Skip to main content
Survey Report

Insurance Market Perspective on Processing Schedule of Values

Casualty|Property
N/A

March 22, 2021

To help better understand the insurance industry’s thoughts, opinions and experience with schedule of values processing we recently launched a survey.

In this report we are pleased to share with you the results from our schedule of values processing survey.

Methodology

Overall, 87 professionals involved with schedule of values processing took part in the survey.

Our participants included underwriters, catastrophe modellers and exposure managers from a range of global insurance companies.

In the survey we asked the participants to rank their satisfaction levels with their current schedule of values experiences based on the following criteria:

  • Meeting service level agreements (SLAs)
  • Quality of service
  • Speed of service
  • Volumes
  • Barriers to a good service

At the end of the survey we also asked an open ended question on the changes participants would like to see for the schedule of values cleansing process in their respective class.

Survey highlights

How satisfied are you with the overall service for schedule of values processing?

Only 15% of participants either gave 9/10 or 10/10 for how satisfied they are with their overall service for schedule of values processing.

On average underwriters gave a 6/10 for their overall level of satisfaction, compared to catastrophe modellers and exposures managers who on average gave 7/10.

Figure 1- Survey responses on how satisfied participants are with their overall service for schedule of values processing.
Figure 1- Survey responses on how satisfied participants are with their overall service for schedule of values processing.
When participants were asked to rank out of 10 how satisfied they are with their overvall service for schedule of values processing, 8% gave 10/10, 6.9% gave 9/10, 21.8% gave 8/10, 20.7% gave 7/10, 14.9% gave 6/10, 13.8% gave 5/10, 5.8% gave 4/10, 5.8% gave 3/10 and 2.3% gave 1/10.
Are you satisfied with how often the schedule of values service level agreements are met?

Many of the participants gave 5/10 and above on how satisfied they are with how often their schedule of values service level agreements are met.

Many participants gave 5/10 and above on how satisfied they are with how often their schedule of values service level agreements are met.”

Paul Ward | Global Markets P&C Hub

Underwriters were less satisfied compared to exposure managers and catastrophe modellers.

Figure 2 – Survey responses for how  satistifed participants are that their schedule of values service level agreements are being met.
Figure 2 – Survey responses for how satistifed participants are that their schedule of values service level agreements are being met.
When survery participants were asked if they are satisfied with how often their schedule of values service level agreements are being met, giving a ranking out of 10, 12% gave 10/10, 8% gave 9/10, 19% gave 8/10, 19% gave 7/10, 10% gave 6/10, 21% gave 5/10, 3% gave 4/10, 6% gave 3/10 and 2% gave 1/10.
What are the barriers to a successful schedule of values process?

Data standards was highlighted as the main barrier to a successful schedule of values process, followed by resources and process standards. 

Participants could select more than one option for this question.

Figure 3 – Survey responses on the main barriers to a successful schedule of values process.
Figure 3 – Survey responses on the main barriers to a successful schedule of values process.
When survey participants were asked what the main barriers were to a successful schedule of values process, 54.7% said resources, 10.5% said service level agreements, 20.9% said software, 81.4% said data standards, 31.4% said process standards and 11.6% said other.

Towards the end of the survey, we asked what changes in schedule of values processing participants would like to see in their respective class. The consistent themes were:

  1. Data standardisation globally
  2. Better quality data
  3. A shared service for the market
  4. Improved data presentation in both accuracy and consistency
  5. More efficient use of time and increased resources

Summary

The key findings highlight a clear desire to adhere to data standards, however this standard can currently differ extremely across the market. And while most respondents have an internal standard to which they aim to process their data, the ability of data processors to adhere consistently to that standard is inhibited by the quality of data available.

The importance of the data standards is impeded by the fact it was identified as being the main barrier to successful processing of schedule of values.

The volume of schedules processed is such that hours of rework is necessary to adhere to different internal standards as schedules pass from insured, to insurer to reinsurer.

There is an incredibly inefficient use of the market’s collective time.

Cleansing a schedule once and being able to use it many times throughout the process would massively increase efficiency and minimise introduction of errors.

The survey results highlight the potential benefits of introducing an industry standard including:

  • Consistency
  • Efficiency – speed and cost
  • Improved quality

Please download the report to view the full survey findings.

We hope you find this report insightful and please do not hesitate to contact us for any further information.

Contact

Paul Ward
Global Markets P&C Hub
Willis Towers Watson

Related content tags, list of links Survey Report Casualty Property
Contact Us