There’s no question; the health-insurance industry is floundering—millions uninsured, ever-increasing premiums accompanied by less comprehensive coverage.

And although President Bush’s health proposal has its critics, it addresses an issue that has long plagued Americans, particularly the 47 million uninsured.

His proposal, while vastly different from former President Clinton’s attempt at health-care reform, has one similarity. It guarantees to upend a health-insurance system that has covered most Americans for the last 60 years.

And even though change is inevitable, especially the reform of a faulty system, it has the tendency to incite fear and doubt.

But let’s not jump to partisan conclusions just yet.

The state of affairs…for now

The least expensive, most popular way to purchase health insurance is tax free through an employer. If an individual contributes, he or she is covered, regardless of health or age.

Because many partake in their employers’ health insurance program, the majority of uninsured Americans comprise lower-income families, children and minorities. However, in recent years the issue has ceased being one of socio-economic status or race and begun to affect middle-class Americans, many of whom are self employed or working for small businesses that don’t offer health insurance.

The uninsured masses either purchase individual health insurance, with no tax deductions, or remain uninsured and possibly dependent on government programs, such as Medicaid.

What the proposal means for you (as a citizen)

The plan is to provide assistance to those who need health coverage, in the form of tax deductions. Under the proposed system, both individuals insured through their employer and those who are self insured will receive deductions up to $7,500 for an individual and $15,000 for a family. If a person spends less than the deduction cap, they’ll receive a tax credit. If they spend more, a tax increase.

The thought is that tax deductions will encourage employer-insured individuals to seek out less expensive, individual health insurance, if their plan becomes too expensive.

However critics object, arguing that health-care costs out pace inflation—the measure to which health-care caps are indexed. According to the Tax Policy Center, within 10 years, 40 percent of plans will exceed standard deductions.

Supporters maintain the new system will level the playing field, offering those who purchase individual health insurance the same tax breaks as those who are insured through work—thus making health insurance more obtainable.

But the proposal still faces opposition from some who argue the uninsured, low-income population still won’t afford the upfront cost of health insurance despite the tax deductions.

Although the proposal has received mixed reviews, it is no doubt a step toward finding the cure for an ailing system. Whether this plan is a spoonful of Robitussin that will merely mask the symptoms or a dose of penicillin remains to be seen.

What the proposal means for you (as an agent)

Individual health insurance will be more attainable then it is under the current system, which means people who are uninsured now may be able to afford coverage with the help of tax deductions. And more people may begin to shop their health insurance like they do auto, home, life and LTC.

If enacted, the policy won’t take effect until 2009, which buys you a little adjustment period so you can strategize how to use this health-care makeover to your advantage.

Health insurance is one of the more complicated and important forms of insurance. And the majority of the population has had an HR rep to hold its hand through the important decisions. As an agent, you have the knowledge and information to guide your prospects to make educated health-care choices.

Regardless of your political persuasion, a possible boost in business is something most everyone can get behind.

Posted by maribeth neelis at 05:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
 

In what's probably the most obvious headline ever written, today the Insurance Journal posted an AP story titled "Many La. Residents Reluctant to Rebuild on Coast."

The article details a recent Associated Press analysis which found that tens of thousands of Louisiana homeowners have decided not to rebuild on their old stomping ground. In the 31 coastal zip codes affected the 2005 hurricanes, as many as two out of three homeowners said they won't rebuild.

Some residents call the reluctance a "knee-jerk reaction" to "a little water." Gun-shyness be darned—between the increased hurricane risk and home insurance rates, I don't know that I'd be rushing back to rebuild either.

Despite the fairly obvious title, the article is an interesting read. Check it out here.

In other home insurance news, there's a great recount of this Orlando Sentinel piece over at the Insurance Coverage Law blog.

The article discusses the growing home insurance problems in Florida, noting that out of the top ten most expensive disasters in U.S. history, the state has seen six of them (in 2004 and 2005). Then there's the growing school of thought amidst residents who feel they're entitled to cheaper home insurance. Check out the full post here for more great commentary.

