Open Insurance Data Standard White Paper Working Group - 12/9/24
- Nathan Southern
Attendees:
Peter Antley
Sean Bohan
Jeff Braswell
Rob Clark
Cory Isaacson
Lanaya Nelson
Nathan Southern
Greg Williams
Opening Remarks/Logistics
Peter Antley (PA) began by acknowledging the LF Antitrust Policy (above) then welcomed attendees to the group.
Discussion of Werner Kruck Marketing Document
Werner Kruck of AAIS started his own draft of a marketing deck, and the results are strong. Lanaya Nelson (LN) pulled this up for review by the group. That document can be accessed here. High-level points about this document:
This emerged from the Thursday working group. The context of the document is a stronger push toward business development in the months ahead, and more specifically guiding where our marketing/outreach efforts are focused and what the distribution of content looks like. This will be a business development/shared document.
This deck is an excellent starting point - well thought out and executed and articulated.
It includes third-party vendors but might be interesting or helpful to add any claims systems - TPAs, etc. Or even actuarial, regulatory bodies, RMS modeling. NGAs, mutual groups.
Insurers can potentially be expanded as well.
Lanaya will start documenting notes/responses to Werner’s deck very shortly. (See action items below).
This deck will feed into Lanaya’s planned spreadsheet for content campaigns. However it can also serve as a starting point for the white paper.
Discussion of Peter Antley Outline
In the last meeting, the decision was made to update the Future State Diagram by adding the Guidewire integration, but PA is still working on determining where to include it.
For the purposes of this discussion, the emphasis shifted to focus on the outline that PA drafted for the white paper - pictured as follows:
Per the above, this outline begins with a problem statement, which PA reworked slightly
The remainder of the outline is fairly generic but mirrors how Peter sees the white paper coming together.
It would benefit however from the inclusion of industry overhead costs (wrt the current state of processing) to help quantify the problem as well.
Also in the introductory paragraph we want to introduce OIDS on a high level and articulate what it is that we want/need to do. Then the paper will move into another section that explains the OIDS effort in detail. What is it? How can I learn more about it? etc.
On this note: PA stressed the criticality of having a website or better yet a webpage where users can learn more about OIDS - linked to the openIDL wiki.
We should talk about how the project is managed by the Linux Foundation, and how this serves as a bulwark against a private company coming in and buying the effort. It should also touch on the fact that a committee of members is in charge of maintaining the standard, but that anyone can use it.
Per Cory’s suggestion: we should note that there is protection against commercial competitors that are trying to force everyone to use proprietary commercial standards that they are developing. This is a large selling point and should be a big content piece.
LN indicated that while - per Werner’s request - we are holding off on a full rebrand of openIDL, she plans to create a landing page off of the website for openIDS specifically.
openIDS.org has been reserved as a domain should we need it in the future.
Case Studies in the White Paper (2)
This will focus exclusively on stat reporting, and how OIDS will be used to receive homeowner’s data for stat reporting
Bordereaux Report also needs to be worked into the white paper - it will focus on policies and claims. The parties: MGA to Carrier, Carrier to Reinsurer. Many uses for the Bordereaux.
Conclusion of the White Paper
Will include an abridged version of the problem statement.
The question also arose - as yet unresolved - of how the white paper and the marketing content from Werner and Lanaya will intersect. (See action items below).
The group will reconvene on Mon. Dec. 18th.
Action Items
Lanaya Nelson
Start documenting notes/responses to Werner’s marketing deck.
Also consider expanding this deck by adding additional bodies - for instance, claims systems - TPAs, etc. Or even actuarial, regulatory bodies, RMS modeling. NGAs, mutual groups. Insurers can perhaps be expanded as well. Consider doing these in columns.
Circle back to Werner with thoughts/suggestions after this is donel.
As planned, send out a spreadsheet for content campaigns.
Begin the creation of an OIDS landing page on the openIDL website.
Clarify how the marketing document in progress and the white paper will intersect, and circle back to Peter and Nathan to clarify on this.
Peter Antley
Work on interpolating costs associated with the current state of the industry into the white paper per Cory’s fine suggestion
Also begin expanding the content of the white paper beyond an outline.
Short-term plans
Develop introduction to white paper per the above.
Longer-term plans:
We should talk about how the project is managed by the Linux Foundation, and how this serves as a bulwark against a private company coming in and buying the effort. It should also touch on the fact that a committee of members is in charge of maintaining the standard, but that anyone can use it.
Also, and per Cory’s suggestion: we should note that there is protection against commercial competitors that are trying to force everyone to use proprietary commercial standards that they are developing. This is a large selling point and should be a big piece of the content.
Work two case studies into the white paper - one for stat reporting, and one for Bordereaux Report
End the white paper with a shorter recap of the problem statement.
Invitation to Ratings Bureaus to Participate in OIDS
Rob Clark (RC) expressed interest in bringing in the Pennsylvania and Delaware Compensation Ratings bureaus to participate in OIDS meetings/efforts. PA agreed that this is viable and helpful but suggested that we put a hold on this idea for at least 30 days, until the white paper has begun to take shape.
