Understanding vertical and horizontal compliance processes: A means to increased quality and reduced costs

INTRODUCTION

Companies in the United States employ many processes in running their businesses.  Laws from various sources affect these processes, so that the processes and administration of them are specialized.  When company management does not acknowledge the need for common understanding and for specialization, the results are confusion, subsequent errors, and increased costs.
Being aware of the need for specialization assists in “knowing how to use and respond to language appropriately, given the setting, the topic, and the relationships among the people communicating.”[1]  Two specialists who are fluent in using and responding to the language of their specialty will comprehend each other.  The conversation between a specialist and a non-specialist may be fluent, but unless both parties use the language appropriately, they will not comprehend each other while two non-specialists conversing about a specialty may unknowingly lack both fluency and comprehension.
In regards to “compliance”, the word can be used to mean anything to do with laws, working with regulators, or even auditing.  To assure fluency and comprehension, “compliance” is used to mean abiding with the requirements of “laws”, i.e., constitutions, laws, statutes, regulations, court rulings, etc., promulgated by a governmental body with appropriate jurisdictional authority.
For property and casualty insurance companies[2], there are five major categories of laws to comply with:

  1. Federal economic sanctions
  2. Money, or financial matters
  3. Employees, or human resources issues
  4. The business of insurance, or operations
  5. Activities that support insurance operations

A discussion of compliance with federal economic sanctions and notable laws specific to insurance follows.  (The Appendix has a listing of laws that generally apply to financial, human resources, and business activities of all industries.)

FEDERAL ECONOMIC SANCTIONS COMPLIANCE

Federal economic sanctions apply to all United States citizens and businesses, arching over other compliance requirements.  The regulations enforced by the United States Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) prohibit insurers from “engaging in [financial] transactions not licensed by OFAC that in any way involve”[3] individuals named on federal terrorist or narcotics trafficker lists or in certain countries[4] unless OFAC has pre-approved the transaction by issuance of a license.  This applies to insurance companies, brokers, business partners, and employees, and includes transactions such as collecting premium to issue a policy[5],[6] and paying a claim[7],[8].  Although OFAC has published risk matrices as guidance for financial services, charities, and securities firms to assess their risks in relation to compliance with the economic sanctions administered by OFAC,[9] no risk matrix has been published for the insurance industry.[10]

The next category of laws deals with financial issues affecting property and casualty insurance companies.  These laws are typically administered by a corporate finance department.

INSURANCE FINANCE COMPLIANCE

Insurance companies are expected to comply with laws addressing these financial matters.

  • Company Formation and Capitalization
  • Domiciliary jurisdiction – compliance with the business laws of the jurisdiction where the company is domiciled, filings with Secretary of State and capitalization requirements of insurance regulatory authority.
  • National Association of Insurance Commissioner’s (NAIC) Uniform Certificate of Authority Application (UCAA) – required filing of financial documents with a state’s insurance regulator to obtain a certificate of authority to sell insurance in a state.
  • Accounting Practices
  • SAP (Statutory Accounting Principles)
  • Solvency
  • Reinsurance
  • Guaranty Funds
  • Internal controls over financial reporting, including revisions to the Annual Financial Reporting Model Regulation (the Model Audit Rule)[11]
  • Reinsurance
  • Guaranty Funds
  • Premium Taxes (state, county, municipality)
  • Producer commission payments
  • Environmental Compliance – Insurers with direct written premium over $300 million must complete the Insurer Climate Risk Disclosure Survey to provide regulators and insurance consumers a method to “assess insurers’ risk assessment and management efforts” regarding climate change risks, focusing on insurer solvency and insurance availability and affordability.[12]  Twenty-one states require insurers to complete the survey.[13]

The next category addressed is compliance with laws regarding employers and employees.  These laws are typically administered by a staffing or human resources department.

INSURANCE HUMAN RESOURCES (HR) COMPLIANCE

Most of the laws that address how companies and employees interact apply to all industries.  There is a short list of laws that specifically apply to insurance companies.

  • Payroll Administration (requires interaction with Finance)
  • Commission payments – to company employees who are licensed and paid as producers
  • Employee Ethics
  • Violent Crime Control and Enforcement Act of 1994 (18 USC §§ 1033-34)

The discussion continues with a focus on compliance with laws specifically addressing the business of insurance.

INSURANCE OPERATIONS COMPLIANCE

Some laws, especially at the state level, affect only the business of insurance (operations) or only a specific type of insurance, such as auto or homeowners.  The major topics are:

  • Advertising/Marketing (Sales and Service)
  • Unfair Trade Practices Acts
  • Producer advertising materials
  • Risk Selection (Underwriting)
  • Declination
  • Rescission
  • Terminations
  • Initial Underwriting Period
  • Midterm Cancellation
  • Nonrenewal
  • Partial (policy modification to remove a coverage or impose a higher deductible)
  • Consumer Reports Used by Insurers
  • FCRA (Fair Credit Reporting Act, as amended by the FACT Act of 2003)
    • Permissible use
    •  Disposal
    •  Adverse use
  • Various laws restricting or prohibiting the use of credit information, including “freezes”
  • Acquisition and Retention (Sales and Service)
  • Assigned Risk (automobile) and Residual Markets (property Market Assistance Plan [MAP], Fair Access to Insurance Requirements [FAIR] program, and Wind, Beach and Coastal Plans)
  • Rating – charging the same rate for the same risk, prohibited rating factors
  • Accounts Receivable (Customer Accounting)
  • Billing
  • Payment Posting
  • Refunds
  • Claims Handling
  • Unfair Claims Practices Acts
  • Adjuster Licensing
  • Continuing Education
  • Notice to insurance regulators following “for cause” termination
  • Privacy – affects all operations processes (Most notably, state insurance privacy laws passed in response to the federal Gramm-Leach Bliley Act and the NAIC Model Insurance Information and Privacy Protection Act)
  • Notice of Information Practices
  • Opt Out provisions
  • Use and display of customers’ Social Security Numbers
  • Security
  • Ensuring information collected from customers is secure from unauthorized access
  • Notifying customers in the event of a breach of security
  • Business Continuation/Disaster Recovery

These laws affect the major processes of insurance operations, which are:

  • Underwriting – risk acceptability selection and routine monitoring for continued acceptability
  • Sales and Service – acquisition of new business and retention of insureds
  • Billing – customer accounting or accounts receivable
  • Claims handling – settling claims based upon contractual language and facts of the loss

OPERATIONS SUPPORT PROCESSES

To support the major processes of insurance operations, insurers engage in at least six additional distinct processes.  None of these involve routine customer contact except complaint administration.

