PwC Managing Agent Change Report

Insurers’ IT projects canthreaten independentagent loyalty. Changemanagement can turnskeptics into believers.

www.pwc.com/fsi

No agent left behind:How insurers can rallysupport for tech upgrades

No agent left behind:How insurers can rally support for tech upgrades 1

The heart of the matter

Insurers are upgrading their technology to support more complex

products, lower operating costs, and get closer to their customers.

But they can do more harm than good when they make changes

that alienate their independent agents. We’ve identified five steps

that can help insurers engage agents early and create a

transition plan that meets agents’ needs—converting these

important stakeholders into enthusiastic advocates.

Right now, in Beaumont, Texas, there’s an

independent agent who is struggling with an

insurance service portal. The site was

launched recently with great fanfare by her

preferred carrier, one of the six she

represents. At the moment, she can’t find

the right link to enter some required

information to prepare an annuity contract

for a new client. As she turns away from her

desk in frustration, a binder from a different

insurer catches her eye. “I should see if they

can help me close this deal.”

Insurance carriers have invested heavily to

modernize their technology in recent years.

And despite upgrades to systems like billing,

claims, and policy administration, there’s

still a lot more change ahead. When

supported by strong distribution channels,

technology advances can allow firms to roll

out more specialized products, give carriers

better pricing flexibility, and lower operating

costs. Agents are eager for innovation, too.

They’re all too aware of how much time

they’ve spent in legacy systems looking for

forms, completing them, reworking

rejections, and so on.

Unfortunately, it doesn’t always work out so

well. In many technology change projects,

insurers are focused inward. They think

about how to streamline their own

operational processes, which have real room

for improvement. Project plans usually

specify some training for the agents who’ll

use them, but many carriers make the

mistake of assuming that agents will simply

do what they’re asked. In reality, any

deployment that involves changing human

behavior requires deliberate planning to

move people from grudging acceptance to

enthusiastic advocacy. Independent agents

are particularly important, because they’re

hardly employees. If anything, they’re closer

to customers, with significant influence over

what policies are sold and with which

carriers they’re placed.


How does agent satisfaction impact carriers?

Carriers must keep agent satisfaction in mind. A study completed byJ.D. Power found that as agent satisfaction increases, the likelihood ofagents increasing their premium business with an insurance companyalso rises.

According to Jeremy Bowler, senior director of the insurance practice atJ.D. Power, “Agents have tremendous influence over policyholderswhen it comes to switching providers. In fact, 60 percent of consumersreport that they would follow their agent recommendation to switch toa new insurance company. Clearly, agent satisfaction can have a majorimpact on policy growth for an insurance company.”

Source: Andrea Wells, “Study: Agency Satisfaction Linked to Amount of Business Sent to Insurers,” Insurance

Journal, March 26, 2009, www.insurancejournal.com, accessed April 6, 2015.

And despite all the hype around direct

distribution, it’s very possible that the

independent channel will become even more

relevant in coming years. That’s because

new entrants are spurring competition in

some markets and many customers will

value the perceived neutrality of

independent agents. Also, while carriers

have had some success selling directly to

customers with relatively simple needs,

independent agents are a valuable resource

for those with more complicated situations.

For the foreseeable future, it’s our view that

companies looking for commercial or

specialty coverage will still want tailored

advice, as will high net worth individuals

with complex insurance needs. As a result,

carriers that downplay the importance of the

independent agent channel risk alienating

some very lucrative partners.

Some carriers “get it.” Leading carriers

expect resistance to change, and they plan

for it. They know that independent agents

will often be concerned about the lost

productivity that follows project rollouts.

They know that agents may be living

through a dozen carriers making technology

upgrades at the same time, with little

confidence that they’ll benefit from any of

them. And they know that these experiences

can affect agents’ willingness to trust and

work with carriers in the long term.

Leading carriers take steps to engage their

field partners early and often. By using a

structured approach to managing change,

these insurers turn potential adversaries

into allies. This requires the right attitude

and some tangible actions. To get increased

value out of technology projects involving

independent agents, we encourage carriers

to follow this five-step approach:

Engage agents from the beginning when

defining the change.

Communicate with agents to build

commitment.

Design processes to ease the transition.

Provide training that is relevant, simple,

and concise.

Deploy and reinforce the program.

While these are not always sequential or

distinct, the successful implementation of

each step increases a program’s overall odds

of success.


