Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
08/07/2026 7:08 pm
TL;DR: Insurance prospect and customer behaviour, preferred contact and purchase methods, portal access, and satisfaction factors shape provider perception, according to Comarch’s research report. The identity lesson is broader than insurance: digital touchpoints, consent handling, and access design now influence trust across customer IAM and governed lifecycle programmes.
NHIMG editorial — based on content published by Comarch: insurance customer behaviour and provider trust research
Questions worth separating out
Q: How should organisations design customer IAM for low-friction digital journeys?
A: Start with the customer journeys that matter most, then align registration, authentication, consent, and recovery so they work consistently across channels.
Q: Why do online portals matter so much in customer identity programmes?
A: Portals are where customers experience whether identity design actually works.
Q: What do security and IAM teams get wrong about customer consent data?
A: They often treat consent as a legal checkbox instead of a lifecycle state that must stay aligned with account access and channel preference.
Practitioner guidance
- Map the highest-impact customer touchpoints Identify the small set of interactions that shape trust, then review authentication, consent, and service recovery across each one.
- Align consent state with account state Make sure preference changes, marketing permissions, and account access are updated through one governed lifecycle so records do not drift across channels.
- Test portal recovery paths as a governance control Review enrolment, password recovery, and self-service reset flows together, because failures there usually reveal weak identity proofing or inconsistent session policy.
What's in the full report
Comarch's full research report covers the operational detail this post intentionally leaves for the source:
- Behavioural trend breakdowns by customer segment and insurer touchpoint.
- Reported preferences for contact methods and policy purchase methods across respondents.
- Detailed satisfaction factors and the specific issues customers say insurers should improve.
- Access-to-portal findings that can inform service design and customer journey remediation.
👉 Read Comarch's research on insurance customer behaviour and provider trust →
Insurance customer research: what it means for IAM and digital portals?
Explore further
08/07/2026 7:32 pm
Customer identity is a trust surface, not a back-office function. This report reinforces that a small number of interactions can shape the entire customer perception of an insurer. That pattern is visible across regulated sectors, where access to accounts, policy data, and purchase flows often determines whether users stay engaged. The practitioner conclusion is that customer IAM should be measured as a trust and conversion control, not just an authentication layer.
A few things that frame the scale:
- The average estimated time to remediate a leaked secret is 27 days, despite 75% of organisations expressing strong confidence in their secrets management capabilities, according to State of Secrets in AppSec.
- Only 44% of developers are reported to follow security best practices for secrets management, exposing a significant developer behaviour gap.
A question worth separating out:
Q: How can teams tell whether customer identity controls are actually working?
A: Look at completion rates, recovery success, portal adoption, and the frequency of support interventions after account access problems. If customers can move through key journeys without repeated resets or manual intervention, the control design is probably sound. If service friction concentrates around identity steps, the programme needs redesign.
👉 Read our full editorial: Insurance customer research shows where provider trust is won