  1. A company is responsible to validate licenses and continuing education, to appoint, and to notify states when appointments are terminated for employees who are producers and adjusters.
  2. For companies that use agents or brokers to sell and service its insurance products, the insurer needs to administer contracts, commission payments, and business relationships with the agents and brokers.
  3. Product development and management works closely with actuarial services and with regulatory filings and handles:
  • The development of new policies, coverages, and endorsements and the maintenance of existing products
  • Ensuring that wording used by contracts, forms, endorsements, and general correspondence for use with customers meets all legal and business requirements
  • Production and maintenance of rate and form manuals for the use of employees who deal with customers
  • Release of new or revised rates, forms, etc., into production after all necessary filings have been approved

Companies sometimes establish one business area for the development of new products and another for the maintenance of existing products.

  1. Actuarial services supports product management by developing adequate and competitive rates for underwriting risks accepted by the company.  A company’s claims department relies on actuaries to develop loss reserves for probable future liabilities related to unpaid and incurred but not reported claims.
  2. Various laws require companies to file rates, forms, manuals, or data in response to new laws or changes in laws, when the company initiates changes to its products, or at the request of an insurance regulator.  The regulatory filings department administers this process. Filings must be made in specific formats and provide details about issues such as the purpose of the filing, premium affects upon insureds, and an actuarial memorandum that supports any rate changes.  Filing of data to fulfill regulator requests requires validation of the data accuracy to ensure the regulator is provided with reliable information. Various regulatory agencies at both the state- and federal-level require insurers to file periodic routine reports, such as a state law requiring insurers to notify the state department of transportation of vehicles no longer insured by the company or federal law requiring liability, no-fault, and workers’ compensation insurers to report payments made to Medicare beneficiaries to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (an agency of the Health and Human Services Department).[14]  Many states also require ad hoc reports, such as monthly updates regarding the numbers of claims presented and closed after a catastrophe.
  1. Consumer protection laws require companies to respond to and keep record of complaints.  Regulators thoroughly review complaint-tracking reports and/or directly review complaints when conducting market analysis and during market conduct examinations.

The next section addresses how a property and casualty insurer coordinates compliance with all of these laws by the establishment of various processes.

THE PROCESSES OF A PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

VERTICAL PROCESSES. Project management refers to a process that drives the flow of knowledge as a “vertical process.”[15]  All of the insurance processes discussed above are vertical processes.  How they fit together is demonstrated in Table 1.
table1

Table 1 – Vertical Processes – Insurance Company

The laws affecting finance and HR issues to a large extent determine the processes within a company’s finance and HR departments.  Accordingly, the compliance process is often integrated within the finance and HR processes.  The finance and HR processes generally do not involve contact with customers.

Insurance operation processes provide service to insurance customers by directly interacting with customers.  The compliance process is either integrated in each of the operations and operations support processes or it may be centralized within a compliance department.  If centralized, the employees supporting the operations and operations support processes are able to fully focus on and maximize their skills directly related to their respective specialties.

INTEGRATED VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL PROCESSES. Horizontal processes drive the flow of work[16] and integrate vertical processes into a coherent system.  Table 2 illustrates how an insurance company’s vertical and horizontal processes may be integrated and also displays the points of interaction between insurers and governmental authorities.  As was done with vertical processes, the discussion is limited to compliance with laws specific to insurance companies.  (The Appendix provides a discussion of the horizontal processes which are not specifically addressed by insurance laws.)
table2

Table 2 – General Business and Insurance Business Processes

A corporation’s entity type and method of capitalization form the foundation of its processes.  The requirements for an insurance company vary based on state insurance laws regarding formation as a stock company, mutual, reciprocal, etc., and whether capital funding is private or public.  State insurance laws require that insurance companies have a board of directors and company officers.  Company officers are responsible to develop and maintain business practices and procedures appropriate for the business.

To comply with new or changes to existing laws, an insurance company may need to alter its operations or operations support processes or periodically introduce new horizontal processes, such as privacy and security.  In addition, training and procedures may need to be changed.  Many states require insurance companies to develop plans for minimal disruption of service to its insureds in the event of a disaster.  Disaster recovery laws are an example of an insurance law that applies not only to the operations processes but financial and HR processes as well.  State insurance laws require companies to submit to regulatory examinations, with authority to require internal audits, and to participate in administrative hearings and arbitration.
How these vertical and horizontal processes interact is discussed next.

INTERACTION OF AN INSURANCE COMPANY’S PROCESSES

PARALLEL HORIZONTAL PROCESSES. The four major vertical processes of an insurance company – finance, human resources, operations, and operations support – are demonstrably different from each other, based distinctly upon the laws being complied with, the customers being supported, the different skills and aptitudes of employees, and the specialized professional certifications available to employees.  However, recognizing horizontal processes as separate and distinct may not be as evident.

For example, although compliance and auditing are parallel processes, and there are laws requiring a company to conduct audits, the two processes are distinct.  The compliance process focuses on the implementation of requirements from laws within the appropriate process or processes, while auditing focuses on the validation that these requirements were implemented properly, completely, and timely.  Therefore, a compliance process reacts to new laws and proactively drives changes to the company’s other processes to assure there are no gaps in compliance.  Conversely, auditing is a post-implementation process that proactively assesses the quality of the process being audited by validating whether processes are performing as expected and is reactive when non-compliance issues are uncovered.  Only when those conducting an audit are not the same persons who assisted in the development of compliant processes are the audit results are objective and independently verifiable.[17]
Another example of parallel horizontal processes is compliance (with laws) and adherence (to contracts and policies).  Governmental authorities establish laws and expect businesses to comply with those laws.  A company signing a contract with another company expects the other company to fulfill its contractual obligations by complying with the terms of the contact.  A company establishes its own policies and expects its employees to follow those policies consistently.  It is expected that laws will be complied with and contracts and policies adhered to.  With only the authority behind the requirements being different, the compliance and adherence processes are similar; however, even so, the scope of a compliance process is properly limited to requirements from laws.

INTERSECTING PROCESSES. To ensure the roles of a horizontal and vertical process that intersect remain separate, the interaction should be limited to the intersection point of the two processes.  When the interaction is not limited, those outside of the intersecting processes many times see the roles of the intersecting processes as similar and indistinct.  These examples will demonstrate the importance of establishing and maintaining separate roles for distinct processes.

Upon the identification of changes because of a new law or an amendment to an existing law, a compliance department is responsible to communicate those changes to the affected operations area.  A compliance department would notify the claims department of a new law that affects claims handling.  The claims department would then alter its processes as needed to comply.  In so doing, the two departments focus on their respective specialties – compliance and claims – and the compliance department would not start performing work that properly belongs to the claims department.

