January, the evidence of its worth
has been more than anecdotal,
Evoy notes. “We’re 25% more
efficient, and we’ve seen quality
improve by 6%, which was a
pretty big leap because we were
not poor to begin with,” he says.
These numbers are all the
more estimable considering the
BPM layer is working with the
company’s aging claims system.
Granted, the current enterprise
claims system the company
uses, Siebel 6, is rather modern
for a legacy system, but
Shohreh Abedi, VP of claims
applications – IT, says there are
more enhancement to come
as the company transitions to
its modern enterprise claims
systems, Oracle’s Siebel 8.
“Normally, with BPM you get
better functionality with modern
claims systems,” Abedi says.
From an architectural point of
view, Farmers is leveraging BPM
to build consistent processes. “We
looked at all the different adjuster
processes and came up with a
standard one to build into the BPM
tool,” she says. “BPM has helped
us take our best practices and
processes and automate them as
much as possible.”
Automation begets con-sistency,
Evoy notes, adding that reducing
complexity for end users was
another primary goal. “My view
from the business was to give the
information to frontline people when
they need it and not rely on them
remembering to go get it,” he says.
“If they have to remember, your
consistency goes out the window
and then so does your ability to
achieve the highest quality as well.”
Yet, Abedi notes, adding BPM is
not merely a technical undertaking.
She says that carriers that build
BPM tools into their claims process
without re-examining underlying
processes may simply be
automating bad or unnecessary
practices. “To be successful, you
have to look at the processes and
see what actually should change,”
Abedi says, noting Farmers’ tight
collaboration between business and
IT also was vital. “This took months
of working hand-in-hand with
the business. Something like this
could not have been achieved by
requirements documents passing
back and forth.”
Abedi adds that the company
implemented a formal change
management process in order
to communicate the “hows
and whys” of the process to
its broader CSR base. “Some
companies feel that change
management is fluff, too touchy-
feely or a waste of money, but we
embraced the process and made
sure we had solid champions at
the senior levels of the business,”
she says. “People buy in when
they feel they have been heard.
We didn’t sit in an ivory tower,
coming up with a plan to force this
on the masses.”
With the system implemented
and end users happy, Farmers
can concentrate on the business
advantages it brings to bear. One
large benefit is shorter training
time. Evoy says this benefit will
pay dividends in the event of a
catastrophe when the company
needs to bring extra hands in
to its call center and rapidly
get them up to speed. “When
a hurricane comes, you have a
couple of days to prepare for it,”
he says. “We can now put 300
extra people on the floor and
have them do competent work.
That’s a big difference from the
past. Now, we can get consistent
quality even though we’re adding
hundreds of people on short
notice.” INN
;#JMM;7BOEFSWFMEF
i'SPN;B;;
UFDIOPMPHZ;
TUBOEQPJOU;;;
UIF;EJGGFSFODF;;
JO;UFSNT;PG;XIBU;
XF;DBO;OPX;EP;
GPS;UIF;CVTJOFTT;
BOE;UIF;DVTUPNFS;
JT;OJHIU;BOE;EBZ;u
and create financial reports. “From a maintenance standpoint, we’re sup-
porting a stripped down version of legacy, and had to learn new technolo-
gies in order to support ClaimCenter, but we’re getting more proficient as
we go along.”
More importantly, the modern system gives IT more power to deliver
what business users would like, Vandervelde says. Specifically, he cites the
functionalities engendered by operating in a browser-based environment,
noting the company recently linked the system to their website, enabling
Amica customers to report a claim online.
“From a technology standpoint, the difference in terms of what we can
now do for the business and the customer is night and day,” he says. “We
now enable customers to submit a first notice of loss to a claims handler
and track the status of a claim online. Prior to having the modern claims
systems that we now have, that would have been very difficult to do.”
ASSESSING OPTIONS
An insurer looking to redo the technology undergirding its claims process
certainly does not lack for choices. In the past decade, a plethora of claims
options has appeared in the market. This wasn’t always the case.
Now, many are designed specifically to work with service-oriented architectures, are typically configurable, browser-based and also have built-in
business intelligence tools. The rules-based scripting common to modern
systems helps route claims to the adjuster best suited to handle it during
first notice of loss. Features such as integrated workflow management capability, automated task management, document creation and business rules
configuration are table stakes for vendors seeking to make a sale. Since
claims, from a systems perspective, largely derives from financial systems,
many offerings feature automated reserving. Likewise, adjuster portals and
dashboards and better user interfaces for easy navigation also are standard
requirements. New systems also grant greater visibility into the workings
of third parties and processes such as salvage, subrogation and litigation.
This broader functionality dovetails with another nascent trend in claims:
the insertion of the customer in the claims process. Some modern systems
