Insurance carriers are not unlike airline carriersboth have technical teams that evaluate their technology to judge if its operating efficiently and will get their charges safely to their destination . . . or determine those systems need to be grounded. Some may see that as the difficult assessment, especially when the history of the system has been dependable. But for most insurers, thats just the first decision in a process that can test the talents and patience of the IT staff.

Installing ready-made software is certainly a quicker approach, but its not always the easiest. Proprietary tools may produce custom results, but they can be laborand talentintensive. If all insurance companies and projects were built alike, one strategy or another might work, but the Main Street America Group (MSAG) flies in different circles than The Hartford Financial Services Group or MetLife. Despite this, though, it appears insurers have varying levels of preference for the buy side.

Were a little bit of both, says Bob Lukas, senior vice president and CIO of property/casualty operations for The Hartford, about the choice to build or buy. Steve Canty, senior vice president of claims for MSAG, comes down on the buy side, although he warns carriers the silver bullet theyre looking for isnt always out there. George Foulke, vice president distribution services for MetLife, is an unabashed shopper. Whenever possible, he says. Its more cost-effective and provides a faster path to market. If there is available software that does the trick for us, we would prefer to buy vs. build.