Should the industry be congratulating itself for doing what is should be doing?
The one question not being asked is why should something like this be news? Shouldn’t product innovation, especially in a market that is always reported to be undersold and under-penetrating, be a given? If the UK population was not so unprotected, which is a massive failure of someone’s behalf, the protection industry would be accused of resting on its laurels for not pushing innovation like it should be.
Andy Couchman, co-editor of the Protection Review, said the intention, in light of the numerous protection awards events throughout the year, was to look at more than what was simply the best product on the market but to gain more recognition for a product that may not sell in copious amounts but was daring enough to try something different.
But surely improved sales and not another trophy for the cabinet should be driving providers? Everybody agrees that protection products do not appeal to consumers like the industry thinks they should so is it not then obvious to have customer appeal as the benchmark for achievement? Improved customer sales will mean improved profits for providers, and surely that should be the impetus rather than being able to list another award at the top of the headed paper?
Peter M. Carvill