Any other home insurance happenings we should be talking about?

[UPDATE]: Florida gets hit again with catastrophic weather

Posted by Megan Mahan at 04:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
 

As we told you a couple weeks ago in the first Agent Blog Wrap-Up, we've got some new contributors to the Agent Blog. Put the names to the stellar writing by checking out the recently revamped InsureMe Agent Blog bios!

We hope to keep this page pretty dynamic as far as content and photos go, so check back often. And yes there is a marketing method behind the bio madness—we know that a more personable About Us section can help develop a relationship between visitor and author. We also know that relationships can lead to increased sales (or in this case, increased blog readership).

Of course, as you can tell by the photos, we also think it's a good idea not to take oneself too seriously. :)

Posted by Megan Mahan at 03:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
 

[Leave a comment with your favorite business movie to enter to win a prize from InsureMe! All comments must be received by Thursday, February 15.]

But because this blog is about insurance, I can’t justify talking about the latest blockbuster or the Dakota Fanning controversy. (I’ll allow myself a quick aside: Check out “Pan’s Labyrinth” if it’s playing at a theater near you. A+)

So let’s talk about business movies, a sub-genre that, believe it or not, is composed of quite a few excellent titles. (I suppose it depends on how strict your definition of a ‘business movie’ is—mine, for example, is lenient enough to include “Planes, Trains, and Automobiles.”)

A Google search of ‘best business movies’ yielded some excellent results. Askmen.com took top billing in the search results. I initially balked at the cheesy domain name, but the site immediately won my trust with their inclusion of “Clerks” in their top ten. Askmen.com had this to say about the low-budget cult classic: “Clerks really is the story of your average slacker working-class stiff. And this is why this is a great business movie: the majority of people in business that you will have to win over could care less about making it to the corner office; most are interested in their paycheck.” OK… Let’s just say it’s a great movie and leave it at that. (Let's also mourn the fact that Kevin Smith doesn’t make funny movies—let alone funny “business movies”—anymore.)

According to Askmen.com, the best movie about business is “Citizen Kane,” Orson Welles’ 1941 masterpiece. I never considered this a business movie, but I have to agree that it’s pretty great.

While their list included movies I hadn’t heard of and might now add to the Netflix queue, there was a glaring omission in their top ten. And it’s called “Office Space.” Come on Askmen.com! Did you get that memo?! “Office Space” is perhaps the best send up of the bleaker aspects of corporate culture in existence.

The second site I visited impressed me with its depth. The site—a blog actually—is called “Busfilm,” and it goes far beyond a list of ten business movies. Busfilm provides an eccentric yet entirely precise categorization of business films based on their theme or plotline or attitude toward business:

• The evil that business does


• The cold-hearted capitalist


• Employees and bosses


• The good business


• Shareholders vs. managers


• The bad artist (wherein the “films' view of artists depends on whether they are selling out to the capitalists.”)


• Wealth-creation vs. Zero-Sum

Of course, one can’t talk about business movies without talking about “Glengarry Glen Ross.” Alas, I need to see this movie again before I can say anything intelligent about it; the only thing I can remember is that Al Pacino swore a lot.

Another good list came from Forbes.com, but since my time has run out, I’ll just include a link to their list.

Happy viewing.

P.S. Tell us your favorite business movie by leaving a comment below.

Posted by Jeb Foster at 04:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (6)
 

In this week's Agent Blog Wrap-Up, we discuss an insurance company getting into banking, how to deal with jerks, why a business plan isn't always necessary and discover that Rhode Island, does indeed, exist.

Posted by James Omdahl at 01:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
 

Very cool tip from LifeHacker about free podcasts from the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA), aimed at helping people start successful small businesses. The podcasts, which vary in topic, are designed to teach the basics, according to LifeHacker.