In regards to customer complaints, the role of the compliance department is to identify new laws or changes to laws addressing complaint handling and ensure that a compliant process for responding to complaints is in place.  Usually, either an operations support area or the operations area to which the complaint is addressed will respond to the complainant.  A compliance department would not have line authority over operations staff and would not be able to administer corrective or disciplinary action to the employees whose actions have caused the complaint.  Accordingly, the compliance department should not have responsibility for vertical processes such as responding to customer complaints.

Separate administration of all distinct processes focuses and limits the scope of responsibilities of all processes.  When distinct processes are combined, the distinctiveness of each becomes blurred, from the perspective of those familiar and those unfamiliar with the processes.  Blurred processes become inefficient and ultimately ineffective.  The result of maintaining distinct processes as separate processes is the maximization of efficiencies and effectiveness.

Specialized skills, knowledge, aptitude, and, in some cases, a professional license or designation are needed required to effectively handle the flow of knowledge within the finance, HR, operations, and operations support activities.  The availability of a professional certification or designation may be used as a straightforward method of distinguishing among processes.  If a certification or designation is available for a specialized function, then that function and the process supported by it are distinct from other specialized functions and warrants administration as a separate process.

ADMINISTRATION OF THE COMPLIANCE PROCESS

Insurance companies have several options when determining which of the company’s departments will administer compliance.  Many workable arrangements are possible that account for the complexities of general and insurance business laws, the multiple processes of any company, and the unique characteristics of individual companies.  The structure below is an example that shows compliance both as a separate process and systemically embedded.  In any configuration, hiring staff with the appropriate professional designations merits strong consideration.

  1. Dedicated staff supporting the specialized processes of finance, HR issues, and operations support are responsible for all of the compliance responsibilities associated with their specialized processes.
  2. An operations compliance manager supports all operations processes by identifying new compliance requirements for these operations.  In this arrangement, the operations functions each concentrate fully on their core processes.
  3. A corporate compliance department supports the business having:
    1. Oversight of the compliance process for the entire company.  To accomplish this, corporate compliance has authority with respect to compliance matters over the vertical processes of finance, HR, and operations, and operations support.
    2. Conducting the compliance process for laws that affect more than one horizontal process.  This will ensure that the integration of these laws throughout all processes is generally consistent.
  4. Both the corporate compliance and auditing functions report to the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.  This will ensure board awareness and involvement in the separate parallel processes of compliance and auditing.
  5. The internal audit department, in addition to conducting audits to validate compliance, also audits for adherence to corporate policy. Additionally, based on the similar roles in post-compliance validation of audit and regulatory examinations, the internal audit department also supports regulatory examinations of the operations and operations support processes.  The company that has only one source that drive changes required due to regulatory examinations and internal audits.

This configuration covers the height and breadth of compliance for insurance companies; including horizontal processes such as corporate policies and auditing, and vertical processes of finance, HR, and operations.  The implementation of such an arrangement is one way to ensure that the company’s compliance process is holistic and systemic, which fosters fluency and comprehension between a company’s departments.  With strong reporting relationships in place, the company’s board of directors is assured that the board’s corporate governance responsibilities regarding compliance are fulfilled.

SUMMARY

Every business is obligated to comply with a variety of laws from state and federal legislatures, regulatory agencies, and courts.  Although states are the primary regulators of the business of insurance, some federal laws also affect the insurance industry, either directly or indirectly.  Laws that affect insurers can be general, specific to an activity, or specific to certain types of insurance policies.  To comply with changes to existing laws or new laws, companies must first be aware of the laws, regardless of the source, and then react to the laws.  The processes companies follow in reaction to changes to laws are part of a compliance process, which proactively makes changes to business processes for the company to remain compliant.

All processes can be categorized as either vertical or horizontal.  A vertical process drives the flow of knowledge while a horizontal process drives the flow of work.  Horizontal processes are necessary to link all vertical processes into a coherent system.  The effectiveness and efficiency of these links determines the effectiveness and efficiency of the business.  The availability of a certification or designation for a specialized function is a sound indication that a vertical or horizontal process is distinct from other processes and should be maintained and administered as a separate process.

In the insurance industry, companies have many choices in determining the best method of administering the compliance process.  A compliance process is often integrated within the finance, HR, and the various operations support processes.  Operations processes may also have integrated compliance or a centralized compliance process may support operations.  Each company’s compliance process should recognize both the company’s unique characteristics as well as the need the unique aspects of specialization within laws and the efforts taken to comply with specialized laws.  When done, this ensures that the company specialists are fluent in and comprehend both the legal requirements and the company’s processes, resulting in harmony instead of confusion, fewer errors and cost savings.  In turn, this provides assurance to the company’s directors that its corporate governance responsibilities regarding compliance are fulfilled.

APPENDIX


A.  VERTICAL PROCESSES – GENERAL BUSINESS COMPLIANCE ISSUES
1.  Finance Compliance[18]

  • Treasury Management[19]
    • External Financing
  • Borrowing
  • Leasing
  • Investor relations
  • Cash Management
  • Collection
  • Disbursements
  • Short-term investing
  • Investment Management
  • Long term securities and equities
  • Risk Management
  • Employee Benefit Fund Management
  • Controller
  • SEC Oversight (limited to publicly traded companies) through the Securities Exchange Act
  • Accounting
  • Financial reporting
  • Internal Accounting
  • GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles)
  • Auditing
    • Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (some provisions apply to both public and private companies)
    • Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) – auditing standards
    • USA PATRIOT Act
  • Tax reporting and tax filings (federal, state, local)
  • Bank relationship management
  • Payables – payroll (requires interaction with Human Resources), accounts payable
  • Budget and Financial Planning
  • Management Information Systems
  • Credit and Accounts Receivable
  • Electronic Funds Transfers
    • ACH (Automated Clearing House) Coding
  • External Auditor Relations

2.  HR Compliance[20]

  • Consumer Reports Used by Employers
  • FCRA (Fair Credit Reporting Act, as amended by the FACT Act of 2003)
  • Permissible use
  • Disposal
  • Adverse use
  • Discrimination Protections
  • ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) and ADA Amendments Act of 2008
  • ADEA (Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967)
  •  Civil Rights Act of 1964
  •  Civil Rights Act of 1991
  • Equal Employment Opportunity Act
  • EEOC’s E-RACE Program (Eradicating Racism And Colorism from Employment)
  • Discrimination protections in connection with background checks
  • The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 – employers may not request or require applicants or discipline employees for declining to take a polygraph test
  • Family and Medical Leave Act
  • Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008
  • OWBPA (Older Workers Benefit Protection Act)
  • Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 – employers may not discriminate against individuals based on national origin or citizenship
  • Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Whistleblower Protection
  • The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) – provides re-employment rights to military personnel and prohibits discrimination by employers
  • Health Benefits/Retirement
  • ERISA (The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
  • Family and Medical Leave Act
  • Payroll Administration (requires interaction with Finance)
  • Internal Revenue Act
  • FLSA (Fair Labor Standards Act)
  • Tax reporting
  • Workplace Safety/Workplace Injuries
  • OSHA (Occupational Safety & Health Administration)
  • Workers’ Compensation Insurance
  • Release of Employees – Mass Layoff
  • Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act
  • Employability Standards
  • Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 – only persons who are able to prove they are authorized to work in the United States may be hired by an employer