An in-depth discussion

In PwC’s 2015 CEO

survey, 61% of

Insurance CEOs

believe changes in

core technologies of

production or

service provision

will be disruptive to

the industry (that

includes

respondents who

listed very

disruptive or

somewhat

disruptive).

Source: PwC, PwC’s 18th Annual

Global CEO Survey, Insurance

sector data, February 2015

In today’s evolving insurance industry,

customer-facing transformation projects

have moved to the front burner. Market

demands are more complex than ever, with

new pressure from customers and agents.

And many policy administration systems are

nearing the end of their productive life,

requiring extensive maintenance and taking

away from discretionary investment. For

many carriers, the question is no longer if

they should upgrade, but when.

On the positive side, insurers can now

choose from a range of stable, feature-rich

systems, making upgrades less risky than

before. Insurance used to be paper based,

and agents spent a fair amount of time

correcting applications and claims.

Automation has helped carriers and agents

work more efficiently, reducing errors and

clerical work. And companies are turning to

technology to get more insights out of the

vast data sets that are now within their

reach. Leading insurers are developing

information strategies that will allow them

to set themselves apart from their

competition.

In the rush to upgrade, many carriers dive

deep into functional requirements

documents that focus on product features,

technical integration, and scalability. But

there are stakeholders whose interests lie far

beyond functional specs, or availability, or

compliance. And, these users—the

independent agents who sell the carriers’

products—can have a chilling effect on

technology projects if their concerns aren’t

identified and addressed.

How carriers get it wrong withindependent agents, and why itmatters

Unlike captive agents, independent agents

have choices. Loyalty, convenience, and

compensation are all important factors that

influence an agent’s decision regarding

carrier, but we believe that ease of doing

business tops the list. If agents feel that a

carrier is easy to work with, they’ll stick it

out, even though their productivity may

drop as they work through the learning

curve of a new system. On the other hand, if

they think the insurer is making their work

harder, they’re very likely to start tapering

off their business with that company and

consider promoting competitors instead.

This is where many carriers fumble, because

they downplay or misunderstand the effect

of the changes they’ve created.

Here are some common errors that insurers

make:

Depending on marketing teams toshoulder all change efforts

Many insurers rely exclusively on their

marketing teams to support change

initiatives with their agents, which—in our

experience—undermines the effort. It’s true

that marketing has communications

expertise, owns external communications

channels, and often has close relationships

with independent agents. And while these

skills are important for spreading the word

about system changes, insurers need more

than publicity to build long-lasting

commitment to technology changes.


Treating change as a simpletechnology problem

Often, insurance carriers see new system

features as straightforward technology

upgrades that require little more than a

simple notification to agents. This point of

view overlooks the fact that many

independent agents work with multiple

carriers, and may be juggling multiple

changes at any one time. This perspective

also underestimates the level of training,

communication, and other change

management activities needed to effectively

implement a technology change. Figure 1

describes the impacts and challenges agents

may encounter from some common

insurance carrier technology upgrades.

Assuming that independent agentsare more like employees thancustomers

Independent agents rarely respond to

directives as well as employees do. If a

technology change makes life harder for

agency staff—for example, if they need to

spend more time collecting or

understanding information—they may turn

to competitive carriers when quoting

policies.

Figure 1: Even the simplest technology upgrades can have many unintended side effects for insuranceagents. These can be mitigated, but will pose serious challenges if they are not addressed up front.

Change Impacts Challenges

New billingsystem andinvoices

Direct impact: Agents may need toadjust to new ways to review payments,make payments on behalf of the insured,and/or update payment plans.

Indirect impact: Policyholders may seenew invoices or different paymentoptions.

Agents may struggle to train staff to use newpayment methods or advise policyholders onoptions.

Agents may not set aside time or attention toexplain changes to policyholders.

Agents may feel sidelined if carriers use thenew system to communicate directly withpolicyholders.

Update toquotingsystem

Direct impact: Agents may need to usenew tools or processes to quote newbusiness, and may lose somefunctionality at first.

Indirect impact: Policyholders may seedifferent pricing or terms as a result ofproduct changes.

Agents may find it easier to move business toother carriers than train staff on new systems.

Agents may react poorly to pricing changes.

Agents may feel overwhelmed by productchanges and resent impact to policyholders.

Incentivecompensationsystemchange

Direct impact: Agents may need toadjust to new system for trackingcompensation and changes tocommission plans and recognitionprograms.