SBA.gov already hosts 9 podcasts, with more to come. Current topics include tips for creating effective business plans, how to finance a small business, and a checklist for starting a new business.

It looks like great stuff, and downloading each podcast couldn't be easier. Check out the SBA Podcast page to get listening!

Posted by Megan Mahan at 04:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
 

Every once in a while I read something that inspires the belief that things are going to be OK, that the apocalypse is not actually at hand.

The most recent morale-boosting article came from the Insurance Journal under the unlikely headline “R.I. High Court Throws out Lawsuit Based on Bad Job Reference.”

Not being a court watcher or follower of Rhode Island news, I nearly ignored the story. But the idea of a lawsuit based on a bad job reference caught my attention, so I followed the link.

Here the lede from the story:

Rhode Island's highest court this week dismissed a lawsuit filed by a licensed nurse who sued her former boss over a bad job reference.

Here’s the follow-up graf:

Paula Kevorkian said Judith Glass, her former supervisor at the Pawtuxet Village Nursing and Rehabilitation Center, wrote a defamatory and malicious reference when she described Kevorkian as having "unacceptable work practice habits.''

Yes, the nurse’s name is Kevorkian. And the reason for the bad reference from her former supervisor? “Kevorkian was suspended from work for three days in April 1994 for allegedly failing to give patients their necessary medications, according to the court's 12-page ruling.”

I swear I’m not making this up.

The Rhode Island court, in its wisdom, threw out the case, saying Glass was qualified to make such statements about Kevorkian and was not motivated by malice or ill will. She was just being honest. And who knows? Maybe she thought people’s lives depended on this woman not being in a position to dispense vital medication.

So the court made the right move and didn’t set a precedent that would have likely resulted in the cessation of the entire enterprise of reference writing. Well done, Rhode Island.

Yet in looking through the comments on the article, it seems as if many employers were already skittish about writing references for their former workers. That’s a shame.

Other people who posted comments focused on the plaintiff’s unfortunate surname. To whom commenter Todd Hitler replied, “What’s wrong with her name?” :)

Posted by Jeb Foster at 09:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)
 

A-B-C Always Be Closing—a sales concept depicted in Glengarry Glen Ross, and alluded to eight years later in Boiler Room. While highly entertaining, both movies portray the kind of salespeople you don’t want to be—despicable, manipulative, conniving (albeit loaded…until the end of the movie when they inevitably get what’s coming to them.)

The characters are amusing and exaggerated, but A-B-C is an actual theory and the actors’ methods not a far cry from what was taught to Xerox salespeople and followed religiously until the early nineties.

Today, most professional salespeople agree selling should be a buyer-centric experience, and your goal should involve building trust not closing the deal. Closing is an afterthought, which inevitably follows when you foster a relationship with the buyer.

Buying is more about you as a person and less about your actual product. In his article Charles Green discusses the three common mistakes of most salespeople.

- talking too much about yourself
- talking too much about your product or service
- pushing too fast to move to action steps

He explains that when a buyer decides to make a purchase it isn’t because they were persuaded by your rational arguments, but rather because they have begun to trust you so are comfortable with the idea of buying from you.

Think back to the last time someone tried to sell you on something. Did you by because you were swayed by their fast talking and wit? Probably not. You likely needed or wanted the product you purchased and were planning to buy eventually. Because they made you feel at ease, you chose them—not necessarily what they were selling, which you likely could have gotten elsewhere.

Your prospects need insurance and can get it from any number of agents. When you talk to them remember that the policy will sell itself. Your job is to get them to buy it from you.

Read the article.

Posted by maribeth neelis at 08:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
 

Nice post over on Guy Kawasaki's blog about the modern day business plan—which, in some cases, may include not having one. He highlights some findings from a report as published in this Wall Street Journal article:

This study examined whether writing a business plan before launching a new venture affects the subsequent performance of the venture. The data set comprised new ventures started by Babson College alums who graduated between 1985 and 2003. The analysis revealed that there was no difference between the performance of new businesses launched with or without written business plans. The findings suggest that unless a would-be entrepreneur needs to raise substantial startup capital from institutional investors or business angels, there is no compelling reason to write a detailed business plan before opening a new business.

