| Author |
Message |
    
rw morris
Registered User
Username: Rmorris
Post Number: 7
Registered: 5-2002
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, June 20, 2002 - 11:26 pm: | 
|
John:
It is a big deal to run multiple systems. You are forced to bear the cost of the software, then you are at the mercy of what ever the carrier wants you to do with it.
I am running DDS right now, in November it was Xactimate, and probably Powerclaim soon.
The biggest problem I feel with the software packages I use is that the added "bells and whistles " keep getting added on making it tougher to get the work done.
It is also difficult to adapt to the different packages when it comes to now file transfer, captioned reports, database items.
We are forced to change our hats at the whim of whatever carrier or vendor we work for.
I guess it would be the same as If a software developer was forced to change which program they write their application in. I don't know alot about it, but I would think thatIf you had to go from writing Simsol from say Visual Basic, to Cold Fusion or whatever, there would be a learning curve involved.
I think the same goes for the xml standard that is coming about, the software developers are going to have to adapt, in the meantime the programs are still running and it will only the future will tell.
I have been in this adjusting software situation from it's inception, dos to windows, to now the "paperless" quest that is being pursued now.
Now it seems that the software companies are trying to get into the "file transfer" business. I guess this seems like a good idea, but the adjusters like us are the guys that are getting used as guinea pigs to find out if it works.
I have spent the last year in school studying Computer Information Science, It has really been interesting learning about the progression of the pc and the direction that people think it will go.
In closing, I think one of the biggest obstacles in relation to being a catadjuster is the uncertainty of not knowing what the programs will do and also the politics of cat adjusting. It is a rough business, you have to be tough to hang in there with it, and a big part of it involves the way we are forced to use lousy products, such as Xactware.
It would be nice if the software developers could get together and agree on an industry standard, but I don't think it will happen.
It seems the software outfits had better pray that some one like Microsoft or Oracle decides not to zero in on the insurance claim industry.
We could see Adjuster XP.
Other than that need to send a claim to Illinois from California. Ah Technology 
|
Eric Carlson
Registered User
Username: Ecarlson
Post Number: 11
Registered: 6-2000
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, June 20, 2002 - 9:49 am: |
|
John, this isn't a direct answer to your question but you said you were opening up a Pandora's box so I'm sure you expect a few dissenting opinions.
I have to disagree with you about “Brand A and Brand B estimating systems” never mixing. Maybe the software developers will never agree on a single standard but once everyone is at least speaking the same language (i.e. XML) the next step is to simply put gateways in place that will provide schema translation. We might not ever be able to send a complete estimate from one estimating package to another because of the wide variation in data structures but sending and receiving basic claim information to and from carries, IA offices, etc. should be a breeze (or a “low-brainer” as Gale likes to call it.) A claim number is a claim number; a policy number is a policy number, etc. etc. The information that cannot be translated automatically by the systems can be displayed using XSL style sheets so a human will at least be able to view the information in a browser similar to the way they would with a printed copy, fax, or PDF.
In a more direct answer to your question, even though I am not an adjuster and I am not forced to use multiple systems, that is one of the most common complaints we hear is that adjusters really don’t like having to learn multiple systems. Even when they aren’t paying for them, having to learn and maintain multiple systems eats up time they could be using to make money. And I’m sure you know as well as I that end-users like to learn one interface and “watch out” if you decide to change the way a tool works. Witness the “2002 Xactimate is garbage” thread.
|
mark salmon
Registered User
Username: Olderthendirt
Post Number: 199
Registered: 12-2000
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 19, 2002 - 9:17 pm: |
|
It really is very simple. If you throw the cash my way I will use the system you want. The leaning curve gets shorter with each system I learn. (last time I try Simsol,it was DOS). I may not like it, I have my preferences, but you pay I play. (With few exceptions ie SF). |
John A. Postava
Registered User
Username: Johnp
Post Number: 33
Registered: 12-2000
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, June 19, 2002 - 8:53 pm: |
|
I may be opening up a Pandora's box but here goes...
The "big three", xactware, MSB and your's truly are actively marketing "data warehousing and mining services" to all of our clients as well as perspective clients. Our sales folks strongly urge the carriers to have all adjusters and contractors writing estimates use "our" software so we can research the data.
Our company's data-ming system, SIMSOL Discovery, went on-line earlier this year and we literally have thousands of claims on our servers. We also give the carriers the option to let their adjusters upload our estimates in our "standard" XML format so they can do their own data-minging if they don't want to pay us (we do it cheaper).
Gale, I know you have been preaching the XML sermon for months but in the property adjusting business, the powers-to-be will never agree to a single standard. Each vendor may create their own "standard" for their clients but just like oil & vinegar, brand A and brand B estimating systems will never mix.
I have been out of the trenches of actually adjusting large amounts of claims since we went to Windows (I still do some interesting losses from time to time). Here is my question (only answer if you feel you are "computer literate")
Over the past half-a-dozen years or so, I have seen the computer literacy of the average cat adjuster rise to a significant level - especially among the younger adjusters wanting to make a name for themselves. To those CADO readers who are computer literate, does it really matter what system you use for a particular carrier, so long as they are paying the freight?
I know you some of you have all of the major systems on your computer and you prefer one over all the others. What I am asking is it a big deal to work with multiple systems? |
|
