Search

This paper investigates the impact of marketing channels on the corporate reputation and profitability of life insurers based on the evidence of bancassurance in Taiwan. The empirical result indicates that marketing through bancassurance reduces underwriting service quality and thus negatively affects the insurer's reputation. On the other hand, bancassurance shows an advantage in that it cuts business expenses and consequently contributes to the insurer's profitability. This paper also finds a positive and sustained relationship between corporate reputation and profitability. Furthermore, the impact of bancassurance on service quality, corporate reputation and profitability increases with market maturity. The overall result suggests that life insurers must pay attention to service quality when marketing through bancassurance, as service quality has a sustained effect on corporate reputation and therefore profitability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses empirically the relationship between corporate reputation and the financial performance of life insurers. First, it investigates the factors contributing to the corporate reputation of life insurers and finds that financial strength as well as underwriting service quality are crucial determinants. Second, this study shows that corporate reputation has a significantly positive impact on profitability because it helps to bring in new business and premiums for investment. Third, underwriting and investment constructs of insurance operations are linked to analyse the sources for profitability. Additionally, this paper finds that a sustained reputation may increase profitability over time, because reputation built previously can keep an insurer in a favourable position in future market competition. The empirical findings of this paper suggest that life insurers can improve their profitability through promoting corporate reputation, which highly relies on the service quality of underwriting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the question of reputational risk from an insurance industry perspective. The paper discusses the sources of reputational risk in the insurance context and points to reputational concerns that arise at both the individual firm and industry level. The paper suggests that many reputational risks arise from economic and social factors outside the industry but still carry significant implications for the industry and for insurers operating within it. The paper finally discusses some of the implications of reputational risk for public policy issues facing the insurance industry today and offers thoughts on how those risks must be addressed. The paper concludes that reputational risk is a particularly important issue for the insurance industry, given the nature of the underlying transactions themselves and the public policy challenges the industry faces. The paper concludes that the industry must continue to build its capabilities for addressing this risk.The Geneva Papers (2006) 31, 382–394. doi:10.1057/palgrave.gpp.2510096 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reputation is an intangible asset that directly affects the market value of the firm. Although reputation evidences belief that the firm is on a sustainable course, it is built on the trust established with all stakeholders through past proper behaviour. It proves more resilient than one might think at first but even menial misconducts, if repeated, can lead to a downfall. The demise of a few can engulf a whole industry when the transactions are based on trust in the fulfilment of future promises. This is why reputation has become an object of research for several branches of management sciences. The key drivers are still in need of refinement. Nevertheless, they can be summarized in one word: authenticity.The Geneva Papers (2006) 31, 425–445. doi:10.1057/palgrave.gpp.2510090 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author describes the reputation of the insurance industry in Europe from an investor's angle. In the first part, he argues that the industry has suffered from a bad reputation in recent years, driven by “negative” events such as WTC, pension mis-selling or the U.S. Spitzer investigations. A changing framework, such as Solvency II, and the industry's increased awareness of the importance of reputation contribute to a better picture for the industry. The author elaborates on a changing industry from different stakeholder viewpoints. In the second part, he explains the results of a small survey conducted among 10 major European investors in insurance stocks. The main finding is that investors' valuation models do not explicitly deal with reputation. However, reputation does matter for investment decisions and the main factors influencing reputation from an investor's angle are “management” and “communication”.The Geneva Papers (2006) 31, 454–469. doi:10.1057/palgrave.gpp.2510094 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, the author suggests that reputation results from actions taken over time. He consequently views an organization's own behavior as the most serious threat to its reputation, rather than the media or business adversaries. The author is wary of the notion of “reputation management” as this could lead organization leaders to believe that the effects of their actions on their reputations can be manipulated. Ultimately, this approach could dangerously widen the gap between appearance and reality. Based on data describing the public perception of the U.S. insurance industry, he advocates reputable behavior