Is the "just do it" attitude right for agents starting their own agency? On the one hand, I think so. There's something to be said for being nimble and not obsessing about the process. And what's that they say about the best laid plans?

And yet, I think there is a fair amount of consideration to take if you're thinking of starting your own agency. We've got a pretty comprehensive article in the Agent Resource Center about starting your own agency, and I still feel that those tips are important for getting a new business off the ground.

Nonetheless, I do like Kawasaki's tips for a modern day business plan, some of which include:

• Use the business plan exercise to get your team on the same page
• Keep the plan short: 10 to 20 pages
• Spend no more than two weeks writing it

And, "don’t draw the wrong conclusion from this study: 'Analysis, planning, vision, and communication are unnecessary.' This isn’t true."

Take a look at Kawasaki's full post here; it might just be the fodder you need to jumpstart your business plan!

Posted by Megan Mahan at 04:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
 

According to an article via the Insurance Journal today, Mutual of Omaha has its sights set on market expansion—namely, banking.

The near 100-year old company could potentially market the new offerings to its existing policyholders. Which, at the end of 2005, included 1.5 million individual policyholders and more than 13,500 employer groups.

Mutual of Omaha president and CEO Jeff Schmid said the new offering would "be a base for extending electronic banking across the country."

The operative word for the move, however, is "diversify." By involving themselves in the banking market, Schmid added that they could broaden Mutual's horizons for the future:

"We have the ability to build a company that complements Mutual over the next 10 or 20 years, that really has so much in common from a financial services standpoint."

While the article notes that about three dozen other U.S. insurers have made the same move, I have yet to catch wind of it. Think in ten years we'll all be banking with our insurer? Seems sort of strange, but not that far-fetched.

Personally, as a customer of Mutual of Omaha, I'll be interested to see how they position the added feature to existing policyholders.

Photo from Flickr under Creative Commons license

Posted by Megan Mahan at 04:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
 

Perhaps the most difficult aspect of sales is also the most rewarding: working with people. A gracious customer can not only vindicate your choice of profession, but raise your esteem of humanity. On the flip side, as New York Times reporter Stephanie Rosenbloom put it recently, “Certain mortals have the power to sink hearts and sour moods with lightning speed.”

This presents a unique challenge, because to be an effective salesperson you’ve got to have a keen human intuition—a sensitivity to others—but you’ve also got to have the epidermis of an elephant . If it isn’t, you’ll either end up getting trampled or losing the sale after you lose your cool. However, if your skin gets too callused, you’ll become, well, callous.

So how does one be a responsive saleperson without becoming vulnerable to the difficult people of the world? According to Rosenbloom’s recent article “Help! I’m Surrounded by Jerks", the answer may come from within: “[Psychologists] say people exhibit difficult behavior because they have a need that is not being met. Understanding that need — a colleague may be snappish, for instance, because his personal life is in turmoil — helps take the sting out of his or her actions, they say.”

In essence, the key to being sensitive without making yourself vulnerable to the jerks of the world is to be more sensitive, more empathetic. “Rather than seeing the office curmudgeon or the post office nitpicker [or ornery customer] as the sum of their most wretched behavior, it is better to think of them as full people, even to empathize with them, if only to maintain some sense of control.”

Read the full article.

I’ll leave you with a quote from the eminently quotable Jack Handey:

"I think my new thing will be to try to be a real happy guy. I'll just walk around being real happy until some jerk says something stupid to me."

Posted by Jeb Foster at 12:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
 

In this week's Agent Blog Wrap-Up, Peter D. reports on climate change, Megan tries to spruce up the rest of the insurance news, and we check in with Aurora Borealis, currently on tour.