Agents may be suspicious of changes tocommission schedules and view simplificationas an exercise designed to pay them less.

Agents may overwhelm staff with requests tovalidate amounts paid.


Failing to understand, or expect,resistance and concerns

Some carriers assume that their agents are a

constant distribution force that is unlikely to

leave. Other carriers may have the best of

intentions, gathering agents’ inputs early in

the process—only to let those inputs fall by

the wayside as they make tradeoffs in the

rush to upgrade. Leading carriers

understand that agents play a vital role in

their distribution strategy, and carefully

prioritize their needs alongside business and

internal user goals.

Forgetting that not everyone benefitsfrom change

When technology upgrades emphasize back

office efficiencies such as streamlined

processes or self-service capabilities, agents

may perceive that changes are simply

increasing their workloads. In this case,

publicizing a planned change can be

counterproductive. Most insurers don’t

consider the agent’s perspective on “What’s

in it for me?” until it’s too late.

Avoid jeopardizing the broaderproject by using changemanagement

For the foreseeable future, independent

agents will still be an important delivery

channel for most insurance carriers; they

may even grow more relevant, as companies

turn to direct distribution for their lower-

margin products. As we’ve already noted,

poorly managed transitions usually lead to

decreased productivity. And dissatisfied

agents are more likely to sell competitors’

products.

But even the fiercely loyal independent

agent may struggle to adapt to technology

changes. A J.D. Power study found that

technology is one of the most important

drivers of agency satisfaction, ahead of both

price and compensation.1 And you shouldn’t

simply assume that agents and their staff

will be comfortable with apps and digital

processes. They’ll need help to make the

adoption work, and they may need

incentives to encourage them along the path.

The good news is that a little planning goes a

long way. And by involving agents early on in

the process—before the requirements have

been written—insurers can make sure that new

systems will work for this valuable

constituency. With the right training and tools,

agents can move from sellers to relationship

builders, and that benefits everyone.

Our approach to managingchange for independent agents

In recent years, we’ve helped a range of

insurance carriers as they’ve upgraded their

technology. Drawing on this experience, we

recommend a structured approach to

managing change with independent agents

in technology projects. Specifically, we

encourage companies to think about five key

steps in the transition:

Engaging agents from the beginning

when defining the change.

Communicating to build commitment.

Designing processes to ease the transition.

Providing training that is simple,

short, and relevant.

Deploying the changes and reinforcing

the program.

It’s important to remember that this is not a

strict, linear process. The approach we

describe below, and the corresponding steps,

are part of an interrelated cycle. These

should be refined throughout a given

project, and some actions may need to be

taken in parallel.

………………………..…..…1 J.D. Power, "Insurance Agents Who Are Highly Satisfied with

a Particular Insurer Drive A Majority of Their Business to ThatInsurer," February 2010.


Step 1: Engage agents from thebeginning when defining thechange

Don’t treat independent agents as an

afterthought when planning for technology

change. Instead, carriers should go out of

their way to engage external stakeholders

early, both before and during the change

design stages. This process starts early,

when defining the requirements. As shown

in Figure 2, we believe you should balance

needs across three areas when planning

technology upgrades: market analysis, user

needs (including both agents' and

customers'), and business priorities.

In a recent publication, Playing for Keeps:

How insurers can win customers one at a

time, we noted how little most insurers

know about their end customers, and how

fragmented operating models have led to

inconsistent customer experiences.2 In that

paper, we talked about how the very notion

of “customer-centric” has changed. We

reiterate here that focusing on the customer

means more than just designing a good user

interface. Not only do you have to actively

look for insight into customer needs, you

also need to streamline the user experience,

and rethink the operating model. These

same concepts apply to agents just as they

do customers.

Long before deployment, carriers should

think about which agents they'll talk to, how

they'll receive feedback, and how they'll

incorporate suggestions. How would your

most important agent segments want to

change the systems you're revamping? How

will your planned changes affect their

business? Could the change affect the way

they interact with their customers? Will it

require more or less of their time? We’re not

suggesting that agent requirements should

drive the project, but carriers should take

time to understand what different categories

of agents and customers want, and then

prioritize those needs and integrate them

within the broader program design.

Finally, carriers should think about how to

engage agents throughout the rollout

process. We suggest that carriers solicit

agent feedback on topics ranging from

system usability testing, to thinking through

communication plans, to defining success.

