By consistently chasing perfection you are assured of achieving excellence

Driving organizational consistency is arguably one of the greatest challenges facing any claims organization. From indemnity and expense trends to corporate culture; consistency, or lack thereof, ultimately defines outcomes. Given the importance, what is it that so many companies are mired with inconsistency?

Certainly this isn’t for lack of trying. From state laws, rules, regulations, mandates, caselaw and procedure manuals, there is a bevy of information that should point everyone in the right direction. Arguably, following protocol should be no different than a quarterback telling the running back to execute a 3-6 dive on a third and one.  Like football, what looks good on paper may not always reflect the challenges of reality.

Just as a running back has to think on his feet, so do those executing on day to day decisions.  Organizations win because they consistently execute basic blocking and tackling. Whether it’s the Ohio State Buckeyes on the gridiron, Southwest Airlines in the air,  or the executive in the corner office,  decisions are made that drive results. Is every decision going to be right? Of course not, but winning organizations also have a knack for learning from mistakes.

As I discuss in my new book, Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules To Take Your Claims Organization From Ordinary to Extraordinary, attitude plays a pivotal role in driving consistency. The simplest way to achieving this is by hiring the right people at all levels of the organization. Herein lies the problem; just who are the right people and how do you find them?

I recently had a claims executive from a large insurer lamenting that he couldn’t hire people fast enough. While getting seats filled was a priority, bigger problems were emerging as their turnover rate hit fifty percent and quality results fell through the floor. All the procedure manuals in the world won’t drive consistency in that type of hectic environment. But what will happen are poor hiring decisions that rush unqualified candidates into production roles. Taking the time to find the right people shouldn’t be a luxury; it should be part of the successful business model.

Also remember that consistency is not always good. Consider those who pick random data points and consistently strive to simply meet a number. Ask yourself, what good is looking at 100% of all cars in 24 hours if there is a 50% supplement rate? Rather, the truly successful will strive for consistent outcomes that benefit all stakeholders, both internal and external.

During a recent meeting with a health insurer, I was questioned as to why they should alter their business practices to improve subrogation results when they were enjoying a year of record profits. While the existing processes may be a benefit to the internal stakeholders, they came at the expense of policyholders who saw premiums increase 15% during this same time period. While this may be sustainable in the short term, it is not an effective business model. Rather, it creates a tremendous opportunity for competitors to improve internal workflows while gaining market share as the result of decreased premiums.

 It simply isn’t possible to drive consistently excellent outcomes without the right paradigm for success. Instead of focusing on “what we do right”, stress “what we do wrong” which will allow organizations to take tremendous strides towards success. To succeed there needs to be consistency of purpose, process, technology, goals and people. The latter are what will transform the organization from ordinary to extraordinary. This winning paradigm can be all consuming to the extent that those executing on the basics not only accept change but embrace it.

While perfection may not be attainable, consistently pursuing it will lead to excellence. The road to success begins with an end to end process that focuses on the totality of the product rather than singular, often meaningless, points of data. As discussed in Re-Adjusted, this organizational calibration is the foundation upon which perpetual success can be built.

____________

Christopher Tidball is a claims consultant and author of Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules To Take Your Claims Organization From Ordinary To Extraordinary. His rules for success have been featured on MSNBC, CBS Market Watch, ABC, Yahoo Finance, Career Builder, Kiplinger’s and the Wall Street Journal. To learn more about taking your organization from ordinary to extraordinary, please visit www.christidball.com or e-mail chris@christidball.com.

Following Trevor Bayne on the road from ordinary to extraordinary

How many Trevor Bayne fans were out there last week?   It’s amazing how a few short days coupled with an intense focus on executing the fundamentals can launch someone from obscurity to instant celebrity.  Welcome to the world of Trevor Bayne, the latest winner of the Daytona 500.  

Late last year, Bayne had 4000 fans on his Twitter page.  Just twenty four hours after his improbable win he added another 24,000, which continues to grow exponentially.     

But how is it that just one day after his twentieth birthday he was able to pull off such a stunning feat?  Simple; basic blocking and tackling which is exactly how you can take your organization from ordinary to extraordinary as well!

Clearly, Bayne recognized that his starting position in the bottom half didn’t bode well for his chances.   By understanding what he was up against, he was able to leverage three critical things to come out ahead; people, processes and technology.  

The same holds true for claims organizations, often hamstrung by a myriad of legislative, environmental and staffing challenges.   The reality is that not everybody can emerge from the backfield to win the race, yet given the right tools, training and resources, the challenge can become immensely easier. 

There is no question that insurance claims can be one of the most challenging of all professions.  Ever the whipping boy, it seems that claims organizations are in a constant  struggle to please everyone; customers, shareholders, agents, underwriters, actuaries, executives and the list goes on.  