Posted by Megan Mahan at 03:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
 

Another stellar post from Creating Passionate Users, on making customers smile:

Marketers and managers tell us to "delight" the customer. But they're usually talking about heroic gestures, "empowering the front line", and virtually always about how to use this "happy customers" focus as a competitive advantage. But sometimes it's the smallest of things that can make all the difference.

CPU blogger Kathy Sierra gives a handful of examples of uninstitutionalized, smile-inducing touch points, which create a genuine (and positive) lasting impression. Here's one:

Fresh-baked cookies in the lobby. GOOD coffee in the reception area, not that crap instant with fake creamer. When I taste that first sip of really good coffee, I always close my eyes and smile. Bliss : )

Ugh. I really, really hate the fake creamer.

All of the examples speak to exceeding a customer's expectation of the experience. And it usually is the small things that make all the difference.

This really is a can't-miss post; check it out in full here and think about the little things you can do to improve your customer's experience—to make them smile.

Gorgeous photo by Flickr under Creative Commons license: http://flickr.com/photos/daexus/329687468/

Posted by Megan Mahan at 04:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
 

Selling insurance requires some hustle. Prospects don’t pick up the phone to call you. They don’t knock on your door or flood your inbox with requests for quotes. You’ve got to pound the pavement—both literally and figuratively—to stay afloat.

Knowledge of this can bring a helpful sense of urgency to your day, but it can also turn you into a frantic, overzealous loon like Bob Torkington of Red Shoe Insurance. (If you’re not familiar with Mr. Torkington’s antics, check out the most recent Agent Blog Wrap Up. It’s shocking.)

In a post over at Fast Company Magazine’s blog, professional executive coach Doug Sundheim reminds us of a very important distinction: “rushing vs. moving quickly.” The latter is of course preferable, but often we find ourselves running around like decapitated chickens, with the vague hope that our mere movement will magically get things done. According to Sundheim, “Rushing undermines critical thinking, dialogue, and learning processes. If unchecked for too long, it significantly decreases individual and organizational capacity to make smart decisions. It becomes OK not to think things through.”

In short, rushing is no time saver (unless you’re in a hurry to make poor decisions that will cost you time and money down the road). Sundheim suggests stopping to ask yourself a few questions when you find yourself in a frenzied rush. After you’ve taken a couple deep breaths, “Get clear on whether the rushing is necessary (or even smart). If it isn't, slow down.” What if it is necessary? “Reassess and renegotiate timelines if needed,” writes Sundheim.

This isn’t rocket science, and you've probably heard this adivce before, but it works. The key is to have the self-awareness to know when you might be pulling a Bob Torkington. The second thing, which Sundheim alludes to in the end of his post, is to have a strategy for slowing yourself down. For some, it might be taking a brief walk, for others, watering the plants or raking a Zen garden thingy.

Posted by Jeb Foster at 10:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)
 

The female workforce has grown from 18.4 million in 1950 to 65.7 million in 2005 with women now comprising 46.4 percent of the labor force.

However, certain fields continue to be male dominated—engineering, aviation, construction. And after speaking with a few former insurance agents, I got the impression that the insurance industry remains (albeit less so) pale and male. InsureMe's agent base reflects the demographics of the industry--the majority of our agents are also male.

Women in male-dominated professions have long faced a unique set of challenges from the blatant sexual harassment of the ‘70s to overcoming subtle but damaging stereotypes still present in many workplaces. Lack of childcare options, that nagging wage gap, the glass ceiling.

Although conditions have improved since the first sexual harassment case in 1974, one would think being a woman (or any minority) in a profession where white men once ruled the roost poses a unique set of obstacles.

Nothing stimulates the mind like a good debate, so let me know what you think.

Do men still outnumber women in the insurance industry?

Is gender still an issue?

As a woman in this particular field, what sort of issues do you or have you faced?

How has the industry evolved?

