A majority of advisers believe the introduction of more female risk advisers into the industry will be a positive step in addressing the underinsurance crisis, but there are many associated issues that have been raised in relation to this question.
As we publish, 60% of advisers have answered ‘Yes’ to our question:
Would the introduction of more female risk advisers have a meaningful positive impact on Australia’s underinsurance crisis?
However, almost one third (32%) believe more female risk advisers will make no difference, while the rest remain undecided.
Summing up the majority argument that more female risk advisers will make a difference to the underinsurance crisis, came this comment:
Empathy for understanding females is a major determining factor in providing advice… Whether it be right or wrong, men do not have a reputation for the caring and sharing most women want.
One of the issues raised in a number of comments we have received is that gender makes no difference when it comes to talking to consumers about life insurance. Rather, it is the quality of advice and the ability of the adviser, male or female, to engage with the client that is the key determinant in whether the client will take out insurance cover appropriate to their needs:
Risk Cover is not a skill that can be taught overnight,(like investments), you either can or you can’t.(Gender makes absolutely no difference, but having a bit of grey in your hair certainly helps.)
… in the end people deal with those they connect with
Success in selling risk policies is not gender based – it is attitude based
Another message coming from this argument is that more advisers who write risk insurance business will contribute to the underinsurance crisis, irrespective of gender:
More advisers (whatever the gender) would have a positive impact.
Others have referred to the quality of advice being the key:
I don’t believe that people generally want to buy according to the gender of the adviser. Rather they are concerned about the quality of the advice.
Other feedback to riskinfo suggests that when it comes to family, children, money and income, female consumers are more predisposed than males to consider insurance to protect the people and things that they love. But at the same time, the industry has focused on protecting the main bread winner in the family, often the male, and have neglected the value of the role of the ‘home maker’ in the family.
We would like to hear your views. Does the gender of the risk adviser matter when it comes to risk insurance for the consumer? Will more female risk advisers make a difference? Or do we simply need more risk advisers irrespective of gender? Let us know what you think…