Even if decisions are made counter to agent

preferences based on sound business

rationale, understanding points of resistance

will allow you to plan for and address them

proactively

………………………..…..…2

PwC, “Playing for keeps: How insurers can win customers,one at a time,” July 2014, www.pwc.com/fsi.

Figure 2: Key considerations when planning technology upgrades.


Know your agents

Understanding thevarying needs ofyour agents can helpyou tailor yourchange managementtechniques for eachgroup.

Each agency is unique, and transition

programs are not one-size-fits-all. We

recommend viewing them across several

dimensions:

Earned premium.

Overall book of business.

Relationship strength.

Adaptability to change.

After you’ve classified your agents, you’ll

be able to design approaches that are

directly relevant to them. When

mapping stakeholder needs:

Agencies that are very important andmay struggle with change should besupported extensively.

Agencies that are less important, butwill adapt well to new programs,should be kept informed duringthe change.

Agencies that offer a lot of value tothe organization and can managechange well should have theirconcerns addressed throughoutthe process by their sales managers.

Agencies that are less important andmay not adapt well to change shouldbe supported selectively.

Figure 3: Mapping stakeholders allows the carrier to identify the

appropriate level of support each agency requires.


Step 2: Communicate withagents to build commitment

After carriers have determined what to build

(or buy, or integrate), they should start

sharing information about the upcoming

changes. Here, small cues send big signals.

As seen in Figure 4, creating a communi-

cations plan helps agents understand what is

happening, why it is happening, what is

expected of them, and how they will be

supported during and after the change.

We encourage carriers to frame the change

in terms that independent agents will

appreciate—and ideally, in a way that they'll

find motivating. To find out what appeals to

different users, tailor and test

communications with different audiences—

not only across agent segments, but within

agencies as well. For example, a customer

service representative might see a $25 gift

card as a valuable incentive, while principals

might respond better to personal outreach to

help them understand how changes may

benefit their book of business. Agency

advisory councils and user groups can also

offer good insights into how changes will be

received.

We also encourage testing messages with

internal audiences. Front-line staff, like

underwriters and regional sales managers,

are likely to have useful information about

how well a given story will be received.

Accounts receivable, claims, and marketing

staff may also have good insights. Finally,

carriers should make sure that their

management is vocal, visible, informed, and

aligned with the communication strategy.

An agent should be able to ask a question to

anyone in the company, from the CEO to a

claims representative, and hear the same

answer. But even the best intentions break

down when messages are delivered

inconsistently. Because of this, we also

encourage the development of internal

training to make sure everyone is speaking

the same language. Another way to avoid

confusion and mixed messages is process-

related: encourage employees to try to solve

agent issues directly, whenever possible,

without handoffs.

Figure 4: A communications plan can help keep stakeholders informed of progress throughout

the lifecycle of the program.


In practice: tackling the big question on price

Helping agents see“What’s in it for me?”can help focusmessaging, but that’sjust a start.

The next question is likely to be “How

does this affect pricing?” Sales managers

will need clear, concise talking points to

address this, even if the changes aren’t

likely to affect products or rating

algorithms.

Particularly in personal lines, where

changes are readily apparent through

comparative raters, carriers should

always be ready to address what’s

behind any price changes. We encourage

carriers to take these steps:

1. Determine the impact. Do you know

the size of potential

increases/decreases? You’ll need an

estimate at the start—and it will

drive how much leadership attention

you’ll need.

2. Determine your pricing flexibility, if

any. Will you offer credits or

transitional pricing to offset

changes?

3. Prepare key messaging and tools, if

needed, to help sales managers

discuss pricing changes with agents.

Consider including information on

how you’ll frame changes to service,

your commitment to competitive

pricing, your financial stability, and

the business you expect to win and

lose as a result.

4. Prepare sales managers for agent

discussions. Consider educating

agents about industry issues that are

driving your changes, and help them

see how policyholders will benefit if

changes in coverage are

recommended. Help sales managers

see these discussions as

opportunities to build trust and

focus agencies on the long-term

benefits to agents and policyholders.


In practice: anticipating agent challenges

One national insurance company implemented a major

technology change that affected the agency quoting

process. When they encountered challenges with the

system, agents turned to underwriters and sales staff that

hadn't been adequately prepared to answer questions.

Without tools, the underwriters and sales staff became

frustrated, making skeptical comments about the

program’s long-term prospects. This damaged the

likelihood of its adoption.