Posted by maribeth neelis at 04:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
 

Want to schmooze with industry stars like Maurice "Hank" Greenberg and Peter Levene of Lloyd's? Want to rub elbows with celebs like Dennis Miller and Bill O'Reilly? See what it's like to be a NASCAR driver? Learn why 2006 didn't live up to hurricane expectations?

The Insurance Journal has enhanced its event directory to keep you up to speed with all the industry events in 2007. And, by the looks of things, industry organizations are making sure attendees are good and entertained.

Read all about it here, and don't forget take a peek at the directory at www.insurancejournal.com/events.

Posted by Megan Mahan at 02:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
 

Allow me to start with a provocation: If you don’t believe the science behind climate change, I think you’re silly.*

Further, if you’re in the insurance industry and you’re not concerned about the impact climate change will have on your livelihood, I think you’re really silly and ought to read this recent release from Lloyd’s of London, a reinsurer that’s taking global climate change seriously.

My position is on the table. Feel free to jump right to the comments section and tell me how silly I am; how there is a sizeable yet conveniently ignored body of evidence to suggest that global warming is part of a natural—not manmade—cycle; how ice shelves and glaciers have melted long before we started driving SUVs; how Al Gore and other radical environmentalists are the architects of a shadowy conspiracy; how you shouldn’t believe what They tell you.

**Yawn**

I will concede, Agent Blog skeptic, that there is a scarcity of civility when it comes to this subject, that both those who acknowedge climate change and those who deny it can be nasty in their delivery. (Just check out the comments on the Lloyd’s press release over at the Insurance Journal.)

I will also concede that once upon a time (back in the 1970s) there was a need for debate on the idea of anthropogenic climate change. But that time has passed. The only worthwhile debate now is what we should do to mitigate the effects of climate change. Insurers, who will be on the front lines in future climate-related catastrophes, are right to demand action.

In the words of Lord Peter Levene, chairman of Lloyd's, "We cannot risk being in denial on catastrophe trends. We urgently need a radical rethink of public policy, and to build the facts into future planning."

Read the entire release here.

* Please understand that I use the word silly in a loving way and not as a proxy for a mean-nasty word.

Posted by Jeb Foster at 01:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)
 

Interesting article by way of the Insurance News Network today, purporting that long-term care (LTC) insurance sales will increase 15% over 2006 sales.

Jesse Slome, the executive director of the American Association for Long-Term Care Insurance, noted a handful of reasons for the expected increase in his article.

For the first time, he says, 8 million Americans now own some form of long-term care protection.

"The Parrot Effect says that people mimic the behavior of others. When consumers ask their friends whether they own LTC insurance, 8 million of them will now say 'Yes, I do!' That's a significant point you can't overlook."

Indeed. And considering that annual LTC benefits topped $3 billion in 2006, lots of happy people with checks will tell other happy people who will undoubtedly want checks. And that means new policies. Lots of them.

While the Parrot Effect could prove powerful, Slome has named three additional reasons for the increase in LTC sales:

1. The government's getting involved.

According to Slome, the third phase of the Department of Health Services' "Own Your Future" campaign will result in the mailing of "well prepared informational material" to several million households—to residents between 45 and 65. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of direct mail, but this might carry some weight.

2. Simplified products make selling LTC easier for agents who don't specialize in it.

New, innovative and versatile products yield new sales possibilities for those who don't specialize in LTC. "Key to the changes is simplification, designed to enable tens of thousands of insurance and financial professionals who have not (yet) delved into LTCi sales the ability to offer their clients long-term solutions without having to become a long-term care insurance specialist," says Slome.

3. Market Stability = Awesome

Consumers and agents alike forget about the correlation between interest rates and LTC insurance rates, says Slome. In fact, he notes, some experts have reported that a one percent decline in long-term interest rates correlates to a need to increase LTC premiums by as much as 20 percent!

So whether you're a seasoned LTC sales vet, or a general newbie, this should be a great year for LTC sales. Check out the full INN article here, and for more sales inspiration, stop by the Agent Resource Center!

