, uniform legal framework for resolving maritime contract disputes, which will streamline the process and ensure fair adjudication of future insurance claims. Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion was particularly notable for its criticism of the 1955 Wilburn Boat v. Fireman’s Fund Insurance decision, which had previously influenced maritime insurance law. Thomas argued that Wilburn Boat was incorrectly decided and stressed that a uniform and enforceable set of rules is essential for the development of maritime law. Impact on the Marine Insurance Industry The Supreme Court’s decision sets a “bright-line” rule affirming that choice of law clauses are valid unless there is a strong argument against the selected jurisdiction. By endorsing New York’s insurance laws as a reasonable choice, the ruling supports a more consistent and predictable legal environment for marine insurers. This decision represents a major step forward in maritime law, helping insurers better assess risks, determine premiums, and ensure fair and efficient resolution of maritime insurance disputes.

Read More
Try your instant quote