Munich Re reports that 2017 was the second most expensive year for natural disasters ever recorded, with overall global losses estimated at over $360B. For the U.S., last year’s severe storms resulted in a share of losses that was significantly higher (50%), than the long-term average (32%). A recently published Business Insurance special report cites estimates of insured losses of $15.4B–with $12B caused by inland flooding–stemming from Hurricane Harvey, alone.
Ernst Rauch, head of Munich Re’s Corporate Climate Center, holds that these patterns are likely to continue. “We have a new normal. 2017 was not an outlier.”
A quick look at the weather on the first day of Spring seems to underscore that point.
- Businesses in the mid-Atlantic and Northeast expect to be digging out from the fourth winter storm in 3 weeks.
- High winds and hail are causing damage across the Southeast.
- Flash flood watches have been issued by the NWS in parts of Southern California.
Is your business prepared for the “new normal”?
With large-scale natural disasters becoming increasingly common and more costly, a renewed focus on business continuity and disaster recovery is essential. Preparing for these events, along with the ability to rebound from them, are a factor on which businesses must now be able to compete. …
This is the third part of a three-part series that we hope will prove helpful in the RMIS selection process. Part 1 explained how moving from spreadsheets to RMIS can be beneficial and included some suggestions for determining if the switch to a RMIS might be warranted. Part 2 provided tips on researching vendors, suggestions for including stakeholders in the buying process, and thoughts on the potential for a new RMIS to solve issues that commonly exist between risk management and other departments.
You’ve put in the research, evaluated RFPs, and interviewed vendors. After viewing demos and getting answers to questions, you’ve learned more about what makes each vendor’s technology and service unique. It seems that you’re finally closing in on selecting the RMIS that best fits the needs of your organization.
There is, of course, a lot of ground to be covered between now and the point at which the work of putting your system in place is begun. Yet it’s likely—based on first-hand experience or “horror stories” you’ve heard along the way—that you have your fair share of concerns related to implementation.
System implementation marks the transition from the known—however imperfect—to the unknown. Even the promise of moving to a RMIS that significantly improves the organization’s ability to manage risk, insurance, and claims data is not likely to make the change completely seamless. This is where selecting the right partner can make all the difference.
This is the second part of a three-part series that we hope will prove helpful in the RMIS selection process. Part 1 explained how moving from spreadsheets to RMIS can be beneficial and included some suggestions for determining if the switch to a RMIS might be warranted. In Part 3, we’ll take a look at what many cite as a major concern or roadblock when considering the move to a RMIS–implementing a new system.
Whether you’ve decided that using spreadsheets to collect, analyze, and report on risk, claims, and insurance data no longer works for your organization or you’re faced with the need to replace an existing RMIS system, choosing the right RMIS takes research and careful consideration.
The suggestions that follow are intended to help you find a solution that meets your current needs and is ready for the new challenges that will emerge as your business grows.
Who else needs to be involved?
Many organizations have internal policies and procedures in place for procurement that require the involvement of stakeholders across several departments. Some initial investigation on this front can help to prevent delays down the line. Examples include the following: …
This is the first part of a three-part series. In upcoming posts, we’ll provide more information that we hope will prove helpful in the RMIS selection process. Part 2 weighs in on additional topics to consider, including who to involve in the process, budgeting, and initiating the process of working with a RMIS vendor. In Part 3, we’ll take a look at what many cite as a major concern or roadblock when considering the move to a RMIS–implementing a new system.
It’s 2018, and the RMIS industry is well into its fifth decade. RMIS vendors continue to develop and refine tools that give users the ability to integrate data from multiple sources, automate workflows, and improve analysis & reporting.
So, who’s still using spreadsheets to collect, analyze, and report on risk, claims, and insurance data? Plenty of people, it turns out.
According to the recently released 2018 RMIS Report, 26.8% of RMIS Report User Survey respondents indicated that they do not use a RMIS. Asked to specify the primary reason for not doing so, 23% cited the use of spreadsheets. Assuming the likelihood of at least some “non-RMIS users” opting out of responding to a RMIS survey altogether, it’s safe to assume that the actual number is probably even higher.
For some smaller organizations, using spreadsheets instead of a RMIS may still make sense. Perhaps the process of pulling together data and calculating a business’s total cost or risk is straightforward and easily accomplished. Maybe the annual volume of claims or the number of properties for which exposure values must be collected is small enough that investment in a RMIS isn’t warranted.
This is the second in a series of five brief articles on key data issues identified by several prominent risk managers at leading UK and European companies. In April, they participated in a roundtable on future-proofing management information (MI). The event was co-hosted by Gallagher Basset and Origami Risk.