supported by credible and energetic communications as the main determinants of reputation.The Geneva Papers (2006) 31, 480–499. doi:10.1057/palgrave.gpp.2510091 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As seen in many other parts of the globe, there is a growing public awareness of corporate ethics in Japan. The deregulation process in the Japanese insurance marketplace is causing a shift toward a market in which a customer's choice becomes the defining factor in a carrier selection. The reputation of the carrier plays a critical role in this selection. The author believes that the origin of reputation management evolves from a business conduct stemming from gaining each customer's trust. One of the initiatives that is currently in force on a company-specific basis is to “expand the scope and activities of insurance,” to enrich the function of insurance products beyond its traditional concept. The hope is that this initiative will contribute to society's growth, which will ultimately enhance the company's positive reputation. Meanwhile, there is an ongoing effort to design a quantitative analysis methodology to enable a truly functional model of reputation management.The Geneva Papers (2006) 31, 446–453. doi:10.1057/palgrave.gpp.2510089 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reputational risk is one of the biggest threats for insurance companies. The promise to provide insurance cover or the promise to pay out an agreed sum at expiry or when an insured dies is based on the trust that a policyholder has in an insurer that it will be able and willing to honour its commitment. Any doubt in an insurer's commitment as a result of financial constraints, but also due to business practices could have a significant negative impact on its business profile. In A.M. Best's view, the management of reputational risk is intrinsically linked to an insurer's overall risk assessment and risk control strategy.The Geneva Papers (2006) 31, 500–511. doi:10.1057/palgrave.gpp.2510088 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reputation is an amorphous concept. It is intangible. It can change over time (for better or worse). It is difficult to define. It is difficult to measure. It is difficult, if not impossible, to value (and is assigned no value by our accounting conventions). And yet it is, without question, among the most valuable assets of any company, particularly a global financial institution. … But what exactly is “reputation” in this context? In my view, “reputation” is a multi-faceted concept derived from many different individual components. A company's reputation, however, is a blended perception that transcends its individual component parts. For a financial institution, these component parts are multiple and include: financial performance and strength, client trust and confidence, client service, corporate social responsibility, corporate governance practices, corporate ethics, corporate disclosure practices, as well as relations with regulatory authorities and compliance in a broad sense.The Geneva Papers (2006) 31, 470–479. doi:10.1057/palgrave.gpp.2510087 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The power of the media has become a parameter for business success in recent years, as media reality – the image of reality that is created by the media – has become a key factor influencing all of a company's stakeholders. These include customers, suppliers, employees, politicians, regulators and the general public. Based on a long-term analysis of German media coverage (1998–2006) and an international comparative analysis of media coverage in the U.K., France, Spain, Italy, Austria, the U.S. and Asia (2004/2005), the following article outlines the changing reputational risk environment regarding the insurance industry. This analysis shows why companies must take a proactive stance on corporate communications. This is confirmed by the experience of Media Tenor, an international media research and consulting institute and Perception Partners Inc., a consulting firm specializing in reputational risk.The Geneva Papers (2006) 31, 395–408. doi:10.1057/palgrave.gpp.2510086 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A company's reputation is a vital asset in building stakeholder trust; a resource that, given the risk of public scandal threatening every enterprise in today's information society, is nothing less than existential. No company can afford to abandon itself to the whims of public opinion; all must actively strive wherever possible to shape reputational opportunities and risks in their own best interest. Professional reputation management has quite simply become every company's duty. This article situates reputation management in the context of corporate values, corporate governance, corporate responsibility and the “triple bottom line”; in the context, that is, of the most fundamental elements of corporate policy. Indeed, only such a holistic approach can do justice to the complexity of the reputation phenomenon. In our reflections on the implementation of reputation management, we will be using Swiss Re as a concrete example, demonstrating in a detailed manner the relevant institutions, instruments and tasks. This implementation question involves a number of issues: corporate citizenship, sustainability management and corporate compliance, among others – but perhaps most importantly, the role reputation plays in a company's sustainable economic success.The Geneva Papers (2006) 31, 409–424. doi:10.1057/palgrave.gpp.2510085 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]