As discussed in “Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules To Take Your Claims Organization From Ordinary To Extraordinary” the rapid road to success comes with a change in paradigm.   Rather than focusing on what is wrong, take the time to determine what is right.   Just as faith, perseverance and determination led Trevor Bayne to victory; these same core principles provide the foundation for organizational success.     

Many people have heard the acronym, K.I.S.S., or keep it simple stupid.   Yet human nature tends to have us complicate matters.   To really boil it down consider that an organization is only as good as their worst employee.   All the technology, gimmicks and gadgets in the world can’t fix that one fundamental problem that so often stands in the way of success.  

Far too often the solutions lie right in front of managers striving for success, yet they are constantly confronted with roadblocks.   Those who have spent time in claims organizations have not only confronted the impediments to success, but have seen the crutches used to prop up what is seemingly a three legged stool.  

“You don’t understand the venue”, “This is a difficult claims environment”, “We can’t prove the injury was pre-existing”, “It’s against company policy to terminate without eighteen verbal warnings, a doctoral thesis and a note from the CEO.”  There is a seemingly bottomless well to the excuses that result in far too many organizations being mired in mediocrity.  

There is no question that getting to extraordinary doesn’t happen overnight.   It takes time, patience and a bold plan of action that will often deviate from the norm.   But when it happens, people will know and look on in awe at what has been accomplished.  Just ask Trevor Bayne. 

But defying the odds is what transforms great organizations.   How many people gave credence to Sam Walton’s plan to redefine retail?  What was the response when Herb Kelleher sought to transform the airline industry?   Perhaps nobody had it tougher than Bill Gates and his crazy vision that computing would define the future.  

Perhaps nobody understands this better than Indianapolis Colts President Bill Polian, who has taken multiple NFL teams from ordinary to extraordinary.  As General Manager of the Buffalo Bills, he focused on young talent to send his team to four consecutive Super Bowls.    He moved to the Carolina Panthers, creating one of the most successful expansion teams in history.    As for the Indianapolis Colts, his vision has resulted in a true dynasty.

The common denominator in each of these situations was bold vision, audacious goals, thinking outside of the box and butting heads with the status quo.   In a day and age when mediocrity has become the accepted norm, those willing to take chances can gain a tremendous competitive edge. 

Consider who in your organization has the “we’ve always done it this way” paradigm.    By understanding that change is the only constant that can result in success, you have taken the first step towards extraordinary.     Just as Trevor Bayne has changed the paradigm on the NASCAR circuit, so too, can you when it comes to claims process transformation.  

 _____

Christopher Tidball is a claims consultant and the author of Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules To Take Your Claims Organization From Ordinary to Extraordinary.   To learn more, please visit www.christidball.com or e-mail chris@christidball.com. 

The importance of Chain of Custody and Preservation of Evidence

With spoliation of evidence claims on the rise, insurers need to be increasingly aware of steps that must be taken to preserve damaged property.   To better understand this, it is important to first recognize and understand the chain of custody. 

The inception of the chain of custody is the point in time at which evidence is collected and the chain must be maintained until the evidence is disposed of.   Evidence comes in all shapes and sizes, and depending upon the nature of your claim must be cared for in a variety of different ways.   This chain ensures continuity in the accountability and is essential as any break in the chain may invalidate admissibility in court. 

The chain of custody is a chronological written record of those individuals who have had custody of the evidence from its initial acquisition until its final disposition. These persons in the chain of custody must be identified and any person coming in contact with the evidence must be documented.

Ideally there will be an evidence custodian.   It is incumbent upon the custodian to be a steward of the evidence while documenting everything that happens through the lifecycle of the evidence process.   Even more critical is an understanding of the various state laws pertaining to evidence and spoliation thereof, which can leave the custodian liable for damages. 

It is often advisable to utilize an independent Evidence Custodian as this will minimize charges of tampering with evidence.   By securing evidence in an independent location, all parties associated with the claim will have access to the evidence. 

Another key part of the process involves the utilization of Evidence Receipts.   Evidence receipts are provided to those who deposit evidence.   The Evidence Custodian will always retain the original, a second goes to the person depositing the evidence and a third goes to a case file.   Having the ability to electronically retain this documentation and back up in an offsite, secured location is ideal.   

The original chain of custody form becomes a voucher and is given a voucher number when it is presented to the evidence custodian. Number evidence vouchers consecutively from inception to the current date.   This original voucher should not leave the custodian with the exception of submission to a court of law as evidence.  

An Evidence Sub voucher should be utilized to document any changes in the chain of custody that occur when the evidence leaves the evidence room.  Consider a situation in which a mold sample leaves the evidence room with the plaintiff attorney and is turned over to a toxicology expert for analysis, in which case a sub voucher would be utilized.  The number of the sub voucher should reflect the number of the original. 

