The Promise of End User System Maintenance

Mike Fitzgerald
Insurance Experts' Forum, March 5, 2010

One of the benefits of investing in modern, configurable software that is often sought is the ability to move creation and maintenance of systems to the business areas. The premise is that transferring these functions to users will increase quality and reduce costs. In Celent’s discussions with insurers and observations, this is often a goal that is more aspiration than realization.  

Our research has begun to quantify the extent to which functions are transferring within various solutions. For example, the graph below details the responses from U.S. insurers using a standalone rating engine when asked what percentage of work is being performed in their business areas:



Surprisingly, tasks to configure interfaces with third-party vendors (CLUE. MVRs, etc.) are performed at a very high level (83%). Not surprisingly, deployment to production is often held in the IT area. (For more details, reference the report: US Property/Casualty Rating Systems: ABCD Vendor View, 2009)

We are continuing to collect such data across different software platforms in order to quantify the “promise” of end user maintenance.

This blog has been reprinted with permission from Celent. Mike Fitzgerald is a senior analyst in Celent's insurance practice, and can be reached at mfitzgerald@celent.com.

The opinions posted in this blog do not necessarily reflect those of Insurance Networking News or SourceMedia.

Comments (2)

Mike,

Curious to know if your research contemplates how many IT personnel are transferring into the business units along with the implementation of various solutions? Have seen this with some clients and curious how widespread it is as an industry trend.

Regards,

John

Posted by: Chevy | March 19, 2010 11:06 AM

Report this Comment


Can you define users in the business units? Are they underwriters, business analysts, IT staff, or all of the above? The industry needs to be careful not to create redundancy and chaos by making it too easy for staff to make changes. And I'm not anti Web 2.0.

Posted by: Robert R | March 6, 2010 1:06 PM

Report this Comment

Add Your Comments...

Already Registered?

If you have already registered to Insurance Networking News, please use the form below to login. When completed you will immeditely be directed to post a comment.

Forgot your password?

Not Registered?

You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.

Blog Archive

Global Supply Chain, Local Problem

As a technology provider, your clientís ability to deliver products and services to their customers, when and where they need them, is at the heart of their business success.

Legacy Systems Are Increasingly a Competitive Handicap

Legacy systems, while reliable, increasingly hold insurers back, a new study finds

From Her to Watson, and What’s Next?

Imagine a learning system that can replace the performance of your best employee to provide the same level of support across the organization.

Five Reasons to Software-Define Your Operations

It may be possible to provision key services with the click of a mouse, but benefits go well beyond that.

3 Policy Admin Conversion Considerations

Insurers would be wise to learn these lessons before formulating a strategy to convert policies to a new policy administration system.

Boyle’s 4th Law - Response Time Matters!

Why many companies donít do a good job of measuring the thing that clients value the most.