Mr. Stewart boarded a sinking ship when he took the helm back in 1989. A number of major carriers refused to join the Institute, while those that had signed on were dropping out in droves.

“Companies thought we were imploding, and they didn't want to get stuck with the organization's liabilities,” he explained during an exclusive interview with National Underwriter in his lower Manhattan office, just blocks from the site of one of the country's worst insurance losses–the 9/11 terrorist attack at the World Trade Center.

Today, the Institute has a staff of 25, down from over 100 in the late 1980s, and its budget, in inflation-adjusted dollars, is 42 percent of what it was when he took over, Mr. Stewart noted. However, he emphasized, downsizing was not how he turned the ship around, citing three major course corrections.

o First, be the top source for the media.

“We put together a small task force of member CEOs to talk to other industry leaders and determine what the Institute's core mission should be. Far and away, dealing with the media on an industrywide basis led the wish list,” he said.

“We rebuilt the Institute around that objective,” he noted. “What I insisted on was that the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post should not be writing an insurance-related story without talking to us first. Once those opinion-leading publications accepted us as a reliable source, the other media would follow.”

o Second, set up “crisis information centers” to handle insurance inquiries after major disasters–the first for Hurricane Andrew in 1992.

“We went to church pastors–some of the most powerful institutions in the community, in terms of distributing local services–and asked them to host meetings to deal with insurance claim issues,” he said. “We stayed until the job was done and talked to every person who had a problem. That created tremendous trust, credibility and good will.”

o Third, establish a dialogue and sustain it with original, reliable content.

Mr. Stewart said that once the Institute got the attention of the media and the public, he wanted to initiate a regular dialogue with both, rather than merely react defensively during bad circumstances.

The Institute–once best known for its consumer hotline–eventually focused its outreach efforts on its Web site, which now generates over 300 million hits annually.

“I decided that whatever happens, we have to be dominant on the Internet. It became a personal obsession for me,” he said. “I wasn't looking to win design awards or have a super-cool site. What I wanted was to be useful for consumers and to break the monopoly of the media in speaking directly to millions of people. The media is still critical, but I didn't want to remain dependent on their filter in getting information out.”

In addition, the Institute emphasized the original research and analysis generated by its staff, led by its chief economist–a post originally held by Sean Mooney (now with Guy Carpenter) and since 1998 by Mr. Hartwig. (Two additional economists–one for life and financial planning issues–were hired last year.)

“Once awareness was built, the question is no longer who you are, but what have you got to say? You're only as good as your content,” according to Mr. Stewart. “We wanted to establish ourselves not just as the spokesmen for insurance, but as the industry's thought leaders.”

The results are quantifiable, noted Mr. Stewart, citing the Institute's annual benchmark survey, taken since 1968. “Fifteen years ago the overall approval rating of the industry was under 35 percent,” he said. “For the last five years, we have remained between 55- and 60 percent.”

That doesn't mean the industry no longer has image problems, he concedes, agreeing that insurers will always face some negative public backlash because of the nature of the business. “If you don't buy auto insurance, you could get arrested,” he noted. “Society compels you to buy our products. That creates a psychological relationship between the citizen-consumer and the industry that generates inherent resentment.”

The question, he added, then becomes, “given this dynamic, how can we develop a less antagonistic relationship with consumers? It took a lot of work and some behavioral change on the industry's part to get out of that 'us versus them' mentality among insurers. I don't believe public hostility is a fact of nature. It can rise and fall depending on what you do to affect the relationship.”

He recalled that “when I came on board, I heard a lot of people saying it doesn't matter what we do, 'they' are always going to hate us. But I believe you earn a reputation and you can burn a reputation.”

The key, he added, is to remember that “our customers are not the enemy. We have enemies, but if you don't allow them to build a base of popular frustration, common sense will prevail.”

Going forward, Mr. Stewart said the Institute must tweak its focus to adapt to the new realities shaping public policy.

“There is a 'Sixth Estate' in this country”–beyond the three branches of government, the media and the lobbyists. “There's the OSPs–the Officially Smart People,” he said, referring to those in academia and think tanks who exert tremendous influence on policymaking in specialized areas.

“This is a space where the Insurance Information Institute is especially well-qualified to participate,” he said. “We can help shape policy by working with such groups, thinking ahead on solutions to societal problems.”

He cited the debate over extension of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act as a case in point, suggesting that resistance could be overcome with objective research showing how difficult economic life would be without a reinsurance backstop.

In retirement, Mr. Stewart is thinking of writing more about this “Sixth Estate,” or joining the club himself. He said he is particularly interested in tackling society's “social contract issues” on retirement and health care financing, “moving toward the 'Next Deal.'”