Fraud Detection Software Increasingly Important
Celent report profiles 13 vendors and offers insights in terms of data sources, service and delivery options.
Insurance Networking News, December 3, 2012
The insurance industry is going through difficult times, which makes it more important for insurers to better manage the basics, according to “Claims Fraud Detection Systems: 2012 IT Vendor Spectrum,” from Celent.
“Fighting claims fraud represents a key element of insurers’ strategy, and we think claims fraud mitigation will trigger more investment in the near future,” said Nicolas Michellod, senior analyst with Celent’s Insurance Group and coauthor of the report. “There are differences among vendors, most notably in terms of data sources, service, and delivery options,” he adds. “We recommend that insurers carefully assess what options best fit their requirements.”
The report offers a description of IT vendors and their claims fraud detection products. Each vendor is profiled with a synoptic table presenting the company and its claims fraud detection solution. The report authors then describe the solutions’ data sources, delivery options, functionality and technology and review implementation and costs, as well as breaking out which vendors offer fraud detection systems on a software-as-a-service basis.
Vendors profiled include BearingPoint, CSC, Detica NetReveal, FICO, Friss Fraud & Risk Solutions, IBM, Innovation Group, LexisNexis, Panopticon Software AB, SAP, SAS Inc., SynerScope B.v., and Valen Technologies Inc.
For more information on related topics, visit the following channels:
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.
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.
Comments (1)
I had the opportunity to look at some of the solutions and can summarize that the ones seen are technological interpretations of challenges of fraud management. In my opinion, the solutions should be insurance functional knowledge driven and the technology should be incidental.
The situations, triggers, weight allotted, identifying false positives & more importantly identifying priority level of positives and the consequent process initiators will make the solutions really relevant and useful. The provisions for self-learning will improve if this approach is taken.
Posted by: Milind Joshi | December 8, 2012 1:22 PM
Report this Comment