Disposition of Evidence occurs when the materials in custody are no longer needed at which time the property should be turned over to the proper owner or if unknown to an applicable insurer, state or federal agency. 

_____

Christopher Tidball is a claims consultant and the author of Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules To Take Your Claims Organization From Ordinary to Extraordinary.   His tips for success have been featured on MSNBC, CBS Market Watch, ABC, Yahoo Finance and in the Wall Street Journal and Kiplinger’s.   To learn more about optimizing your organizational results, please visit www.christidball.com or e-mail chris@christidball.com. 

Insourcing or outsourcing: it comes down to people, processes and technology

An often asked question by business leaders is why should I pay someone to do the work when I can just do it myself?  Given my position of providing support services to a wide variety of industries from insurance carriers and hospitals to utilities and governments my answer may come as a surprise.

There is absolutely no need whatsoever to outsource if, and only if, an organization has the resources and infrastructure to do it better internally.   Having spent more than twenty years in the confines of multiple Fortune 500 companies, I can attest to the limitations that exist which have given rise to the myriad of vendors plying a variety of trades. 

The most common obstacle to doing something internally is manpower.  Businesses have become increasingly wary of expanding their workforce for a variety of reasons.   Until there is some semblance of confidence in the economic direction of the country, this is unlikely to change.   Beyond that are levels of bureaucracy that can sometimes impede interal production.  As a result, it is sometimes easier to look outwards for assistance. 

From in sourcing processes to using low cost vendors, expenses often are the overriding factor in making decisions.   While perceived upfront costs should always be a consideration, business leaders should never minimize the potential costs associated with lack of expertise, inefficiencies or dumbed down processes used to drive down price points. 

Consider the case of a large financial institution that opted to utilize a low bid vendor for subrogation collections.   Certainly the upfront costs were slightly cheaper than other bidders.  But to achieve those price points, the service provider relied on a lower skill set of employees which turned out to be a costly error after unfair trade practice allegations began to surface.   In the end, the costs of the ensuing litigation more than erased the upfront perceived savings. 

During my tenure overseeing claims vendor management for a large insurer, daily solicitations were the norm.   Invariably, they always said the same thing.   They were unique, innovative and better than the competition.   I was certainly not alone, as this ubiquitous presentation is what procurement staff in any industry is confronted with.    The challenge is to separate those who can from those who say they can and the reality is that if a service provider has not walked in the shoes of their potential business partner they will be ineffective. 

There is a reason that some products cost more than others.   Reliability, quality, safety all drive our decision making process when looking at commodities such as cars.    The same should hold true when deciding how to run a process.   Can I do it better myself or do I need help?  Will my help know what they are doing or will they get me sued?  Can I save money beyond the upfront perceived savings?   Can I reduce my internal staffing costs? What is my realistic net back to the bottom line? 

Numbers can be very fuzzy and those presenting the numbers should be held to account.   Those asking the questions need to understand what their internal results have been and then measure them against what is being presented.   If something is too good to be true, it probably is just that.  If much of the proposed savings come in the form of “soft” savings, be leery.   Effective and credible business partnes will give proposed client’s solid numbers with a quantifiable return on investment.  

The reality is that the most successful organizations identify the most effective processes.  Certainly an organization isn’t going to build a fleet of cars for their staff because it wouldn’t be cost effective; unless you happen to be GM, Ford or Honda.    So the million dollar question remains at what point to economies of scale make sense for internalization of process?  The answer is that it varies, but what doesn’t vary is the need for a quality at all costs approach.  

Expertise costs money.   But with expertise comes results.   Simply put, if given a choice between paying $100 dollars for something that could probably get you $110 back or paying $150 dollars for someone who could guarantee getting you $500 back what would you do?  The same holds true with business processes relationships.  

Rather than looking at the upfront cost savings, focus on the long term benefits.  While a percentage point here or there may be enticing, is it really worth it if millions of dollars are left on the table?  As the Chinese proverb says, “if you are planning for a year, sow rice; if you are planning for a decade, plant trees; if you are planning for a lifetime, educate people.”

 _____________

Chris Tidball spent more than twenty years in a number of claims related functions in the insurance industry.  He is a business consultant, contributing writer to Claims Magazine and the author of Kicked to the Curb and Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules To Take Your Claims Organization from Ordinary To Extraordinary.  He works with the insurance, healthcare, utility and government sectors to improve their bottom line.  To learn more, please visit www.christidball.com.

Bailment: the devil is in the details

In many respects, subrogation can be one of the most challenging aspects of the end to end claims process.  Perhaps nowhere is this more evident than the pursuit of complex recoveries, such as those associated with bailment.   According to Blackstone’s definition, “Bailment, from the French bailor, to deliver, is a delivery of goods in trust, upon a contract, express or implied, that the trust shall be faithfully executed on the part of the bailee.”