3.  General Business Compliance Issues

  • Advertising/Marketing
  • Telemarketing Sales Rules (”Do Not Call”) issued by the Federal Trade Commission or similar rules issued by a comparable state agency to protect the public from unwanted telemarketing
  • Intellectual Property
  • Patent, Copyright, Trademark, Servicemark, Patent and Trade Secret protections
  • Obtaining, Using, and Protecting Information
  • Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
  • HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996)
  • Products/Services Sold to Members of the U.S. Military
  • SCRA (The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act of 2003) and related state laws
  • Conducting Business Electronically
  • UETA (Uniform Electronic Transactions Act)
  • E-Sign (Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce)
  • Document Retention (Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

B.  HORIZONTAL PROCESSES – GENERAL BUSINESS COMPLIANCE ISSUES
1.  Corporate Governance Issues

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires publicly traded companies to have a corporate governance plan.  The New York Stock Exchange requires every company listed by the Exchange to have “certain standards regarding corporate governance,” regarding “corporate responsibility, integrity and accountability to shareholders.”[21]  Companies not listed by the Exchange may opt to develop corporate governance policies based on the Exchange’s standards to be modernistic, before going public, or because a lender requires it.

2.  Establishment of Various Corporate Policies and Departments

A board establishes an ethics policy to provide general oversight and direction for corporate behavior.  Corporate counsel serves as consultants for the company’s board and management with the development of corporate policies.  In addition to supporting policy formation, corporate counsel should be involved in nearly every aspect of the company’s processes, particularly all issues regarding laws and contracts.  Risk management is sometimes set up as a separate department with responsibility to identify and reduce exposure to all types of risks to the company.  A corporate compliance department may be established and have responsibility to administer the overall compliance process.  Counsel’s legal interpretation of risks and laws is supportive of the risk management and compliance processes.

A company’s ethics policy, or code of business conduct, often states that the company will comply with all known laws.  (The three largest P&C insurers in the United States from the 2011 Fortune 500 list[22] make a similar statement,[23] and others very likely do as well.)

Many companies form departments to administer contracts the company signs.  In support of risk management, the contract department should validate that all employees adhere to corporate policies in areas such as contractual data-sharing agreements.  A corporate training department may be formed.  Policies to address the topics of security of its employees, customers, premises, systems, and intellectual property may be established.  A corporate audit or internal audit department would be formed in part to validate that the company’s various processes are compliant with laws and adhere to corporate policies.  The company would also establish departments for computer processing and advertising and marketing.

REFERENCES


American International Group, “Code of Conduct” [http://www.aigcorporate.com/corpgovernance/code_of_Conduct2010/AIGCodeOfConductEng.pdf].
Berkshire Hathaway Group, “Berkshire Hathaway Inc. – Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.”  [http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/govern/ethics.pdf].
CNN/Money Homepage, Fortune Magazine, “Fortune 500 2011” Rankings by “Industry: Insurance: P & C (stock)”, [http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/industries/182/index.html] and (mutual) [http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/industries/184/index.html].
Cornell University Law School, LII/Legal Information Institute, “UCC:  uniform commercial code”, [http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/].
Corporate Legal Times, “The Roundtable Sponsored by Littler Mendelson:  Compliance Matters – What Should You Be Doing to Build Better Compliance Policies?”,  September 2005:1,  [http://www.insidecounsel.com/pdfs/SeptRoundtable.pdf]
Department of Health and Human Services, “Mandatory Insurer Reporting:  Liability Insurance, Self-Insurance, No-Fault Insurance and Workers Compensation”, [http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MandatoryInsRep/03_Liability_Self_No_Fault_Insurance_and_Workers_Compensation.asp#TopOfPage].
The Institute of Internal Auditors, “International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing”, [http://www.theiia.org/guidance/standards-and-guidance/ippf/standards/full-standards].
National Association of Insurance Commissioners, NAIC/AICPA Working Group, Financial Condition (E) Committee, “Model Audit Rule Revisions”, [http://www.naic.org/committees_e_naic_aicpa_wg.htm].
National Association of Insurance Commissioners, News Release “Insurance Regulators Adopt Climate Change Risk Disclosure”, [http://www.naic.org/Releases/2009_docs/climate_change_risk_disclosure_adopted.htm].
National Association of Insurance Commissioners, “Climate Change and Global Warming (EX) Task Force 2010 Fall National Meeting, Sunday, October 17, 2010, 5:00 – 6:00 p.m. Handout”.  [http://www.naic.org/documents/committees_ex_climate_101017_handout.pdf]
National Capital Language Resource Center (NCLRC).  “The Essentials of Language Teaching, Goal:  Communicative Competence”,  [http://www.nclrc.org/essentials/goalsmethods/goal.htm].
New York State Insurance Department, “Circular Letter No. 11 (2009),” “Compliance with the Federal Bank Secrecy Act, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and Office of Foreign Assets Control Requirements”, [http://www.ins.state.ny.us/circltr/2009/cl2009_11.htm].
New York Stock Exchange, “Final NYSE Corporate Governance Rules”, [http://www.nyse.com/pdfs/finalcorpgovrules.pdf].
New York Stock Exchange, “Listed Company Manual”, Section 301.00 Introduction, [http://www.nyse.com/Frameset.html?displayPage=/listed/1022221393251.html].
Securities and Exchange Commission.  Final Rule:  Revision of the Commission’s Auditor Independence Requirements, [http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-7919.htm].
Snider, Keith F., and Nissen, Mark E., “Beyond the Body of Knowledge:  A Knowledge-Flow Approach to Project Management Theory and Practice”, Project Management Journal, June 2003:  6.
State Farm Insurance Companies, “State Farm® Code of Conduct 2011“.  [http://www.statefarm.com/_pdf/2011-code-of-conduct.pdf
United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2010-11 Edition,” “Financial Managers”, [http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos010.htm].
United States Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, & Urban Affairs, “Brief Summary of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act”.  [http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/070110_Dodd_Frank_Wall_Street_Reform_comprehensive_summary_Final.pdf].
United States Department of the Treasury, “Civil Penalties Information Chart”.  “Enforcement Information for June 3, 2010”, [http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/Pages/20100603_33.aspx] and “Enforcement Information for April 7, 2011”, [http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/CivPen/Documents/04072011.pdf].
United States Treasury, “Home/Resource Center/FAQs/Sanctions/Frequently Asked Questions and Answers.” [http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Sanctions/Pages/answer.aspx].
United States Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control, “Foreign Assets Control Regulations and the Insurance Industry”, April 29, 2004: 1, [http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/regulations/t11facin.pdf].
United Stated Department of the Treasury, “Terrorism Sanctions:  What is Your OFAC Risk”, [http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/programs/terror/terror.shtml].

