Kemper Direct CIO Evaluates 4 Mobile Development Strategies

During a session on mobile development at this week's IASA conference in San Diego, Kemper Direct VP and CIO John Elcock told the assembled audience that when the company realized it couldn't compete without a mobile app, a choice had to be made regarding how it would be able to devote the right amount of resources to creating one.

"We've seen studies indicating that by the end of 2015, P&C insurers who don't have mobile capabilities will lose 25% of their market share," Elcock said. "But we were concerned about having to create an app for every platform that's out there. The ideal is to create once and deploy to many, so we don't have the overhead."

The insurer ended up working with its policy administration system provider, DRC, to develop native code applications for iOS and Android, as well as a mobile web site. [Read how DRC and Kemper, then Unitrin, developed a policy system for a new homeowners line of business.] But things have changed since then, he noted, outlining the pros and cons of four different mobile development paths:

Native code development: This provides the best user experience, but requires a lot of follow-up from the insurer to stay current with new versions and capabilities, Elcock says: "People go and buy an iPhone or an Android phone for the user experience, because that's what people rave about. You don't want to compromise that, and each one of those devices provide toolkits for development. But they're not portable to other platforms."

Cross-platform tools: Elcock praises these platforms for their flexibility, but cautions that using one could paint you into a corner: "If you have a small IT budget, this might be a solution that's worth considering at this time. They've gotten better since we looked at them a couple years ago. The downside is they're very sticky. You build your app using their code base, and then you're stuck."

Mobile web: Simply creating a device-agnostic, robust mobile web site might be enough, but fully precludes the ability to work offline, Elcock relates: "The downside is no connectivity, no app. There's also not a lot of real estate to work with and they're not able to utilize many of the native device elements like GPS and the camera. The distinction between the mobile applications and the native applications are becoming blurry as the browsers gain access to those things.

HTML5: Elcock says that while this has been an option for a while, it's only recently beginning to hit its stride: "It's much further along than when we looked at it a couple years ago. It's appealing for its cross-platform support for things like drawing, audio or video without using Silverlight or Flash, and drag-and-drop, in a browser."

Nathan Golia is senior editor of Insurance & Technology. He joined the publication in 2010 as associate editor and covers all aspects of the nexus between insurance and information technology, including mobility, distribution, core systems, customer interaction, and risk ... View Full Bio