In layman’s terms, bailment is the delivery of tangible personal property to a person on the condition that it be returned by the bailee to the bailor as soon as the purpose of the delivery is complete. When thinking of bailment, consider situations involving checking baggage with an airline or leaving your vehicle with a mechanic for repairs.  When considering bailment, note that some arrangements benefit the bailor, some the bailee and others enjoy mutual benefit.   As a general rule, the bailee owes the bailor the duty to use reasonable care to safeguard the property.  However, the standard of care is dependent upon who receives the benefit of the bailment.  

Consider a couple of scenarios:

If a friend loans me his chainsaw, I am the sole beneficiary and owe a high degree of care.   Let’s say that this same friend wants to take a vacation and asks to leave his car on my property so as to have it out of the street, then the benefit is to him and the duty of care owed is greatly diminished. 

What is most often seen in the P&C industry involves various degrees of benefit associated with automobiles, watercraft and other sources of transportation.   As a general rule, a cause of action arises in situations where there is delivery of bailed property that is either lost, damaged or stolen.    In such instances, a presumption of negligence on the part of the bailee arises putting the onus on them to show that they exercised a reasonable degree of caution. 

It is important to recognize that the degree of care varies and causes of action can be limited by contractual language, such as that contained in many contracts for self storage units.    But it is also important to recognize that courts have also held that this type of loss may not constitute bailment, as the self storage unit never had physical possession of the property. 

Another important distinction arises between bailment and consignment, where the goods are merely placed with a middleman and are governed by Section 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC).    The code defines a consignment as a transaction in which a person delivers goods to a merchant for purposes of sale, and (a) the merchant deals in goods of that kind under a name other than the name of the person making delivery, is not an auctioneer and is not generally known by its creditors to be substantially engaged in selling the goods of others; (b) the goods must have a value of at least $1,000 at the time of delivery; (c) the goods are not consumer goods immediately before delivery; and (d) the transaction does not create a security interest. 

As a bailment is not for sale, it is not subject to UCC Article 9, but rather is entrusted property as defined under UCC Article 2-403(3).    This is why a proper claims investigation is critical to identify the terms of any agreements entered into between multiple parties. 

It is also important to distinguish between bailment and license.   A good example of licensure is a vehicle parked at a municipal parking meter.   By license, the vehicle owner may obtain permission to park (fee).  Failure to pay that fee would be trespass and result in a fine.   Licensor has no obligation to be vigilant over property, nor may they retain the property.  

However, bailment can arise if a person delivers their vehicle to a parking facility and transfers possession to an attendant, such as a valet.    As a general rule parking lots are generally absolved from liability in situations where there has been no release of care, custody and control unless a cause of action can be created against the owner’s or their employees. 

Similarly, it is important to distinguish between bailment and a sale, with the latter taking place once possession has been transferred and consideration for the property made.  

To determine if bailment applies, consider the following:

1)     Bailment is not a contract,  but could have a contract involved;

2)     Bailment is not a tort, but a tort may have been committed;

3)     Bailment is not a sale because the goods are temporarily in the bailee’s possession;

4)     Bailment is not a license, because obligations are imposed on the  bailee. 

As I discuss in Re-Adjusted, 20 Essential Rules to Take Your Claims Organization from Ordinary to Extraordinary, the devil is in the details.  This is why it is so critical to have a well thought out investigation that delves into all of the aspects and nuances of claims that are so often overlooked.   While subrogation can be a very complex, and often misunderstood, aspect of claims it can also be incredibly profitable for those taking the time to dig deep and find the pot of gold that is often overlooked. 

 ____

Christopher Tidball is a claims consultant and the author of Kicked to the Curb and Re-Adjusted.  With more than twenty years of proven claims experience, he provides innovative solutions to help client’s improve their bottom line.    His ”20 Essential Rules”  for self improvement and business success have been featured on dozens of media outlets, including ABC, CBS Market Watch, Yahoo Finance, MSNBC, Wall Street Journal and Kiplinger’s.    To learn more, please visit www.christidball.com or call (818) 409-6016.  

Missed Subrogation: Bad Business or Bad Business Practice?

When it comes to claims processes, insurance companies are anything but equal.   While some strive for excellence, others are mired in perpetual mediocrity.   When looking at the end to end claims process, there may be no greater area of opportunity than subrogation.  Compounding matters is the complex question of whether failure to properly pursue subrogation is simply bad business or do policyholders have a legitimate cause of action?

Having managed a variety of claims processes during a twenty year career, I will be the first to attest to the opportunities that truly exist.   As discussed in my newly released book, Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules to Take Your Claims Organization from Ordinary to Extraordinary, there may be no bigger pot of gold than subrogation. 