Posted by Megan Mahan at 12:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
 

It's with a bit of tardiness that I present you with this week's Agent Blog Wrap-Up. (Technical difficulties; happens to the best of us!)

Take a look to find out who won this week's contest (for 100 smackeroos), sneak a peak at a vintage insurance sales training video, and catch the new song by Aurora Borealis!

Posted by Megan Mahan at 11:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)
 

Insurance and alternative hairstyles aren't exactly synonymous. But as we launched or corporate United Way charitable giving campaign this year, InsureMe CEO committed to shaving his head provided we received 100% participation from InsureMe employees.

We kept our end of the bargain. Now watch Tim as he keeps his.

Posted by Megan Mahan at 03:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
 

The other night, I heard a knock at the door. I answered to find a young man with an agenda. Although I was not interested in donating money to an alternative art school in Des Moines, I couldn’t help but appreciate this guy’s delivery

He engaged me asking questions about my artistic passion and informing me of opportunities to contribute creatively; only then did he solicit me for a donation.

No money was exchanged, but I listened to his entire spiel because of his approach.

A recent post on Landing the Deal reminded me of this encounter. It discusses Chief Sales Officer Jill Konrath’s take on the detriment of being ‘over-zealous sales guy.'

As a rule people despise being sold.

“Whether you want to or not, you always communicate your intent. Prospective buyers sense it instantaneously and react accordingly. If they feel you have their best interests in mind, they're attracted to you. Conversely, they're repelled by any behavior that smacks of self-serving intentions.”

Some advice on selling a la Jill Konrath: Change your question, change your language, and change your role.

Your question. Regardless how much you need a sale, go into a meeting with a prospect asking—How can my product serve them? –How can I improve their situation?

Simply asking those questions instead of –How can I complete this transaction?—will change your behavior and put your prospect at ease.

Your language. When customers’ needs are at the forefront, you shouldn’t begin by discussing your product, but rather compel them to divulge their concerns, wants and worries. Sounds a little schmaltzy; but once you have them figured out, you can create a pitch that fits.

Your role. So yeah, you’re an insurance agent. But you have many roles—buddy, parent, co-worker, Lost fanatic. So when you attempt to make a sale, don’t think of yourself as a seller.

“Sales is the outcome of what you do, but it is not your purpose.”

Although you obviously sell insurance, remember that you offer a service to those you insure. You are knowledgeable in a complicated field; you’re not only selling a policy, but the security that goes along with it.

Read the entire post.

Posted by maribeth neelis at 04:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (7)
 

Yep, today's blog post comes in the form of video! A little rough around the edges but hopefully I'll get better at this as time goes on. :)

Posted by Megan Mahan at 04:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)
 

We'll be drawing the name of the $100 prize tomorrow during the Agent Blog Wrap-Up, so stay tuned! Feel free to keep commenting on your measurable goals, though. It's been great to see the interaction!

Cheers,
The InsureMe A/V Team

Posted by Megan Mahan at 01:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
 

[UPDATE]: Get your comments posted by Thursday before noon (MST)—we'll draw a winner tomorrow afternoon!

Just quick note about the current contest (announced last Friday on the Agent Blog Wrap-Up):

When posting a comment with your measurable goals for 2007 (to this post), please include your email address. Rest assured—your email address will not be displayed in your comment. We just need a way to contact you if you win the $100. :)

Good luck!

Posted by Megan Mahan at 04:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
 

In case you haven't yet heard, the Consumer Federation of America (CFA) (in conjunction with various national consumer organizations) released a new study yesterday, concluding that the P&C industry has dramatically increased their profits by jacking up premiums and lowering claim payouts. The report also states that the P&C industry has offloaded some costs to American taxpayers.

The findings, which were summarized by Insurance News Net, included these grimace-inducing bits from the study's author, J. Robert Hunter:

Profits and a solid insurance industry are a good thing but unjustified profits and excessive capitalization harm consumers. [...] Unfortunately, a major reason why insurers have reported record high profits and low losses in recent years is that they have been methodically overcharging consumers, cutting back on coverage, underpaying claims, and getting taxpayers to pick up some of the tab for higher risks.

