Remember that Frank is speaking to an audience attending ISOTech……emphasis on \”tech\”.
Also understand, that every issue, problem and scenario identified in Frank\’s speech has a solution via an ISO product or service……or by one of the ISO subsidiaries.
ISO is the mother-of-all sources for insurance products (and many of them are very good)……but effective January 1, 1997 ISO also became a \”For Profit\” corporation. They are also very good at producing a profit.
The editorial responsibility of this site is not the subject of the article – but the staff behind The Insurance Journal – You\’ll see more errors on this site than any other – Constant poor output – they need an editorial staff – or at least to use SPELL CHECK !
Why do you have a problem with this? Is this not what \”business\” is about? Frank (Mr. Coyne…my opinion) has turned ISO from being a \”rate maker/stat agent\” to being a very succesful/profitable supplier of information to the insuring community which is critical to the survival of most companies. If you don\’t pay attention…you won\’t be one of the survivers, WAKE UP…it\’s all about \”actionable data\” that day-to-day executives need and can can turn their companies on a dime (and get nine cents change) when the data tells them to. The CAT companies (ie:ICAT) has proven this. (By the way, I don\’t even knoaw if ICAT is an ISO affiliated company).
Also, stop being concerned about \”spell check\” and focus on your business issues.
You are so correct. ISO is just like all our other vendors who promise the moon, just to get their foot in the door so they can make money. Never mind that the \”solution\” is only good for them, not necessarily for you. I have a dim view of all \”techies\” who promise new, but can\’t actually promise \”improved\”. the concentration in the industry on the technical side assumes that technology will solve all the problems; it can, but it also creates a lot of unintended problems; better technology does not necessarily translate into a better results.
Sounds like the age old problem of the techies and number crunchers telling us what we can have to work with rather than asking what we need and making it easier for experienced people to deal with. Hasen\’t changed in many years!
Y\’all are obviously in the insurance industry and I\’m not so maybe I\’m missing something but I think you\’re missing Frank\’s point.
What\’s at the root of insurance? Probabilities and predictions. What\’s the best strategy? Improve accuracy by data analysis. The \”haves\” will use the best tools and models available and get better at it and force the \”have nots\” out of business.
The ISO CEO makes a sound argument. Whether he\’s prophetic or not remains to be seen. But I wouldn\’t bet against him, he\’s got the data analysis and prediction tools to back up his claim!
I don\’t doubt that predictive modeling is useful. What I doubt is that it makes any sense to invest in technology that only delivers new technology. Old fashioned responsible underwriting and claims analysis cannot be understated. Too often we get the sale of technology but don\’t have people with the skills to make any use it or who can\’t make any sense of the information they assemble. What good does it do for a claims associate to run a claimsearch match report if they can\’t interpret what is means? So a prior claim was found from 1993? who interprets it? Using tools to move faster, does not necessarily make one more efficient, that\’s my argument. Why spend millions on thin-client, when even ISO relies on a mainframe at the end of the data stream?
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Sounds to me like Mr. Coyne has no need for people in our service industry, other tha programmers and actuaries.
Joe,
Remember that Frank is speaking to an audience attending ISOTech……emphasis on \”tech\”.
Also understand, that every issue, problem and scenario identified in Frank\’s speech has a solution via an ISO product or service……or by one of the ISO subsidiaries.
ISO is the mother-of-all sources for insurance products (and many of them are very good)……but effective January 1, 1997 ISO also became a \”For Profit\” corporation. They are also very good at producing a profit.
Hope their data modeling is more accurate than their press releases. Didn\’t even spell the company name right.
JCitizen
The editorial responsibility of this site is not the subject of the article – but the staff behind The Insurance Journal – You\’ll see more errors on this site than any other – Constant poor output – they need an editorial staff – or at least to use SPELL CHECK !
If a \”junior underwiriter\” only needs to key in a few shreds of data to get an answer, then why would there even exist a \”senior underwriter?\”
Why do you have a problem with this? Is this not what \”business\” is about? Frank (Mr. Coyne…my opinion) has turned ISO from being a \”rate maker/stat agent\” to being a very succesful/profitable supplier of information to the insuring community which is critical to the survival of most companies. If you don\’t pay attention…you won\’t be one of the survivers, WAKE UP…it\’s all about \”actionable data\” that day-to-day executives need and can can turn their companies on a dime (and get nine cents change) when the data tells them to. The CAT companies (ie:ICAT) has proven this. (By the way, I don\’t even knoaw if ICAT is an ISO affiliated company).
Also, stop being concerned about \”spell check\” and focus on your business issues.
PAY ATTENTION!!!!!!!
You are so correct. ISO is just like all our other vendors who promise the moon, just to get their foot in the door so they can make money. Never mind that the \”solution\” is only good for them, not necessarily for you. I have a dim view of all \”techies\” who promise new, but can\’t actually promise \”improved\”. the concentration in the industry on the technical side assumes that technology will solve all the problems; it can, but it also creates a lot of unintended problems; better technology does not necessarily translate into a better results.
Sounds like the age old problem of the techies and number crunchers telling us what we can have to work with rather than asking what we need and making it easier for experienced people to deal with. Hasen\’t changed in many years!
Y\’all are obviously in the insurance industry and I\’m not so maybe I\’m missing something but I think you\’re missing Frank\’s point.
What\’s at the root of insurance? Probabilities and predictions. What\’s the best strategy? Improve accuracy by data analysis. The \”haves\” will use the best tools and models available and get better at it and force the \”have nots\” out of business.
The ISO CEO makes a sound argument. Whether he\’s prophetic or not remains to be seen. But I wouldn\’t bet against him, he\’s got the data analysis and prediction tools to back up his claim!
I don\’t doubt that predictive modeling is useful. What I doubt is that it makes any sense to invest in technology that only delivers new technology. Old fashioned responsible underwriting and claims analysis cannot be understated. Too often we get the sale of technology but don\’t have people with the skills to make any use it or who can\’t make any sense of the information they assemble. What good does it do for a claims associate to run a claimsearch match report if they can\’t interpret what is means? So a prior claim was found from 1993? who interprets it? Using tools to move faster, does not necessarily make one more efficient, that\’s my argument. Why spend millions on thin-client, when even ISO relies on a mainframe at the end of the data stream?