As fiduciaries, it is incumbent upon insurers to take the requisite steps to protect the interests of their policy holders.  As premiums are correlated to losses, so too are they related to recoveries, which serve as a net back to the corporate bottom line.    Lackluster results in this area can give rise to premiums being higher than they would be had the insurer utilized every possible tool at their disposal to maximize their subrogation returns.   Given the dramatic rise in health insurance premiums, this is an industry that should be particularly attuned to improving subrogation results so as to reign in rising costs. 

While there are a myriad of solutions, many are often overlooked.  In my dealings with a number of domestic and international insurers, it is not uncommon to find carriers missing subrogation on a significant percentage of claims.   Adjuster errors can range from poor investigations and improper liability assessments to limited statutory comprehension and reliance on third party representations of no coverage without any independent verification thereof.   

In our very litigious society, steps to improve not only subrogation, but the entire claims handling process, gives way to a bevy of benefits.  In addition to protecting the company from increasingly creative litigation; cost containment, indemnity accuracy and recovery optimization will translate into lower premiums giving carriers a substantial competitive edge.  

There is no question that a myriad of solutions are available in the marketplace, perhaps in direct correlation to the recognition by insurers that they could do better.   It is equally as important to recognize that solutions can be an exercise in futility without the right people in place.  

Arguably there is no greater organizational challenge than cultivating and developing a team to effectively execute deliverables.   In the world of sports, teams that block and tackle consistently are the ones that win championships.    The same holds true when it comes to business, where consistency improves outcomes.  

 But beyond simply gaining an edge on the competition, proper claims execution is not only good business, but a good business practice.   In the end, the carriers that rise to the challenge by leveraging people, processes and technology will be the last ones standing in an increasingly competitive and litigious environment.  

 ++++

Christopher Tidball is a freelance writer, insurance consultant and author of Kicked to the Curb and Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules To Take Your Claims Organization From Ordinary To Extraordinary.  By combining  claims experience with innovative process improvements, his client’s recognize a dramatic improvement in outcomes with no new money required.   To learn more, please visit www.christidball.com or e-mail chris@christidball.com.

Forget free agency; build your winning team through the draft

Developing staff is arguably one of the greatest challenges to effectively managing a claims organization.  It’s a delicate balance to please customers, shareholders, board members and executives while executing basic blocking and tackling maneuvers in an increasingly litigious environment often wrought with fraud.  

So what steps can managers take to effectively improve their organization?  As discussed in my new book, Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules to Take Your Claims Organization from Ordinary to Extraordinary, focusing in on hiring can fundamentally transform an organization.   

1-      Hire the best and the brightest.   In a day and age when doing more with less has become the new norm, it is impossible to move your organization ahead with mediocrity.   While this may seem overly simplistic, consider how many times hasty hires have been made simply to fill an open seat before a new hire requisition is pulled due to inactivity. 

 2-      Retaining your talent.   While the economy may be bad now, it won’t be forever.  By rewarding the best and the brightest, you are almost guaranteed that your talent won’t flee when things improve.   Rather than being the company that takes advantage of the situation today by skimping on compensation, consider innovative ways to reward employees.  Also keep in mind that rewards don’t have to be monetary in nature; but do have to reflect the importance of the individual and their value to the organization.

 3-      Tenure doesn’t necessarily equate to talent- If I had a dime for every time a supervisor asked permission to hire someone based solely upon their experience, I would have retired years ago.  Truth be known, many of my best hires had no insurance experience whatsoever!  Rather, they had a positive attitude, a willingness to learn and an insatiable curiosity which served as a foundation for success. 

 4-      Get rid of the whiners- Nothing does more to undermine the success of an organization than whiners and complainers.   In a typical organization, there is a 20/60/20 rule.  Twenty percent of the staff are leaders and producers.  These are your A players.   Another twenty percent are whiners.  They complain about management, long hours and excessive inventory while never providing a solution.    These are your C players.   The remaining sixty percent wave in the wind.   With weak management, they gravitate towards the whiners; hindering  production , quality and results.   With strong management, they move towards the A players, providing a catalyst for success.   Simply getting rid of the whiners provides the very foundation upon which a successful organization can be built.

As former UCLA basketball coach John Wooden once said, “I’d rather have a lot of talent and a little experience than a lot of experience and a little talent.” Given Wooden’s immense success, it’s hard to ignore this sage advice.  

While we can teach claims, we can’t teach attitude.  While we can train on processes, procedures and techniques, we can’t get rid of bad habits that so often accompany poor performers.    If given a choice between taking over an office of highly tenured employees or starting up an organization comprised of trainees, my money is on the latter to be far more successful. 