ENDNOTES


[1] National Capital Language Resource Center (NCLRC).  “The Essentials of Language Teaching, Goal:  Communicative Competence.”  [http://www.nclrc.org/essentials/goalsmethods/goal.htm.]  Site accessed August 31, 2007.
[2] The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, signed into law in 2010, established a Federal Insurance Office, which is authorized to gather information about the insurance industry and to monitor the insurance industry for systemic risk purposes.  This Act also established the Financial Stability Oversight Council.  The Council has authority to monitor non-bank financial institutions and it will recommend that the Federal Reserve assume regulatory authority for companies it deems systemically important.  United States Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, & Urban Affairs, “Brief Summary of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act”.  [http://banking.senate.gov/public/_files/070110_Dodd_Frank_Wall_Street_Reform_comprehensive_summary_Final.pdf].  Site accessed June 1, 2011.  Because the affect of these federal actions is yet undetermined, no further discussion of these issues is made.
[3] United States Treasury, Office of Foreign Assets Control, “Foreign Assets Control Regulations and the Insurance Industry”, April 29, 2004: 1. [http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/regulations/t11facin.pdf], site accessed March 6, 2006.  Although Sec. 326 of the USAPATRIOT Act (Customer Identification Program) does not apply to P&C insurers [see 31 CFR 103.16 (a) (4)], all businesses are required to check various government lists to confirm that there is no business activity with a Specially Designated National (SDN) or a Specially Designated Narcotics Trafficker (SDNTK).
[4] United States Treasury, “Home/Resource Center/FAQs/Sanctions/Frequently Asked Questions and Answers.” “At what point must an insurer check to determine whether an applicant for a policy is an SDN? If you receive an application from an SDN for a policy, you are under an obligation not to issue the policy.  Remember that when you are insuring someone, you are providing a service to that person.  You are not allowed to provide any services to an SDN. If the SDN sends a deposit along with the application, you must block the payment. [09-10-02].”  [http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Sanctions/Pages/answer.aspx], site accessed April 11, 2011.
[5] A commercial broker handling an insurance risk outside the United States remitted a penalty of $122,408 to OFAC in 2011 for allegedly providing commercial multi peril insurance policies for property located in a sanctioned country.
 [6] A property and casualty insurance company remitted a penalty of $11,000 to OFAC in 2011 for allegedly providing a personal automobile insurance policy without an OFAC license to an individual named as a SDNTK.
[7] A life insurance company remitted a penalty of $22,500 to OFAC in 2011 for allegedly mailing a death benefit claim payment to a sanctioned country in violation of OFAC regulations.
Endnotes 5, 6, and 7:  United States Department of the Treasury, “Civil Penalties Information Chart”.  Endnotes 4 and 6:  “Enforcement Information for April 7, 2011”, [http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/CivPen/Documents/04072011.pdf]; Endnote 5:  “Enforcement Information for June 3, 2010”, [http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/OFAC-Enforcement/Pages/20100603_33.aspx], sites accessed April 12, 2011.
[8] United States Treasury, “Home/Resource Center/FAQs/Sanctions/Frequently Asked Questions and Answers.” “Is it sufficient if my company screens life insurance policies only prior to policy issuance? . . . It also is important to screen the policyholder and beneficiary prior to paying a claim. (05-01-03)” [http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Sanctions/Pages/answer.aspx], site accessed April 11, 2011.
[9] United Stated Department of the Treasury, “Terrorism Sanctions:  What is Your OFAC Risk”, [http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/programs/terror/terror.shtml], site accessed April 11, 2009.
 [10] However, the New York state insurance department issued a circular letter stating its expectations that insurance companies will abide by the requirements of OFAC and two other federal laws that do not explicitly apply to the business of insurance.  State of New York Insurance Department, “Circular Letter No. 11 (2009),” “Compliance with the Federal Bank Secrecy Act, Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and Office of Foreign Assets Control Requirements,” June 29, 2009, [http://www.ins.state.ny.us/circltr/2009/cl2009_11.htm].  The requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act apply to “covered products,” the features of which are not generally underwritten by P&C companies.  The requirements of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act apply to U.S. companies that do business with officials of foreign governments.  Site accessed July 26, 2009.
[11] National Association of Insurance Commissioners, NAIC/AICPA Working Group, Financial Condition (E) Committee, “Model Audit Rule Revisions,” [http://www.naic.org/committees_e_naic_aicpa_wg.htm], site accessed July 26, 2009.
[12] National Association of Insurance Commissioners, News Release “NAIC Adopts New Climate Risk Disclosure Survey,” March 28, 2010.  [http://www.naic.org/Releases/2010_docs/NAIC_adopts_new_climate_survey.htm], site accessed March 29, 2010.
[13] National Association of Insurance Commissioners, “Climate Change and Global Warming (EX) Task Force 2010 Fall National Meeting, Sunday, October 17, 2010, 5:00 – 6:00 p.m. Handout”.  [http://www.naic.org/documents/committees_ex_climate_101017_handout.pdf], site accessed April 10, 2011.
[14] Department of Health and Human Services, “Mandatory Insurer Reporting:  Liability Insurance, Self-Insurance, No-Fault Insurance and Workers Compensation”, [http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MandatoryInsRep/03_Liability_Self_No_Fault_Insurance_and_Workers_Compensation.asp#TopOfPage], site accessed April 22, 2009, and [http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MandatoryInsRep/04_Whats_New.asp], site accessed March 20, 2010.
[15] Keith F. Snider and Mark E. Nissen, “Beyond the Body of Knowledge:  A Knowledge-Flow Approach to Project Management Theory and Practice”, Project Management Journal, June 2003:  6.
[16] Snider and Nissen:  6.
[17] Auditor independence is a requirement with respect to financial audits of publicly traded companies via rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission.  See 17 CFR Parts 210 and 240 [http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-7919.htm].  Additionally, in the “International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing”, The Institute of Internal Auditors state:  “The internal audit activity must be independent, and internal auditors must be objective in performing their work.”  [http://www.theiia.org/guidance/standards-and-guidance/ippf/standards/full-standards], both sites accessed December 29, 2009.
[18] Many of these activities are affected by a state’s adoption of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC)[18], which seeks to standardize interstate commercial transactions.  [18]Cornell University Law School, LII/Legal Information Institute, “UCC:  uniform commercial code”, [http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/1/], accessed May 15, 2011.
[19] United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2010-11 Edition,” “Financial Managers”, [http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos010.htm], accessed December 24, 2009.  The typical duties of a treasurer and controller were obtained from this Handbook.
[20] Corporate Legal Times, “The Roundtable Sponsored by Littler Mendelson:  Compliance Matters – What Should You Be Doing to Build Better Compliance Policies?”  In “the average corporation, a third of compliance falls in labor and employment law.” September 2005:1.  [http://www.insidecounsel.com/pdfs/SeptRoundtable.pdf], site accessed April 25, 2006.
[21] New York Stock Exchange, “Listed Company Manual”, Section 301.00 Introduction, [http://www.nyse.com/Frameset.html?displayPage=/listed/1022221393251.html], site accessed March 18, 2006.
[22] CNN.com, The Internet Home of Fortune, “Fortune 500 2011” Rankings by “Industry: Insurance: P & C (Stock), [http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/industries/182/index.html and Mutuals [http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/industries/184/index.html, sites accessed May 10, 2011.
[23] 1. Berkshire Hathaway Group, “Berkshire Hathaway Inc. – Code of Business Conduct and Ethics.”  [http://www.berkshirehathaway.com/govern/ethics.pdf], site accessed May 10, 2011.
2. American International Group, “Code of Conduct” [http://www.aigcorporate.com/corpgovernance/code_of_Conduct2010/AIGCodeOfConductEng.pdf], site accessed May 10, 2011.
3. State Farm Insurance Companies, “State Farm® Code of Conduct 2011“.  [http://www.statefarm.com/_pdf/2011-code-of-conduct.pdf], site accessed May 10, 2011.

