CHRISISM #76 - Protection NOT Insurance

09 October 2018

Have you ever been engaging with a potential new client and imparting what you believe are really valuable and important messages, but for some reason you don’t seem to be getting through to them and business isn’t eventuating when you feel it could and should have?

Have you ever been engaging with a potential new client and imparting what you believe are really valuable and important messages, but for some reason you don’t seem to be getting through to them and business isn’t eventuating when you feel it could and should have?

As outlined in Chrisism#8, more often than not when business is slipping through your fingers, it will at least partly be due to the negative perception you are creating in the mind of your prospect simply because of the terminology you are using and the use of the word “insurance” is a classic example.

Risk advisers need to be acutely aware of the historical burden they carry on their shoulders as a result of people’s negative perception of this thing called “insurance.” After all, think about this for a second:- when was the last time someone jumped for joy when you mentioned “insurance”?! Certainly not a very common occurrence, I’m sure you would agree. There is a simple solution to this – stop using the word “insurance”! So whenever you might have historically used the word “insurance”, start using the word “protection” instead. It doesn’t have the same negative connotation and people of all ages will still be engaged because you haven’t given them any justification for ‘putting up the shutters’ and switching off.

And while we are on the subject of “insurance”, let’s also make sure that we avoid at all costs the use of the word “insurances” as this just compounds the problem and more often than not produces the negative thought bubble in the client’s head:- “Oh my God – there’s more than one!”

So where you might previously have used the word “insurances”, I strongly recommend that you embrace a new phrase:- “personal protection package”. Apart from having a certain alliterative quality about it, rest assured this will become an extremely appropriate and relevant phrase very early in the piece. When you are carrying out your wants analysis, the very first answer you get to the first question you ask will establish that your client’s primary objective in the event of the ‘what if’ scenario of illness or accident is the maintenance of their income status quo i.e. 100% Income Replacement – and this financial outcome cannot be achieved with just one product; it will require combining all three products that deal with this ‘what if’ scenario, thereby necessitating from the outset a personal protection package.

The Risk Workshop by Chris Unwin

Are you a financial adviser who would like all of your clients to have appropriate types and levels of personal protection? But perhaps you feel you need a more structured and client friendly engagement process?