Sometimes we forget how much our industry trades in trust.

According to the ‘World Values Survey’, Australians are the most trusting people in the world when it comes to each other. We are more likely than any other country surveyed to say that ‘most people can be trusted’ but when it comes to financial services and those of us in it, trust is at an all time low. And it’s declining.

So, what do we do about it?

There is certainly a role for regulators to help shape the landscape whether through looking at the sustainability of products or increasing professional development requirements for Advisers, but this is a major transformation that requires effort at all levels. We’ve looked at some of the most trusted companies in the world and what got them there, for some potential clues into our own way forward.

In human relationships, trust is comprised of a number of factors like open communication and transparency, authenticity and accessibility – and we expect the same things from the companies we work with. These ideas work to create trust whether you’re talking about a brand, a company, or an individual.

Listen, learn, and act.

Nike is one of the worlds most trusted brands, which could be seen as a bit surprising for a company that’s had its fair share of controversies…and that may be a big part if it’s success. When in 2019 they released a shoe featuring the original American flag featuring the 13 colonies, they faced significant consumer backlash. The brand could have continued with the well-selling shoe but based on consumer feedback pulled-it from sale and promptly apologised. In doing so they demonstrated that they not only listen to customer feedback, they act on it. It’s a fact that unites many of the most trusted brands – they listen, learn and act on customer feedback in an open and public way.

What do you stand for?

According to AdAge, 53% of consumers expect brands to get involved in at least one social issue that is not directly related to their business. Consumers want to know that you (and your company) care about more than just making money. It demonstrates ethics and values and existing for more than just the bottom line. They want to know you care so that your motivations and decisions can be trusted. In doing so, you’re more likely to generate positive conversations around your company. Virgin is one of the most trusted (and profitable) businesses of our time.  Richard Branson often talks about the importance of purpose to his success.

“Never has there been a more exciting time for all of us to explore this next great frontier where the boundaries between work and higher purpose are merging into one, where doing good really is good for business”.

Your call is important to us.

We have all experienced being on-hold to a company and hearing them repeat how important our call is. But you can’t help thinking that if the call was truly important to them, they would have more people answering phones. Shortening the distance between companies and customers is the last major factor we will explore which can help create trust.

Accessible companies are ones where you can speak to decision makers, when you can tell they’re not avoiding you, where no one hides behind a desk, and where you can ask the questions you want – not just hear what they want to tell you.

Starbucks is another of the world’s most trusted brands and they have achieved this in-part through their accessibility on social media. In 2018 they had more than 23,600 conversations initiated on their Facebook wall and they replied to more than 95% of them. Their CEO and most executives are on social media and all engage and reply to customers’ questions – big and small. In doing this they demonstrate that serving customers is the most important activity anyone at their organisation can do. It’s proof that customer service is in their DNA and critical to their business.

_

We have a way to go in restoring trust, but the good new is, there is a way forward. By looking at the leading brands, the ones who inspire trust, we can take advantage of their experience and apply it to our own organisations…and ourselves.

References.

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/33-of-aussies-lost-trust-in-the-banks-in-2018-says-accenture-which-is-way-below-global-standards-2019-5

https://www2.deloitte.com/au/en/pages/financial-services/articles/restoring-trust-financial-services-digital-era.html

https://home.kpmg/au/en/home/insights/2019/02/financial-services-royal-commission-regaining-trust.html

For all our Advisers, we wanted to give a quick rundown on what you need to know about upcoming changes to our Income Insurance and other retail products. 

We’re making some changes – for the better!

From 1 April 2020, we’ll be aligning our Retail Income Insurance offering with APRA’s sustainability measures. As we’re removing Agreed Value, we’re also taking the opportunity to make some other improvements. As you probably know, we’re always striving to make things better.

• We’ll be adding a 1 year waiting period for Income Insurance, so you have more flexibility in designing cover for your customer.
• We’re increasing the maximum sum insured for TPD to $5 million.
• We’re adding new functionality so your customers can pay their premium monthly or annually across all ownership types (coming soon!).

We will not be increasing our pricing on Income Insurance or other cover types with these changes. The benefit of all our products being sustainably priced, is that we’re able to maintain our current premium rates across all cover types.

To lock in an Agreed Value application, you have until 11.59pm on March 31, 2020 to submit applications. You will then have until June 30, 2020 to finalise.

We’re not done yet.

Our product design team have already started creating a brand-new Income Insurance offering that we’re pretty thrilled to bring to market soon. We’ll be sure to keep you posted as more details are confirmed.

The icing on the cake.

To help Advisers during the transition period, we’ve extended our 8% Lifetime Discount on our retail lump sum cover until the end of March 2020.

Don’t forget we also offer discounts for healthy living with our Life+ discount, and when you bundle three or more covers, we waive the premium on the Care Support Package. You’re welcome!

As always, if you have any questions, please reach out to your BDM or contact me directly.

If you read the headlines, you can be forgiven for thinking that insurers don’t understand mental health. Certainly not the nuances between a ‘tough patch’ as a response to a normal life and a debilitating condition. With 1 in 5 Australians experiencing mental ill health, it’s a topic that’s not going away, so we spoke to our Chief Underwriter and industry veteran, Scott Hodgson, for his perspective on why insurers struggle to support and understand mental health. 

Let’s jump right in, Scott. Why do you think underwriters (and insurers) have such a tough time grappling with how to handle mental health?

Scott Hodgson: At a company level, mental health conditions are a major cause of claims, and so life insurers want to understand the risk to manage it over time (so they can get the pricing right). It’s a very sensitive topic at a personal level and so advisers and underwriters find it hard to discuss with some applicants. Plus, it is difficult to properly classify the risk when assessing it, as individuals all have different responses to life events – and different diagnoses can often be made for what might be similar triggers for a mental health issue.

Additionally, there are no universal clinical indicators, for example blood tests, for mental health conditions, so diagnosis and treatment requires skilled practitioners, and even the medical profession finds treating mental health patients complex.

What is your view on exclusions related to mental health?

Scott Hodgson: I’ve seen a worrying trend of automatic exclusions without really understanding the situation. If for example, you have a major life event (loss of a loved one for example) and you see a psychologist, perhaps you’re even on medication temporarily, but you didn’t take a heap of time off work and this was years ago, I don’t see why this would mean an exclusion. But because the risk cannot always be quantified it is necessary to exclude in some cases. This is preferable to not offering cover at all, and of course over time the exclusion can be reviewed. Once sufficient time has passed and the condition is managed well (or has receded) then the exclusion may be removed.

Is there any good news on this front in terms of changing attitudes, policy and research?

Scott Hodgson: Fortunately we now have good public policy around mental health, much more openness and de-stigmatising in general as well as better training of general practitioners in respect to mental health, plus access to Medicare supported sessions with psychologists. So while it might seem like mental health conditions are at epidemic levels, it is simply that these conditions are now being discussed and disclosed. Hopefully this leads to much better management than in the past. In time gone by you may remember a neighbor or relative who had a “nervous breakdown” that was discussed in hushed tones? These days anxiety and depression related to life events should be considered manageable conditions, that need empathy from the community.