The firms included, in alphabetical order:

Aon Corp.

Arthur J. Gallagher & Co.

Brown & Brown Inc.

Hilb, Rogal and Hobbs Co.

Hub International Ltd.

Marsh & McLennan Co. Ltd.

U.S.I. Holdings Corp.

Willis Group Holdings Ltd.

“These eight firms represent the preponderance of broker distribution throughout the country, and [the report gives] highlighted information on their overall performance relative to one another, the market and banks to offer some critical insights into things that probably are not key or apparent to a lot of people who follow them, know about them, or compete against them,” explained Mr. Wevodau.

Among the observations he made, brokers who have been very acquisitive have failed to see proportionate growth on their organic (in-house) side. On the other hand, brokerages that have not been acquisitive have generated a “consistent, strong growth rate” on their organic side, primarily because they have emphasized a “very, very strong sales infrastructure.”

The only exception to this rule, he pointed out, was Gallagher, which he described as an enigma, because the firm “consistently keeps a good balance of a good, solid, organic growth rate measured against the acquired growth rate.”

Few banks that acquired brokerage firms, he contends, have built substantial insurance programs because insurance is not viewed as a key part of their strategy. Instead, insurance is seen as an extension of services to their clients and does not get the same attention as other financial services, Mr. Wevodau said.

Additional information on the report is available at www.wfgca.com.

Reproduced from National Underwriter Edition, January 16, 2004. Copyright 2004 by The National Underwriter Company in the serial publication. All rights reserved.Copyright in this article as an independent work may be held by the author.