Joseph L. Wiest, CPCU, ARC, ACP, is a corporate compliance director of market conduct with a top ten P&C insurance group.  He is a graduate of the University of Nebraska, having earned a B.S. in business administration. Since 1984, he has been employed in the insurance industry, working 20 years for a major personal lines direct writer, holding positions in customer service, line underwriting, staff underwriting, and compliance.  He also served as the compliance officer of a nonstandard auto carrier for two years.  He has earned a business ethics certificate from Colorado State University in addition to nine other professional insurance designations.

The aligned organization: A framework for sustainable competitive advantage

Challenges

Insurance companies face many challenges, as competitive pressures mount, regulatory hurdles abound and market cycles oscillate relentlessly. Getting products to market faster, minimizing regulatory and financial risk and lowering operating costs have become universal mandates. The insurance industry, perhaps more than any other, requires leaders to emerge that know how to innovate, that replace the routine with the novel and push the limits of their operations to derive that most elusive of organizational ideals – sustainable competitive advantage. Organizational alignment – the idea that strategic vision, work processes and employee rewards are fine-tuned and in synch – provides the enterprise framework needed to achieve that ideal. This is no faddish methodology or technique of the moment. Organizations that fail to produce a consistent, replicable and scalable architecture are ultimately relegated to the domain of obsolescence. This article provides the practical means to avoid such a fate.
Maintaining competitive advantage requires new levels of thought and the application of a disciplined and systematic way of doing things. What gets a company to one level of success is not sufficient to achieve the next; innovation and genuine thought leadership are called for.

While the thought leader’s job involves painting a picture that promotes some worthy ideal which the rank-and-file dutifully pursue, the substance behind that picture lies in the careful articulation of the strategies chosen, the means by which the good work of the organization is done and a clearly communicated understanding of the rewards earned for the attainment of the organization’s objectives. Taken together, we have a formula for success; the alignment of strategies, work processes and rewards provides a solid framework upon which to build a viable organization for the long term creating, in effect, the glue that binds employees as they work toward the fulfillment of organizational goals.

That group of individuals who work together toward a common purpose has become the Holy Grail of organizational excellence. Maintaining cohesiveness, however, is no easy task; consistently moving people together in a particular direction with the passion, dedication and competence needed in today’s ultra-competitive world requires new levels of commitment and with that, the call for strong leadership is unprecedented.

Implementation

Deploying any enterprise-wide initiative requires first readying the organization for transformation. As such the values, beliefs, norms and policies that characterize the culture must conform to the new way of doing things. Readiness for the implementation of an alignment framework means solid top-down management support, and constitutes a change that to be effectively brought about requires a sense of urgency, a strong vision, genuine empowerment to act and an institutionalization of the new approaches contained in the changed work processes. For change to be sustainable, management support must be complemented with appropriate attention to training and infrastructure:

  • Management support. The importance of support from the top cannot be overemphasized. As a principal source of validation, top-down management support is a requirement prior to the launch of any major initiative that involves change.
  • Training. Training is the method used to institutionalize the new work processes. In addition to teaching new tools and methods, institutionalization requires formal policies and procedures to be established.
  • Infrastructure. Sharing of information and applications across teams is an important element of effective change management. The deployment of a distributed information sharing or knowledge management system greatly assists team members by providing a common repository of “lessons learned” to be applied in subsequent improvement efforts.

To achieve alignment:

  • A compelling vision must be developed and communicated to support a strategic focus;
  • Uniform work processes must be adopted and applied to create efficiency, reduce role confusion and eliminate the ad hoc approach to work; and
  • An effective reward system must be created to tie work processes with strategy to maintain focus.

A compelling vision

Perhaps the single greatest leadership challenge is the creation and effective communication of a compelling vision. What is it that makes a vision compelling? What business purpose could possibly move people to action, simply because it’s a worthy pursuit? How can a leader best communicate in a way that drives people to action? Unfortunately, “vision has become one of the most overused and least understood words in the language,”[i] a vague term with multiple meanings depending upon who’s using it.