This isn’t to say that there aren’t good, qualified, experienced candidates.  There are.  But like a dominant football organization, dynasties are built through the draft; not free agency.   By adopting this mindset, the identification and hiring of the right people becomes ingrained in the corporate culture.  

So how does one find the A players?  While there is no magical formula, there are steps that can be taken.   I am a big proponent of personality testing, especially as it pertains to insurance claims.  Not everybody is suited for a career in claims.  There are certain personality traits, and perhaps even flaws, that lead to success.   

Identifying people with experience in organizations that have a reputation for hiring the best and the brightest is a great way to find talent.  Generally speaking, candidates with this type of experience are highly motivated, hard working, go getters.    By the same token, one must proceed with caution when considering candidates from organizations with a reputation for hiring mediocrity. 

As an organization adopts this hiring paradigm, they will see long term benefits as those being hired move into management and hire like minded individuals with the traits necessary for success.   Consider this approach as building your team using the draft, a business proposition with results borne out by Indianapolis Colts president Bill Polian who has used bold vision to build champions throughout his career.    As general manager of the Buffalo Bills, he used young talent to build a team that participated in four straight Super Bowls.   He then took on the challenge of creating champions in the Carolina Panthers, arguably one of the most successful expansion teams in NFL history. 

Attaining the top takes not only vision, but the ability to bring together players and processes in a manner than embodies a winning attitude.   Instilling a culture that is dedicated to quality and results while frowning upon mediocrity creates a mindset that being the best is of utmost importance.  

It is this mindset, brought about by winning attitudes that give companies across the business spectrum an incredible competitive advantage.    The common denominator, without fail, is people and a culture that doesn’t accept mediocrity, even if there is a higher cost.  

 _____

Christopher Tidball is a freelance writer, insurance consultant and author of Kicked to the Curb and Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules to Take Your Claims Organization from Ordinary to Extraordinary.  By focusing on continual process improvements, he provides a growing network of businesses with solutions to dramatically outperform the competition.  To learn more, please visit www.christidball.com or e-mail chris@christidball.com. 

 

Putting the brakes on sudden acceleration

A very predictable dynamic evolved as increasing numbers of Toyota automobiles were involved in crashes attributed to sudden acceleration.   For a time, it seemed that anyone driving a Toyota involved in an accident had a get out of jail free card, even if they were fault.  

In a reversal of fortune, Toyota seems to now have the get out of jail free card, as federal highway safety officials absolved the electronics in vehicles while blaming driver error for most of the accidents.  

Talk about upsetting the apple cart.  Insurers and trial lawyers, alike, are now scrambling to make the next move.   Not too long ago, The Insurance and Financial Advisor reported that State Farm was seeking $30 million dollars from Toyota for damages associated with crashes allegedly caused by product defects.   Toyota has already been fined $16.4 million by the federal government and recalled 7.7 million vehicles as the result of stuck accelerators, which had been blamed for multiple crashes.  

According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and NASA, there were three main causes for sudden acceleration.   Two of them, sticky accelerator pedals and floor mats that trapped the throttle, were addressed through product recalls.   The third, and most common problem, was drivers hitting the gas when they thought they were hitting the brakes.    

To date, millions have been paid in related claims by insurers and fines by Toyota.    These findings certainly call into question legitimate damages that Toyota may have, as well.    The automaker lost an extraordinary amount of money and received an inordinate amount of bad press as the result of early conclusions that have now been largely dispelled. 

In the case of State Farm, and other insurers, they have paid out claims as the result of crashes involving Toyotas subject to the recall.   Their insured’s have also paid out deductibles, which are often required as part of one’s insurance contract.   If Toyota paid money that it is now determined was unwarranted, do they have a legitimate cause of action for recovery? 

What about the drivers that were actually at fault?  Many had their deductibles waived and avoided surcharges for at fault accidents.    Will insurers take the time to re-rate those accidents accordingly, as the at fault drivers should not get a premium discount subsidized by claim free drivers.  

As talked about in an earlier Toyota blog, the challenge for State Farm and others would be to prove their case, as it was my contention early on that many of the accidents involving sudden acceleration were actually caused by driver error.   After twenty years in the insurance industry, the behavior of people involved in accidents is pretty predictable when blame can be affixed elsewhere.  

Also in the mix is the plethora of lawsuits related to personal injury and diminution of value.    Toyota is being sued by at least 57 individuals for injury or death and is being inundated with class action lawsuits, which currently total 177.   As a result, these cases have been ordered consolidated by a panel of federal judges and will be heard in proximity to Toyotas American headquarters in Torrance, CA.    Such class-action lawsuits “are more scary for Toyota than the cases where people actually got injured,” said Tom Baker, a University of Pennsylvania law professor.   ”A super-big injury case would be $20 million. But you could have millions of individual car owners who could (each) be owed $1,000. If I were Toyota, I’d be more worried about those cases.”

