Role:
product strategy
user research
Outcomes:
launched a completely new dashboard experience for all policyholders
improved monthly active usage by +40%
delivered on company-level initiative to increase engaged policyholders
I reflect on why it's so difficult to get policyholders to actively engage with their insurance.
It points to a problem of confirmation bias.
Corvus is a tech company that provides cybersecurity insurance and services for businesses. In my time at the organization, business and design challenges evolved significantly but one very interesting macro-level problem always stood at the forefront - the uphill battle of getting policyholders to engage actively with their insurance during the policy term.
The mental model around insurance
The concept of insurance, as a whole, has not changed much in the last century. You buy home or auto insurance, and hopefully you forget about it for the year until you have to renew your policy. In fact, if you've opted into auto-renew, you may not think about your insurance for even longer periods of time.
It is only when something goes wrong - your car is broken into, house is damaged in a storm - that you think about your insurance.
And to be fair, that's always been the point and the value of insurance - for peace of mind.
In interviews, policyholders overwhelmingly told us..
"I don't want to think about insurance. Why should I spend time thinking about insurance?"
"It's more of a set-it and forget-it type of thing for me."
But cyber insurance is unique.
Cyber insurance requires vigilance throughout the policy term as cyber threats change quickly and often. Policyholders must continuously monitor their environment, scan their assets, and stay up to date on the latest vulnerabilities. If negligent, the policyholder could lose coverage, face higher premiums the following year. Worse, they get hacked and have to deal with business loss.
In short - it is this confirmation bias that is detrimental to both the insured and the insurer, as the lack of engagement makes it more likely for cyber incidents - and therefore claims - to occur.
— In this particular 2x2, various 'ideas' are plotted across two factors - level of sentiment towards the engagement of the 'idea', and the level of vigilance required towards the 'idea'. The green line shows the desired movement of the idea 'cyber insurance'
To explore the concept further, I started with a high-level gap analysis.
To explore the concept further, I started with a high-level gap analysis.
— In this particular 2x2, various 'ideas' are plotted across two factors - level of sentiment towards the engagement of the 'idea', and the level of vigilance required towards the 'idea'. The green line shows the desired movement of the idea 'cyber insurance'
I find that it's also helpful to outline and call out specific gaps, to see what behaviors need to be influenced:
Desired state
Current state (expectation)
— confirmation bias has created expectations about the cadence and nature of engagement with their insurance.
Informing strategy
The first thing that needed to happen was to get the broader organization to acknowledge this problem.
These findings were organized and communicated to stakeholders, followed up with strategy discussions which I conducted with the product manager.
3 key decisions were made from those conversations.
It should inform the core strategy behind the policyholder dashboard.
It should inform the nature and cadence of communication to policyholders.
It should inform expectations around engagement metrics.