An interesting overview on the pace of disruption and the markets that seem to be most susceptible (or accepting) of disruption.
I pose that it has been the lack of pressure to disrupt the services and products traditionally offered by banks and insurance companies that has led to these markets remaining somewhat sheltered from the forces of tech disruption.
That said, in recent years there has been increasing pressure upon banks to provide a broader and more flexible portfolio of products and services that support the times of change in retail and global trade. It is this business pressure that has fueled the Fin-Tech revolution and resulted in a mass of innovation across the banking sector.
The example set by some of the more disruptive markets (like retail) is leading to a consensual acceptance by enterprise and consumers that we can and should challenge traditional business practices and look at how we can leverage technology to create new ways of delivering the same, or better, outcomes. It is also becoming increasing recognised that embracing such disruption is critical to differentiate an organisation in a world where barriers to entry into a market are minimal and first mover advantage is key for gaining market share.
It is with this in mind, that I look at the David's findings through a different lens of opportunity and prosperity in the markets that are behind the curve of disruption.
The Insurance market appears to be the perfect environment for innovation and disruption. There is a need to change traditional products, services and business practices to better support the changes in the other markets and shift in consumer behaviours. The advances in areas like the internet of things, predictive analytics, block-chain, robotics, machine learning and big data can not only help insurers to offer new products, but also enable them to be more competitive by 'right sizing' and 'right timing' products based on real data and real-time insight. The outcome is win-win for both the market and their customers, which is the perfect driver for change.
Although perhaps it is historically correct that "No one talks much about insuretech", now I think we have come to a point where we have to.
In contrast, insurance shows little sign of imminent change. There are very few exciting new digital insurance firms, and there is still a great deal of inertia in the system. The fact that many forms of insurance are purchased annually, and used even less frequently, seems to be a major gating factor. No one talks much about “insuretech”.