Desperately Seeking SEMCI? Producer Views That Might Change The Debate

Create a vendor selection project
Click to express your interest in this report
Indication of coverage against your requirements
A subscription is required to activate this feature. Contact us for more info.
Celent have reviewed this profile and believe it to be accurate.
We are waiting for the vendor to publish their solution profile. Contact us or request the RFX.
Projects allow you to export Registered Vendor details and survey responses for analysis outside of Marsh CND. Please refer to the Marsh CND User Guide for detailed instructions.
Download Registered Vendor Survey responses as PDF
Contact vendor directly with specific questions (ie. pricing, capacity, etc)
30 June 2004


Boston, MA, USA June 30, 2004

Desperately Seeking SEMCI? Producer Views That Might Change The Debate Insurance

Single Entry Multiple Carrier Interface (SEMCI) is clearly good for independent producers. But do SEMCI benefits outweigh its cost to carriers?

The SEMCI debate seems to thrive on unchallenged assumptions. Celent's latest report, Desperately Seeking SEMCI? Producer Views That Might Change The Debate, explores these assumptions from the producers perspective.

"SEMCI is a great idea if youre a producer," says senior analyst

Craig Weber, author of the report. "But the benefits of SEMCI for producers come at a considerable cost to carriers."

"The technology cost is only the beginning," Weber says. "Commoditization of products and core services like new business makes it hard for carriers to differentiate themselves. And in any case, SEMCI is a luxury item for producers, well behind product and price as a key driver of carrier choice."

Weber adds that agency management systems and producer portals overlap in terms of functionality. "The portals tend to deliver richer functionality, which also offsets the value of SEMCI in many cases," he says.

A key finding of the report is that over half of all producers surveyed said they would use either agency management systems or proprietary carrier systems, as long as those tools make their job easier. (See Figure 1.)

The report summarizes producer views on a variety of issues related to use of agency management systems and proprietary carrier systems. It is based on a survey administered to independent producers in June, 2004.

Other key findings discussed in the report include.

  • The fragmentation of the agency management system market, which makes it difficult for carriers to meet the needs of their diverse producer population.
  • Low levels of producer satisfaction with key activities that producers perform within agency management systems, including checking commission information, real-time links to carrier systems, data upload, and checking new business status.
  • Producers focus on functionality, which may drive them toward carriers that support both agency management systems and proprietary carrier systems for various business needs.
  • The tendency of some property/casualty producers to shop their new business to multiple carriers, which supports complaints about re-keying business into multiple systems.


Table of contents is available online.

of Celent Communications' Property/Casualty Insurance research service can download the report electronically by clicking on the icon to the left. Non-members should contact for more information.

Send mail to with questions or comments about this Web site.