Document View

A recent survey conducted by the New York-based Insurance Information Institute sampling customer opinion on their satisfaction with claims found that 77% were satisfied with how their claim was handled, 20% were dissatisfied, and 3% had no opinion. Ten years ago the answer was practically the same: 76% satisfied and 20% dissatisfied. Part of the reason there has been no progress in claims satisfaction would appear to be that customer expectations on service have grown enormously in the past 10 years.

Can we improve satisfaction among claimants?

For our customers, there are two defining moments in their relationship with us: when they pay their premium and when they have a claim.

A survey this year conducted by the New York-based Insurance Information Institute looked at the latter, sampling customer opinion on their satisfaction with claims. We restricted the question to actual claimants, defined as households with an auto insurance claim in the past three years.

We found that 77 percent were satisfied with how their claim was handled, 20 percent were dissatisfied, and 3 percent had no opinion.

Is this good or bad? How can we judge? If we were selling a product that brings instant gratification like Coke or Hershey bars, we would be quite distressed that 20 percent of customers did not like the product. But insurance has built-in characteristics that suggest that high levels of satisfaction will be difficult to attain.

For example, the basic fact that a claim has been filed implies that the customer has had an unpleasant or even a horrible experience. Even a minor discourtesy to a person in a sensitive emotional state may cause stress and lead to a feeling of dissatisfaction with the claims process.

We can get some sense of the significance of the 20 percent dissatisfaction level with claims by looking at experience in other countries. A survey just published by British Insurance Quality Service found that only 9 percent of auto insurance claimants were dissatisfied with the way their claim was handled-less than half the rate in the United States. Since the U.K. and United States auto insurance systems are roughly similar, it is not easy to explain why the U.K. claimants have a better experience than their counterparts here.

One clue to the difference may lie in another perspective on the data. We can look at how the public in the United States answered this question in prior years. Ten years ago the answer was practically the same as this year: 76 percent satisfied and 20 percent dissatisfied.

This result seems to fly in the face of reason. We know that companies have been exerting themselves to be more consumer-friendly and to make early contact with claimants. So why no progress in claim satisfaction?

Part of the reason would appear to be that customer expectations on service have grown enormously in the past 10 years. Service companies-hotels, airlines, banks and mutual funds-have all gone out of their way to be intensely customer-focused. Customers are getting used to being pampered and expect prompt, solicitous and attentive service.

This change in expectations is probably the reason why the causes of dissatisfaction with claims handling have changed radically in the past 10 years. In 1987, fully 38 percent of respondents cited insufficiency of the settlement amount as the source of the dissatisfaction. In 1997 this figure dropped to 14 percent.

The vast majority of dissatisfied claimants-more than 70 percent-are unhappy with the process of handling the claim, either in terms of service by insurance personnel or in the delay in settling the claim.

We know from focus group research that claimants want their hands held throughout the claims process. Where possible, claimants should be given a clear description of the claims process in terms of procedures and time frames, so they know what to expect and are not surprised by new steps in the claims process or by the length of time it takes for the process to move from one step to the next.

Another source of customer dissatisfaction may arise from the lack of job satisfaction on the part of claims adjusters. It is known from other service businesses that a key to customer satisfaction is job satisfaction among frontline employees. Satisfied employees lead to satisfied customers.

A recent survey conducted by Claims magazine suggests that not all is well in the world of adjusters. Claims professionals report that they are demoralized and do not feel they get the respect they deserve from their employers. They attribute their problems to downsizing and expense reduction programs.

Adjusting claims can be very stressful. Adjusters are dealing one-on-one with claimants. While the majority of claimants are honest, decent individuals, there are always the few who are not. And an adjuster only needs one difficult claimant to ruin his or her day. Over time, dealing with difficult claimants can wear an adjuster down, leading to early burnout.

There are a number of well-known techniques that can be used to avoid burnout. In general, a key factor in burnout is a lack of control. Employees have to deal with customers faceto-face, but feel they do not have enough control to solve the customers' problems. An obvious solution is to extend the employee's sphere of influence so they have more power to solve the problems of claimants.

Other methods of avoiding burnout include reinforcing support structures. Employees need to feel their superiors and coworkers appreciate and respect their work. Training sessions, encouraging teamwork and a culture that signals appreciation and a sense of belonging can improve morale and prevent employees from slipping into a burnout condition.

In addition, companies can encourage the use of the most traditional stress reliever: physical exercise. Our image with the public is determined by how we interact with them, particularly when they file a claim. At times of stress, a caring sympathetic claims professional can create enormous goodwill for the industry.