Developing the vision

As a foundation for organizational change, the best source of renewed vigor is “a clear and value-based vision created by an appropriate mix of rational analysis, intuition and emotional involvement”[ii] that inspires all to work not just for themselves, but for the good of the company in a way that advances some broader commitment. Max de Pree, retired CEO of Herman Miller, touted the vision of his company “to be a gift to the human spirit,”[iii] providing a lofty image for the company to pursue. To create their own sense of purpose, members of an organization must ask themselves, collectively, “Why are we here?,” as those companies that exhibit greatness, having endured years of challenge and change, tend to embrace a set of common values and promote a solid reason for existing. Representing the company’s distinct ideology, values and purpose remain fixed while the world around it changes, and with it the organization’s strategies and practices that must adapt accordingly.
A compelling vision comprises three distinct aspects. First, those core values common to the workforce must be discovered and embraced; next, a core purpose must be articulated; and finally, the envisioned future must provide excitement about the prospect of meaningfully contributing to its attainment.[iv]

  • Discovering core values. Vision begins with an understanding of values common to members of the workforce. According to Bruhn, “Consistent leadership and an espousal of values are the cornerstones of a stable culture.”[v] A brief employee poll that asks what each considers to be their most important values can be quite revealing. Integrity, honesty, providing value, creative expression, professionalism and open communication are typically common values that may be uncovered during such a poll. The three or four that are most often mentioned are values to be embraced and promoted throughout the enterprise as an important foundation of a culture that supports the company vision.
  • Discovering core purpose. Perhaps the most difficult aspect of describing a vision is articulating a core purpose – what exactly does the organization stand for? Why does it exist? What is its meaning? Viktor Frankl describes the search for meaning as the primary motivation in one’s life. The effective leader understands the unique and specific meaning assigned to work by each individual, and speaks to the sense of purpose derived from that meaning. Only then does the work “achieve a significance which will satisfy [the individual’s] will to meaning”[vi] – the driving force beyond financial reward that motivates people to action and keeps them interested.
  • Envisioning the future. The truly compelling part of an effective organizational vision is a view of the future, embraced by all, toward which they are collectively moving.

Communicating the vision

Once developed, the failure of leadership to consistently communicate the message the vision is designed to inspire will leave members of the organization unmoved and the good work of the organization underperformed. Anita Roddick, founder of the wildly successful Body Shop, describes the importance of communication:

I think that [communication] is one of the most essential skills of leadership. Because no matter how passionate you feel about something, if you can’t communicate it in an enlivening or entertaining way, and if you can’t have a passion, which is the most persuasive form of communication, you might as well just not be.[vii]

The first and most critical element in the aligned organization is a compelling vision that speaks to common values and imbues all involved with the organization’s functioning with a strong sense of purpose that goes beyond personal gain.

Uniform work processes

The great enemy of customer satisfaction is variation. Consider this: we citizens of the world don’t gobble up billions of McDonald’s hamburgers due to the culinary brilliance of the grill crew or the quality of the meat. Rather, we’ve come to expect a fast, hot and predictably edible meal at an affordable price whether we’re in New York, Los Angeles, London or Paris. It’s the lack of variation that results from process uniformity that is the principal driver of McDonald’s’ success. Similarly, an insurance company that has developed a reputation for consistently delivering good service, fast claims resolution, predictable billing and excellent customer service can expect a more loyal customer base, even in the face of higher premiums. To be sure, many of the largest, most successful insurers certainly do not position themselves as low cost providers.

To achieve alignment, work processes must be performed in harmony with an organization’s larger goals. However, we often find a significant gap between even the most captivating organizational visions and the objects of their fulfillment. Peter Drucker has said that “All ideas must degenerate into work if anything is to happen,”[viii] and so we’d expect the quality of the methods by which such work is performed to be of paramount importance. Yet organizations, large and small, continue to employ ad hoc approaches to their operations; it is a standardized, efficient and effective framework for accomplishing work that is most often lacking. While the organizational leadership may have been diligent in their assessment of target markets, customer preferences and the voids which their products and services fill, they often lack a cogent means of  “operationalizing” those strategies in a way that translates into the day-to-day work of employees. The realization of a leader’s strategic vision suffers most from the implementation piece – that bridge between strategy and operations that is often so poorly engineered that the thought of traversing it brings fear and trepidation. Building the proper bridge – strong, capable and proven – instills confidence in the workforce, as the solid span is easily navigated and reaching the other side a matter of routine. Uniform work processes provide that bridge.

–Jack Welch famously said of GE’s programs to improve operational results, “This is the way we do things,” whether it was the Total Quality Management movement of the 1970s, the Work-Out sessions of the 1980s, or the Six Sigma initiatives that emerged in the 1990s and continue through today. Welch was emphatic about the way things got done, and as a result, decision making was made easier as those who promoted best practices at GE became true evangelists of company work processes and often rose to leadership positions within the company. Interestingly, Mr. Welch presided over the single greatest increase in shareholder value in the history of corporate America, elevating the company’s market capitalization by more than $400 billion during his twenty-year tenure as CEO.[ix]

Organizational learning

Why should work processes be uniform? Why shouldn’t individuals be left to their own devices, letting individual pockets of genius emerge as innovative means of goal attainment? The answer lies in understanding the power of organizational versus individual learning. According to Probst and Buchel, “learning by a social system cannot be equated with the sum of the learning processes undergone by individuals.”[x] Uniform work processes become the means by which an organization’s constituents get things done on behalf of the organization, and as such, the organization that succeeds in developing a uniform set of work processes develops an ability to be more adaptable to change, a key ingredient of success and longevity.

Business Process Management: A framework for uniformity

Business Process Management (BPM) is the discipline of modeling, automating, managing and optimizing a business process through its lifecycle to increase profitability. As such, it provides an excellent underpinning to a uniform process framework. A successful BPM initiative begins with the promotion of “process thinking” throughout the organization, where employees are aware of and working daily toward the improvement of the key performance indicators (KPIs) that mark the efficiency and effectiveness of – and the degree of variation contained within – the processes with which they’re involved.[xi]

Absent the modeling, measurement and monitoring of activities within the process, improvement efforts are based on guesswork and intuition. By providing so much visibility, BPM takes the guesswork out of improvement efforts, enabling fact-based decisions that deliver measurable, visible and sustainable gains. Imagine this idea extended to the dozens of processes – and hundreds of process segments – that comprise a typical insurance company’s operations. BPM provides the uniform set of tools and techniques needed to remove variation from  critical operational processes, providing a solid foundation for sustainable competitive advantage.

