“A nightmare.” “Painful.” “Hate using it.” What are these agents talking about? Bad technology. Technology they nevertheless are compelled to use in order to do business with a specific company.

In our personal technology use, we get many choices. If a Web site turns quirky, runs slow or doesn’t deliver expected content, we simply click ourselves elsewhere. In business dealings—well, agents have choices, too. Comparisons among companies’ technology featured prominently in the 2009 PIA Company Performance Survey.

Unfortunately, agents don’t get all they’d like from companies today. Three performance items (out of 20) probed aspects of agent-company technology. Average performance on technology items lagged behind performance scores for the survey as a whole.

Companies’ overall average performance score was 7.3 (that’s all 77 companies, for all 20 items combined). For providing agent/company technology with “easy, intuitive function,” companies’ average score was 7.2; “download works well” scored 7.0; and “enables real time” scored 6.4. These items placed 15th, 17th and 19th, respectively, in agent satisfaction.“

"Importance" to agents. Bad technology is a highly aversive experience, as reflected in agents’ strong choice of words. In addition, PIA’s 2009 survey results expose a big gap between agents’ priorities and typical company performance in the technology field.

Administered prior to the 2009 PIA Company Performance Survey, the PIA Benchmark Survey asked agents how “important” (on a 10-point scale) a given performance factor is when they evaluate a company relationship. Several technology-related performance items were tested.

Of these, “easy, intuitive functionality” rated highest in “importance” at 9.15 (out of 10). It placed eighth out of 35 items tested. So, easy-to-use technology appears on agents’ top-10 list in “importance,” but their overall experiences are judged below-par.

The “easy, intuitive” description could apply to a wide range of technology—it’s an experience, not a system, program or application. The difference between agents’ desire for ease-of-use and the average company’s delivery presents a major opportunity to companies looking to encourage more placements.

Agent comments. On the performance survey, agents named a company’s “main strength” and something the company should improve. Technology-related topics accounted for 14 percent of all agent comments received—second only to “pricing” (17 percent).

Nearly one out of every five (19 percent) recommendations agents make for improvement involve technology. This compares to just one in 10 (10 percent) comments naming technology as a company’s “main strength.” The ratio of “strength” comments to “improvement” comments is 39/61 for technology as a whole.

The survey prompted agents to provide comments immediately following the performance rating procedure, where the agent had scored the company’s performance in 20 different areas. So, when naming a company’s “main strength” and something it could improve, agents had just completed a detailed analysis. In these circumstances, PIA views the comments as a good indication of what’s uppermost in the agent’s mind, regarding a specific company.

The 39/61 strength-to-improvement ratio means that agents’ technology comments trend negative overall, by about 3 to 2. However, the strength-to-improvement ratio differs markedly for commercial-lines units, where it actually tilts positive (a 56/44 ratio). The ratio for personal-lines units (38/62) is very similar to the survey’s as a whole.

More detailed breakdown. Many comments simply mention a company’s overall “technology,” or “automation.” However, of 878 technology-related comments, 535 (61 percent) name specific areas of technology.

When agents zero in on something specific, one-third of the comments (33 percent) say it’s a company’s “main strength,” while two-thirds (67 percent) say the agent wants it improved. When agents merely cite a company’s “technology” in general, their comments are more evenly divided (48/52).

For specific technologies, strength-to-improvement ratios are: company Web site overall 39/61 (identical to technology overall); Web site rating 44/56; participation in comparative rating 0/100; upload 8/92; download 2/98; endorsements 18/82; and real-time transactions 19/81.

Note how comments trend much more negative as they move beyond company Web sites and Web site rating. In many cases, “improvement” comments state that a certain function is entirely lacking from that company, and the agent would like to see it made available.

What agents say. One agent’s “improvement” comment sums up the reality that so many others imply: “Automation: Absolutely critical for survival/growth.” This is a stark warning that, in the agent’s mind, this company’s very future is at stake here.

The way day-to-day business is transacted between companies and agents is undergoing a quiet revolution. Agents do try to warn companies that aren’t keeping up. The survey’s sheer volume of technology comments sounds a significant alert. Given the lower-than-average performance scores for technology items, we’ll go out on a limb and say the warning may apply to the majority of companies that agents deal with.

The comments below show that technology directly affects choices about where to place business (emphasis added): “Their computer system is antiquated, obsolete and costs them premium income.” “Technology. The main reason I do not use them is completing and fax(ing) or e-mailing an application: too laborious.”

Agents can’t help but compare their companies’ technologies: “The quoting-to-issue is the best I have ever seen.” “Agent portal for quoting small accounts (BOP) is very easy to understand and to use. Probably the best in the market at this time.” “Their system is the most user unfriendly we have ever used.”

Agency workflows are evolving to take full advantage of powerful efficiencies delivered by real-time transactions and premium-comparison systems. Companies that cannot enable the “round-trip” data loop created by modern agency/company workflows will increasingly run the risk of being marginalized. Error-free download is a “must” for these workflows to function correctly.

See more comments. To see many more specifics about what agents are asking for, view their comments in the 2009 CPS Report 5: “Technology,” logon to www.pia.org/GIA/cps/CPS%20Report05_09.pdf.

These comments show agents’ familiarity with “what’s out there” in the market today. The functionality they request isn’t some wish list. It’s what they’re actually getting from other companies—companies whose functionality drives business their way.—Kiehl