Toyota owners suing the company contend their vehicles have dropped in value because of the recalls and that Toyota knew all along about safety problems but concealed them from buyers. They point to evidence such as Kelley Blue Book’s decision this month to lower the resale value of recalled Toyotas an average of 3.5 percent, ranging from $300 less for a Corolla to $750 less for a Sequoia.

In addition, other automakers are being dragged into the melee.  In Canada, a class action lawsuit has been filed against Pontiac, makers of the Vibe which is a joint venture between the U.S. automaker and Toyota, as owners have alleged it’s value has dimished as the result of Toyota’s issues.  

Now that these studies have been released, the question remains as to the legitimacy of pending litigation.   While we don’t know what the future will hold,  we can gain some perspective through the prism of history.   In 2008, Ford paid more than 800,000 Explorer owners damages for diminished value as the result of that vehicles rollover danger.   In addition, attorneys reaped a windfall of $25 million dollars in fees and costs. 

Now that Toyota has been largely exonerated, one must wonder how hard they will fight back to regain a reputation tarnished in large part by bad publicity and what now appears to be somewhat inaccurate, and certainly premature, conclusions.  

__________________

Chris Tidball is the author of Kicked to the Curb and Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules to take your Claims Organization from Ordinary to Extraordinary.  His career spans twenty years in the insurance industry and now provides claims and subrogation consultative services.     To learn more, please visit www.christidball.com or email  chris@christidball.com. 

The real unemployment rate and the devil in the details

It seems that with increasing frequency, there are diverging results in economic numbers.   Those put forth by the administration say one thing; generally that the economy is improving.  Those put forth  by more credible independent sources reflect ongoing problems. 

Perhaps nowhere was this more evident than Gallup’s announcement last week that unemployment rose to 9.8%, while underemployment hit 19.2%.   This was in stark contrast to Labor Department numbers that showed a decrease in unemployment to 9.0%. 

Prior to Friday’s report, it was broadly speculated that unemployment would actually rise to 9.5% as the result of lower than expected job creation.   As is often the case, the devil is in the details which can be quite inconvenient for anyone in campaign mode.  

Economists had expected January to bring about 149,000 new jobs.  What they didn’t expect was a paltry 36,000, far short of the number needed to bring about any semblance of economic recovery.  While the administration and media have  been busy touting the reduced unemployment rate, they have completely overlooked the half million people who have simply given up on finding work and left the labor force, continuing a downward trend to 64.2 percent of the population which is the lowest level since March 1984. 

Clearly there is mounting evidence that the administration and congress need to focus more on job creation.   Certainly the extension of Bush era tax cuts should have served as a catalyst to begin the re-employment of millions of Americans would have been kicked to the curb. 

Since that didn’t occur, perhaps it is time for those in Washington to recognize that it may be their very own policies, rules and regulations that are hampering growth.   After all, why is it that millions of jobs get sent overseas each year?  With increasing frequency, business owners are showing that they don’t have the time, money or patience to deal with burdensome regulation, organized labor or excessive taxation by opting to do business elsewhere. 

In his book Kicked to the Curb, business consultant Christopher Tidball shares a blueprint for both job creation and finding jobs in a difficult economy.   In a recent interview on Cox radio affiliate WOKV he suggested that more effort needs to be put into giving businesses what they need to create jobs, which far too often runs counter to the needs of bureaucrats, lobbyists and special interests. 

With increasing strife in Egypt and the Middle East, perhaps now it is time to resume issuing permits to drill for Oil in the Gulf or opening up ANWR for energy exploration.   Businesses remain concerned about costs associated with Obamacare, which in and of itself has cost the nation millions of jobs.   Equally as concerning is the ongoing debate about Cap and Trade, a job killing proposition that would likely result in cross generational double digit unemployment.   By eliminating these fears, the floodgates will open for those seeking employment.  

While each new mandate, rule or regulation coming out of Washington does have an economic cost, eliminating them rarely does.  To the contrary, elimination will put America on the path to recovery while driving down the costs of doing business domestically, which is a boon for consumers and job seekers alike.  

****

Christopher Tidball is a freelance writer, business consultant and author of Kicked to the Curb: 20 Essential Rules For Coming Out On Top When Your Life Has Been Turned Upside Down.  He has been featured on MSNBC, Career Builder, CBS Market Watch, Kiplinger’s and other media outlets with a proven path to prosperity.  To learn more, please visit www.christidball.com or e-mail chris@christidball.com. 

Taking your claims organization from ordinary to extraordinary

 We’ve often heard the phrase “nobody’s perfect”.   While this is sage advice, perfection is a noble goal and one that everyone should strive for.   The reality is that we live in an imperfect world, but every so often perfection seems to surface.  