Effective reward systems

The final component of a properly aligned organization is the system by which employees are rewarded. A major challenge of leadership is to “develop a desire within an employee to perform a task to his or her greatest ability based on that individual’s own initiative”[xii] by supporting the strength of the company vision with meaningful compensation. This means ensuring that adequate incentives are in place to motivate the workforce, or “implementing a reward system that will reinforce actions that are congruent with the new set of beliefs and values” that accompany a change.[xiii]

Developing a properly aligned compensation structure requires first translating the company vision into a set of success criteria. Those criteria become tangible pursuits that indicate that all in the organization are working effectively toward the fulfillment of its objectives. For example, an insurance  company may determine that in order to realize its vision it must get licensed in several new states, develop and introduce new products, and provide faster claims resolution for its customers. Each of these success criteria are then quantified by assigning a target number that represents another step toward realizing the organizational vision. To be properly aligned, a portion of employee compensation is then tied to the attainment of those goals, in effect “making strategy everyone’s everyday job.”[xiv]

Benefits of alignment 

History has been the best teacher. While many companies enjoy evolutionary progress in response to changing environments and the consequent needs of the organization, they often find themselves at a turning point, a point of change where calculated risks must be balanced against the collective savvy of those who lead the organization and hold responsibility for the quality of critical decisions. The stakes become higher, the job more difficult and the purposeful application of the lessons of the past never more important. True alignment helps the organization to succeed by (a) enabling genuine empowerment to take root as the adoption of well-documented best practices eliminates the propensity to micro-manage, (b) creating efficiencies by minimizing the performance of superfluous work not consistent with the larger goals of the organization, and (c) promoting effectiveness by rewarding employees for on-strategy work.

Empowerment

Empowerment is facilitated when an organization is in alignment, as the properly aligned organization makes easier the task of management by providing employees with an unambiguous purpose, clear direction and an appropriate reward system. The ability to involve employees in critical decisions enabled by proper alignment (since they are held accountable for their actions through an aligned reward system) instills trust – a critical ingredient in a culture of empowerment, while regularly disseminated performance information keeps employees aware of their standing in the organization, and the alignment of organizational interests and rewards provides tangible proof to employees that they’re doing the right thing (and doing things right).

Efficiency

Efficiency is defined by Drucker as “doing things right.”[xv] The adoption and support of uniform work processes provides for all in the organization the means to do things the right way. Absent uniformity in the way things are done, efficiency will always suffer. The adoption of proven best practices installs a comprehensive set of tools and methods to attack the work of the organization in a manner that is consistent with its larger goals, reduces process variation and provides a means for continuous improvement. The efficiencies created by the adoption of such well-established practices as those embodied in BPM, applied in every corner of the organization, will also enable a cross-functional culture to evolve as the lexicon, tools and methods common to it will begin to be used effusively throughout the organization.

Effectiveness
Drucker as well defines effectiveness as “doing the right things.”[xvi] When a dedicated workforce is rewarded for performing their daily work in a manner consistent with the larger goals of the organization, the right things get done, and the organization is as a result more effective at consistently achieving the goals it sets for itself. Consistent goal attainment is a strong motivator, as the confidence of a unified group of employees who regularly accomplish difficult objectives are filled with the benefits of effective team development, including pride, friendship, mutual support and self-esteem  and develop the confidence and willingness to attack new challenges as they emerge.

Summary

As insurance companies prepare for the inevitable change that marks any dynamic industry, greater synchronization between their goals, the means by which they are achieved and the rewards available for participating in their attainment is required. To accomplish such organizational alignment, specific steps can be taken to increase the company’s chances of success:

  • Vision. To create a compelling vision, first uncover common, core values by polling employees. The core purpose results from asking Why are we here? The envisioned future, supported by values and purpose, should be widely and regularly communicated by company leaders.
  • Processes. To ensure uniformity in the way work gets done, the adoption of process thinking and best practices embodied in disciplines such as Business Process Management (BPM) involves extensive training and the modeling, automating and managing of key organizational processes. The enthusiastic support of leadership is critical here.
  • Rewards. To directly align company vision and processes with organizational objectives, adopt a reward system that provides compensation and acknowledgement to employees who consistently perform “on strategy” work.

By taking these steps, forward-looking insurance companies stand a far better chance of attaining leadership positions in their respective market segments and achieving unquestioned organizational success.

Conclusion

Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law defines “organization” as “a body that has a membership acting or united for a common purpose.” While the definition is simple, the development of a unified, self-sustaining organization is a complex task. There are myriad means of helping to bring together a workforce for a common purpose. Cultural embedding mechanisms such as reward systems, acknowledgement, organizational structure, role modeling, and a well-articulated organizational philosophy all serve to bring people together. The basic structure critical to the organization that expects to benefit from a cohesive workforce, however, must support the efforts of employees by aligning strategies, work processes and rewards.

Alignment gives managers at every level of the organization the ability to rapidly deploy chosen business strategies, develop a world-class workforce and support a culture of continuous improvement, all at the same time. The organization that achieves alignment gains a motivated, committed group of individuals purposefully working together in a uniform manner to fulfill the vision of a compelling future – the very definition of organizational success, and the engine of sustainable competitive advantage.

References


[i]  Collins, J. & Porras, J. I. (1996, September-October). Building your company’s vision. Harvard Business Review, 65-77.
[ii]  Hersey, P., Blanchard, K. H. & Johnson, D. E. (2001). Management of organizational behavior: Leading human resources (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
[iii] As cited in Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Currency Doubleday.
[iv] Collins & Porras, 1996.
[v] Bruhn, J. (2001). Managing tough and easy organizational cultures. Health Care Manager, 20(2), 1-10.
[vi] Frankl, V. E. (1946). Man’s search for meaning. New York: Washington Square Press.
[vii] Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2003). Good business: Leadership, flow and the making of meaning. New York: Penguin Books.
[viii] Drucker, P. F. (1973). Management: Tasks, responsibilities, practices. New York: Harper Business.
[ix] Welch, J. (2001). Jack: Straight from the gut (with Byrne, J. A.). New York: Warner Books.
[x] Probst, G. & Buchel, B. (1997). Organizational learning: The competitive advantage of the future. Herdsfordshire, UK: Prentice Hall.
[xi] Berg, R. (2007). Empowerment, productivity and profit: The promise of business process management. Insurance News Net.
[xii] Rudolph, P.A., & Kleiner, B.H. (1989). The art of motivating employees. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 4(5), i-v.
[xiii] Hersey, et al, 2001.
[xiv] Kaplan, R.S. & Norton, D. P. (2001). The strategy focused organization: How balanced scorecard companies thrive in the new business environment. (pp. 12 – 13) Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
[xv] Drucker, 1973.
[xvi] Drucker, 1973.


Rob Berg is a Principal and Director of Management Consulting at Perr&Knight. Over a career spanning more than twenty years, Rob has led or advised the management teams of companies in the financial services, consumer retail, software and telecommunications industries. His expertise includes strategic planning, organizational design, enterprise systems deployment, project management and process improvement methodologies, including workflow design, analysis and simulation. In addition to holding a Bachelor of Arts in Economics from Stony Brook University and completing graduate work in technology management, decision theory and organizational behavior, Rob’s practical experience is supported by credentials from the American Society for Quality (Six Sigma Black Belt) and Stanford University (Advanced Project Management).