This scenario could have been avoided by defining a clear

support framework that included clear guidelines for

what each employee should know and when questions

should be referred to a customer service center or a

regional sales manager. By envisioning the change from

the agent's perspective, insurers can anticipate questions

and plan accordingly.

Step 3: Design processes toease the transition

As much as we’ve emphasized messaging, if

carriers don't support the process changes

with organizational focus, the

communication will fall flat. This means that

carriers need to prepare front-office staff to

respond to issues, develop process changes

to support the new tools, and create metrics

and incentives to encourage adoption of new

behaviors.

Most carriers understand the need for

preparing frequently asked questions, or

FAQs, to help underwriters and customer

service representatives deal with concerns.

But no list of potential questions will ever be

exhaustive. Leading carriers establish

protocols for responding to feedback,

answering questions, and escalating

questions they can’t answer appropriately.

To support a positive agent experience,

companies will also need to make process

changes to support agents’ use of the new

tools. This can be as simple as establishing

support contacts for agents in the early

stages, so employees can refer the agent to

the right place if they can't answer

something themselves. In some cases, it may

involve role changes or more. For example,

we often see insurance executives who

assume their IT help desks will be able to

effectively handle independent agents'

questions after a technology change. But an

IT help desk that typically supports

employees, or even captive agents, may not

be equipped to support increased call

volume, let alone handle independent

agents' questions. In some cases, carriers

may need to add support roles during the

transition to the new system to provide

sufficient support.

Finally, as the saying goes, "What gets

measured gets done." If carriers want to

encourage a particular set of behaviors, from

internal staff or independent agents, they

should measure what their staff and agents

do. By evaluating their performance against

targeted metrics, carriers can find out how

well stakeholders are adapting. If they're not

adapting well, the measurement data will

provide clues as to why—and help carriers

understand how to modify incentives to get

what they want.


Step 4: Provide training that isrelevant, simple, and concise

With independent agents, there’s no

guarantee that they’ll attend the carefully

crafted training or read through thoughtfully

prepared communications. Without this

information, they may not be prepared for

new processes, systems, or responsibilities.

In these cases, training designs should

require little formal training, because they

should be intuitive and supported through

“just in time” guidance like FAQs or access

to real-time chat support. If agent feedback

from earlier focus groups indicated the need

for more in-depth training, carriers should

also develop options for in-person or virtual

courses. Incentives, like continuing

education credits, can help agents prioritize

training by framing it in “What’s in it for

me?” terms. When developing the training

strategy and plans, remember that

independent agents guard their time

carefully. Every hour in a training class is an

hour not spent generating revenue, so

training should be kept relevant, simple, and

concise to make the best use of agents’ time.

Finally, people learn differently, so making

multiple options available increases the

likelihood that training materials will be

used and understood. Depending on the

nature of the changes, you may want to

supplement initial training with additional

tools, such as short modules that cover the

basics, online demos with reference

documents, question and answer sessions,

or contests. You may also choose to offer

personal visits or one-on-one training,

though this tends to be less cost-effective

and require more support from sales

managers.

Step 5: Deploy and reinforcethe program

Companies often forget that changes need to

be reinforced after the first steps are taken.

This is particularly true for insurers trying to

change independent agent behavior, because

agents have what they see as an easy

alternative: ignore the change and sell

someone else’s product. Even after agents

read briefings or attend training, a lack of

support can push them back to previous tools

or processes that may feel more comfortable.

We suggest carriers consider these steps:

1. Build (and use) feedback loops to

hear what field agents think. This starts

with thinking through the process to

identify persistent questions, issues, or

agent dissatisfaction. When you know

what people are saying, and you have

created a path to escalate this feedback to

leadership, for action, you send a critical

message to the independent agents: “We

value you and your opinion, and we’re

listening.” That, by itself, often helps

increase engagement.

2. Share success stories. Look for ways

to share stories that promote agent wins.

By collecting testimonials from

influential agents who have made the

switch, you can influence others who are

on the fence. And if the data on adoption

tells a positive story, share that

information early and often.

3. Be prepared to see the post-

adoption environment for what it

is, not what you want it to be. If

something isn’t working, acknowledge

the issues, and provide information on

how the issues are being addressed.

When you show that you’re willing to

change if necessary, you enhance the

agent experience, and you support the

development of trust. This helps get more

support for the current change, and the

one that comes next.


Making the case for change management

Communicating thebenefits as well as theimpact of disruptionis important togaining leadershipbuy-in.