The 1972 Miami Dolphins posted a 17-0 record on their way to winning the Super Bowl.  But even this seemingly perfect team gave up points, unlike the 1933 Providence Huskies who not only went undefeated but held their opponents scoreless.  

Perfection is hard to attain, but striving for it is an achievable goal.   The question is how you translate perfection to your claims organization.    Does calling every claimant within 24 hours or looking at every damaged car within 48 hours constitute perfection?  How about closing claims within 7 days or having 100% title compliance on totaled cars?   Certainly they are good metrics, but what happens to perfection when 100% of all property damage is assessed within 48 hours and the claims organization has a 30% supplement rate? 

Like many of you, I was always driven by a variety of metrics that were designed to push the organization to the next level.   While on the surface this is great, it often drove unintended consequences.   I recall a few years back a push to contact all parties to the claim within 24 hours of report.   But what truly constituted a contact?   Creative adjusters were known to leave contact cards, voice mails, and messages with neighbors and in one case even sent a wire via Western Union.  

Measurements, like sports statistics, are important.  Quarterback ratings, first downs and yards gained are all important in football, but in the end all that really matters is the final score.   The same is true in claims, where contacts, inspections and cycle time are all indicators of probable results, but what really tells the whole story is the actual claims outcome.  

The best way to measure a claims organization is by establishing a solid quality assurance program.  I’m not talking about one where the manager reviews a few files and gives them a grade, which at times may be self serving to his or her own office.  Rather, a true quality assurance program that audits files to specific metrics and then provides actual results based upon the established benchmarks. 

Rather than Monday morning quarterbacking, this approach is similar to that used by football coaches who review hour upon hour of game day film in a never ending quest for perfection.    It is the quintessential return to blocking and tackling that is necessary to move any organization to the next level of performance.  

The quest for perfection needs to be bred throughout the organization.  There should be no rewards for coming in second place.  From customer service and policy holder retention to brand recognition and accurate settlements, it is incumbent upon all involved to put forth their best possible effort to exceed customers’ wildest expectations. 

When applying this to the claims organization, it is imperative to get a picture of what is occurring at any point in time.   From first notice of loss to ultimate disposition, there are critical milestones that need to be addressed.   While many carriers focus on simple QA metrics, such as leakage, that doesn’t always paint a true picture.  Aside from being incredibly subjective, it doesn’t take into account many other habits that could be forming in the organization.   Remember, it is possible to win a football game even if you have six turnovers.  However, the winning score isn’t likely to bode well for the team as a whole. 

Rather, it is critical to delve into every aspect of the claim to develop a plan of action and subsequently understand which areas of deficiency are most threatening to the organization. 

By developing a team from the ground up, it is possible to attain excellence.  Simply looking from the outside in, it is not, which is why I am so critical of some attempts to isolate mere metrics that will be used as defining moments. 

During loss intake, were all critical questions asked?  How about during the claim investigation?  Were the negotiations appropriate?  Was the settlement accurate?  How about documentation, S.I.U. notification, system coding or recovery identification?  All of this plays a critical role in the overall filing handling. 

In the perfect world, every file would be reviewed and every outcome would be optimal.  But we don’t live in a perfect world, so we must rely on statistically valid samples that are indicative of organizational results.  

Settlements alone don’t paint the whole picture.   By putting objectivity into the equation, it eliminates bias and ensures a more accurate portrayal.   Of course, from this outcome must come remediation which will serve as a catalyst to take a claims organization from ordinary to extraordinary. 

By recognizing that an organization isn’t perfect, leaders take a giant step in their pursuit of excellence.   As I discuss in my book, Re-Adjusted, to truly see this, one must have an entire paradigm shift from “what am I doing right” to “what I am doing wrong.” 

Far too often we are quick to pat ourselves on the back.  Great, we did something right.  Or, did we simply do what we were supposed to do in the first place?  Like the football team that ran a 3-6 dive on 3^rd and 1 and got the first, they merely achieved a designed play.   But, that is just one of the requisite steps necessary to ultimately score a touchdown.  

The same holds true in claims where basic job functions don’t deserve kudos.  Rather, that energy should be focused on areas of opportunity such as conducting proper investigations, effective negotiations and achieving accurate settlements.   It is this focus on fundamental blocking and tackling that will serve to not only improve claims organizations, but give them a significant competitive edge in the marketplace.  

 Perfection is not attainable, but if we chase perfection we catch excellence.-Vince Lombardi

 ***

Christopher Tidball is the a freelance writer, claims consultant and the author of Re-Adjusted: 20 Essential Rules to take your Claims Organization from Ordinary to Extraordinary.   To learn more, please visit www.christidball.com or e-mail chris@christidball.com.