From the time that Craig Grant joined Protector Plans last summer until their first binder on their new Protector Plans Excess Executive Liability (PPEL) program, the go-to-market process took just nine months. We sat down recently with Grant, chief underwriting officer and program leader for PPEL, asking him to describe the process, who was instrumental in the design, and lessons learned.
First, explain to us what your new PPEL program is.
Our Excess Executive Liability program is part of the Protector Plans group. We’ve created a policy platform providing excess coverage for MLPL (Management Liability/Professional Liability) to middle-market commercial customers in all 50 states, admitted and non-admitted. This is our carrier SCOR’s first entry into the middle market space, and they chose to go with Protector Plans.
How did that relationship with SCOR on this product happen?
Our relationship with SCOR is not new. They’re also engaged in Arrowhead Commercial DIC and All Risk programs. SCOR’s product was already available on the open market, but it was strictly marketed for larger professional liability exposures. Our approach was to go downstream to gather more of the middle market – theoretically, lower-hazard risks. They liked our plan, and we were awarded the line of business as their MGU/MGA.
When you looked at the marketplace, how did you identify the needs that weren’t being met?
The middle market excess executive liability space, which includes Professional Liability/E&O and Management Liability (D&O, EPL, Fiduciary and Crime), has been undergoing a market correction with respect to terms, conditions and rates. Wholesalers and retailers were – and are – looking for options to moderate the impact from these new terms, conditions and rates. More importantly, they’re seeking professionals to help them articulate what’s going on in the market. We can fill that bill.
Describe the process to create and launch your MLPL
From ideation to first issuance, the process took nine months. That’s no easy feat. It was truly a team effort. We had 25 teammates from about 13 functional areas that were involved.
From ideation to first issuance, the process took nine months. That’s no easy feat. It was truly a team effort.
PMO Director Kelly Spies managed the process, bringing in the teams we needed. The fact that it only took nine months shows the effort everyone put into making sure we had the tracks in the right place, from intake to booking: Having the right workflows in place. Hiring the right individuals. Making sure we were compliant. Licensing. The list goes on. Our group encompassed individuals from just about all National Programs’ Shared Services teams:
- Project managers
- Business system analysts
- The Actuarial and Data Science teams, who built our submission tracker and grader
- Velocity team (finance and accounting)
- Commercial Operations team
- Brown & Brown Legal
- And various other National Programs companies who’d recently launched new products
25 teammates from 13 functional areas were involved, to bring this program to fruition.
Tell us about Phase Two
Phase two will be launching the primary product, which will be rolled out in at least three tranches. Depending on our carrier’s appetite at the time, our primary product may include:
1. Primary offering for Commercial Management Liability which includes D&O Liability, Employment Practices Liability, Fiduciary Liability and Crime/Fidelity.
2. Primary offering for Professional Liability, focused on E&O rolled out to professional firms, media liability (claim/fame/occurrence), along with possibly Tech E&O is a possibility, along with Cyber.
3. Another piece will be aimed at financial institutions, particularly asset management: registered investment advisors, venture capital funds, private equity funds, various other funds and fund management.
Phase two will require a bit more time, as we’ll need dedicated language for each of those industry segments. We’re working towards releasing or getting consent to release this primary product over the following year.
But before that, we’re currently working with SCOR on setting up claims handling as a potential revenue stream. This would allow us to handle, in-house, claims management on the accounts we underwrite. Doing so will provide us with deeper insights into the product’s success or where improvement is needed in underwriting, risk selection or exposure assessments. We’ll all be at the same table and closely aligned with the objectives of the program.
At the same time, you were building a template or playbook. Can you explain?
National Programs’ PMO team has already built a playbook to help all of us launch new products more quickly, but what we’ve developed with our Excess Executive Liability program is a more refined version for Protector Plans. As Protector Plans grow their product offerings, they’ll have some workflows and system builds that can easily be used each time.
As Protector Plans grow their product offerings, we’ll have a ready-made playbook to get to market quicker.
We can take this product development playbook off the shelf at any time, when someone comes to us with a new product program, instead of spending weeks trying to figure out who goes where and what resources there are. It’s ready-made, so we can get to market quicker.
A lot of teammates dedicated untold hours to the project. The fact that it only took nine months to launch our Excess Executive Liability program is a testament to all the effort everyone put into the project.