Some organizations find it hard toarticulate the benefits of a changemanagement program. Reasons vary:some have a low perception of theactivities’ “soft” value, others areoverconfident in the quality of the finalproduct, and most have unrealisticexpectations for how stakeholders willreact.

Though soft benefits, such as greaterengagement help, are important,decision-makers are often more swayedby demonstrating the potential fordisruption. By using a simple impactanalysis that shows the likelihood andpotential effect of a change on eachstakeholder group, managers can showwhat’s at stake.

While there is no perfect “rule of thumb”for change management budgets, weoften see investments of 10-15% of atechnology program’s overall cost. Thiscan vary by a project’s size andcomplexity, the maturity of a changemanagement function, whether captiveagents are also affected, and likelihoodof resistance. Other approaches includemaking a case by activity (which entailsquantifying specific activities), orbenefits, (which involves estimating thelikelihood and cost of project delays,reduced productivity, or lost business).


What this means for your business

These are complicated times for the

insurance industry. Historically, the sector

has relied on independent sales agents who

have been responsible for understanding

consumer and business needs and

recommending insurance products to their

customers. But shifts in consumer

preferences, demographics, and technology

are changing this. Many insurers are now

pursuing multi-channel strategies that put

them in direct competition with the same

independent agents they rely on. As the

number and share of market for

independent agents declines, the

relationship between some carriers and

agents may become more adversarial.

At the same time, carriers are investing in

new technology to capture better data so

they can profile their customers better,

building more loyal and profitable

relationships. And independent agents want

carriers to invest in technology, processes,

and products, because this helps them

deliver quality customer service.

How changes are designed and

communicated can have far-reaching effects.

By following a structured approach for

engaging agents early and throughout the

change process, insurers can lock in the

benefits of the larger program. And, they can

help manage some of the more contentious

aspects of the agent-carrier relationship in

the process.

This is the bottom line: when change

management is handled poorly, agents are

likely to shift their business to other carriers.

By involving agents early in the change,

seeking feedback, and encouraging

collaboration, agents are far more likely to

adopt the change and see the carrier as a

true partner. For the leading carriers who

“get it,” change management is a profitable

secret weapon that strengthens the unique

relationship between carriers and their

independent agents and gives them a

competitive edge.

www.pwc.com/fsi

“No agent left behind: How insurers can rally support for tech upgrades,” PwC, May 2015, www.pwc.com/fsi

© 2015 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, a Delaware limited liability partnership. All rights reserved. PwC US refers to the United States member firm,and PwC may refer to either the PwC network of firms or the US member firm. Each member firm is a separate legal entity. Please seewww.pwc.com/structure for further details. This content is for general information purposes only, and should not be used as a substitute forconsultation with professional advisors.

For a deeper conversation, please contact:

Debra Mazloff

[email protected]

(312) 298 5360

https://www.linkedin.com/in/debramazloff

Imran Ilyas

[email protected]

(312) 298 6884

https://www.linkedin.com/in/imranilyaspwc

Christine Goldberg

[email protected]

(602) 364 8510

https://www.linkedin.com/pub/christine-goldberg/7/29a/b45

Juneen Belknap

[email protected]

(407) 236 5102

https://www.linkedin.com/pub/juneen-belknap/0/8aa/54

We would like to acknowledge the contributions of Michael Wellman tothis publication.

About our Financial Services

practice

PwC’s people come together with one purpose:to build trust in society and solve importantproblems.

PwC serves multinational financial institutionsacross banking and capital markets, insurance,asset management, hedge funds, privateequity, payments, and financial technology.As a result, PwC has the extensive experienceneeded to advise on the portfolio of businessissues that affect the industry, and we applythat knowledge to our clients’ individualcircumstances. We help address businessissues from client impact to product design,and from go-to-market strategy to humancapital, across all dimensions of theorganization.

PwC US helps organizations and individualscreate the value they’re looking for. We’re amember of the PwC network of firms in 157countries with more than 195,000 people.We’re committed to delivering quality inassurance, tax, and advisory services.

Gain customized access to our insights bydownloading our thought leadership app:PwC’s 365™ Advancing business thinkingevery day.

Follow us on Twitter

@PwC_US_FinSrvcs

A publication of PwC’sFinancial Services Institute

Marie CarrPrincipal

Cathryn MarshDirector

Emily DunnSenior Manager

Kristen GrigorescuSenior Manager

PwC Managing Agent Change Report

Economy & Finance

Transcript of PwC Managing Agent Change Report