Who Owns The Customer

One key question that has challenged the industry for decades is that of 'Who owns the customer?' Are agents/brokers competing with carriers for digital customers and self-service? Or can the two happily co-exist (or at least get along)? 

Captive/tied/exclusive agents, these questions should in theory be simple, as the insurer should own the customer with the agent simply serving as an extension of the insurer. However, in reality, few agents are employees anymore, and many 'exclusive' agents are not exactly exclusive. Nevertheless, these agents do typically seek to build the insurer's brand with their core base of customers by utilizing their branded offices, marketing, etc. for their local outreach.

Independent/non-captives/non-exclusive agents have the flexibility to offer various products from various companies with a better compensation model but present a challenge to insurers. They extend a carrier's reach at little upfront cost, but their loyalty tends to be tied to compensation plans, ease of doing business with a particular carrier, and how a carrier's underwriting standards match up to their client base. As a result, this is where much of the friction lies with customer ownership - agents who want to own the customer, versus carriers looking to grow their wallet share with those customers.