I couldn't find the full white paper at the URL included in the article, but you can get the five-page gist courtesy of the INN.

Not surprisingly, the American Insurance Association (AIA) issued a rebuttal yesterday, stating that a financially robust industry was good for consumers.

“Insurance company profits are essential to providing insurance coverage relied upon daily by American families and businesses,” according to Gov. Marc Racicot, president of the American Insurance Association (AIA).

Racicot continued, saying:

Insurance is a business based on risk, and any risky business proposition must have a relatively high rate of return for investors from time to time, or the investors will take their capital elsewhere, and that business will cease to exist. [...] After record losses in 2004 and 2005, the respite provided by 2006 has meant that insurers could replenish the capital that they must have on hand in order to stand behind the policies they sell. Healthy balance sheets better prepare insurers to face future catastrophes, and greatly benefit consumers.

I'm going to weigh the facts a bit more before giving an official opinion, but I can tell you one thing: as a product people don't like to spend money on, consumers are more inclined to gravitate towards the CFA findings than those of the AIA.

Posted by Megan Mahan at 03:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
 

Happy Monday, y'all. I hope a phenomenal weekend was had by all and that you have, by now, watched the first Agent Blog Wrap-Up featuring Aurora Borealis. The fan mail is already streaming in. I have a feeling Aurora Borealis is going to take off from here.

Once you've watched the video, don't forget to leave a comment on last Wednesday's post. You could $100. So far no one's posted anything, making your chances of winning...well, pretty awesome.

I've spent most of this afternoon reading up on insurance news and various hot topics through my favorite sales and marketing blogs. A couple things piqued my interest but not enough to send me into a 700-word diatribe. So without further ado, here are today's links:

Not Much Employer Backing for HSAs [The Health Care Blog]
Sidecars (relating to reinsurance) [Specialty Insurance Blog]
Minn. Boy Sues Parents Over Injuries Sustained in Accident [Insurance Journal] Make sure to check out David Rossmiller's stellar commentary of this story here.

Posted by Megan Mahan at 03:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)
 

With the change in power in congress and President Bush’s vow to brandish his pen in favor, it seems that all of the obstacles once blocking a mental health parity law are now gone.

(Just so we’re all on the same page, a mental health parity law would require insurers to provide equal benefits for mental and physical illness.)

Presuming the bill will be passed, What does it mean for the insurance industry? For employers? For patients?

The near-constant refrain from insurers is that such a mandate would drive up premiums for everyone and make it more difficult for employers to provide coverage for their workers. If history is any judge, insurers may be on to something.

But advocates of parity point to studies that show treating mental and physical illness equally isn’t something to fear. Some of these studies, including a 2003 federal study of Vermont’s parity law, which is the strictest in the country, reveal that parity can actually lower health care spending in some cases. The reason? Those who get regular care are less likely to need major medical attention later on. Employers, in turn, see reduced absenteeism when the mentally ill are given proper care.

Which side, Agent Blog reader, do you agree with? Is this another costly mandate that will simply be passed on to the average premium-paying Joe? Or is this a long overdue redressing of an unfair system?

Let us know by leaving a comment—as long or as short as you like—below. You don’t need to wax eloquent—if you’re pressed for time but want to be on record as having an opinion, you can just write “good idea” or “bad idea.”

I look forward to hearing from you.

Posted by Jeb Foster at 09:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)
 

We're all pretty excited to present you with the first-ever Agent Blog Wrap-Up. We hope you enjoy it as much as we enjoyed making it.

Link to Wednesday's post (so you can have a shot at the contest, of course!):
So This Is The New Year...

NOTE: Please remember to enter your email address when you leave your comment. Your email address will not be published on the blog; we just need a way to contact you if you win the $100!

Posted by Megan Mahan at 04:13 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)