11 quick takes: Will technology kill the agent?
One of the more popular and interesting threads on Insurance Forums in the past week has been “Will technology kill the agent?”
As consumers get more and more tech-savvy, the original post ponders whether at some point life insurance could become a true commodity that can be shopped and applied for just from an app.
The responses have been plentiful and interesting, with some of the more concise opinions offered below in no particular order. To read more or add your own thoughts on this issue, please visit the thread.
1. It'll only kill the amateur agent that only gives quotes for coverage, instead of looking for problems to solve using insurance. Also, it's only for the self-actualizing buyer that would use an app like that. Most people are totally confused about life insurance... and I like it like that. If the agent can't provide value for the client... that agent's days are numbered.
2. Technology will not work without the agent. The agent is valuable in conjunction with the Internet. The agent can use the Internet to find information, and for processing the applications. With technology, if the buyer is shopping for price, they will get, just that: a price... The Internet shopper will buy improper coverages, because the shopper is basically self-diagnosing their risk. The value of an agent is the relationship combined with the agent’s knowledge. The fact-finding questions the agent asks the client, other than application questions, is what separates the agent from the boiler plate Internet. Think about this. Through experience, I have noticed that a household’s insurance agent seems to remain with the insured longer than their doctor.
3. Some carriers cut the [independents] out by offering lower rates by going direct, plus allow the agent to quote with a much higher rate. I realize rate is not to be sold. Agency, coverage, level of service, and having an agent is all worth it. Today, that is forgotten often by many, and hard to refresh to many. The question here should be: Will Direct Writers Kill the Agent?
4. Technology does not eliminate the need for the agent. However, government over-regulation such as the DNC and CMS-type regulations are a greater threat because it makes it more and more difficult for the agent to personally reach the consumers that need his services.
5. Technology will never replace salesmanship. Good consultative selling, solid conversations and empathy, will be necessary to truly increase any company’s sales in any industry, FOREVER. People have been selling life for 400 years, and nothing has changed in that time. Might be less salesmen, but so what? More for us...
6. The more complex the products are... and the more noise being said on the Internet... the more an agent is needed. As agents are aging (average age is mid-50s) and phasing themselves out... this can create a huge opportunity for those who are properly trained to capitalize on it.
• To read more or add your own thoughts on this issue, please visit the thread.
Responses continue on next page
- Coverage for life ... provided you don't live past 100
- Pacific Life takeover of former Genworth Lynchburg life operation helps stabilize the term market
- When technology enables sleazy marketing practices
- For first time ever, more Americans covered by employment-based life insurance than by individual
- MDRT appoints Pittman as its 92nd President; New York Life continues to dominate U.S. membership
- Need for coverage on display in the stories of 2017 Life Lessons Scholarship award recipients
- LIAM updates: Podcast debunks 5 myths about life insurance; Guardian releases educational videos
- Less than half of employed Americans have workplace group life coverage