Private Equity-Backed Frenzy in the Insurance Brokerage Segment

The insurance distribution segment is made up of more than 30,000 brokerage agencies with many medium- to small-scale agencies. Many of are often lacking the financial or technology infrastructures of larger competitors, and in many instances, the agencies are populated with agents nearing retirement.

The average age of brokerage executives is 60 years old, and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics indicated that nearly 700,000 insurance professionals currently are 55 years old or older. In addition, 400,000 brokerage employees are expected to retire within the next five years. In 2017, there were approximately 1.1 million insurance agents, brokers and service employees in the United States according to industry data.

Private Equity Growth

Private Equity backed funding is nothing new to the insurance brokerage segment, but it has been very prominent over the last seven years. Mergers and acquisitions of insurance agencies in 2017 totaled 604, a 31 percent increase over 2016 according to industry data. In 2017, private equity/hybrid buyers accounted for 382 transactions, 63 percent of the total, compared with 56 percent in 2016.

M&A activity in 2018 was very strong although I believe when the final numbers are reported for 2018, the number of acquisitions will be slightly less than 2017, but the private equity-backed acquisitions will most likely exceed 60 percent.

Early indications are that eight of the top 10 buyers in 2018 are private equity-backed firms compared to 2008 when only four of the top 10 had private equity funding.

In 2016, private equity-backed companies completed 55% of all broker acquisitions. Nine out of the top 10 acquiring companies across 2015 and 2016 were private equity-backed firms. Gallagher & Company was the only public company on the mega-buyers list.

Between January 01, 2010 and December 31, 2016, Gallagher completed almost 300 acquisitions. In 2017, Gallagher completed 39 transactions, more than half of which were within its US retail P&C and benefits operations, and in the first half of 2018, the company made 18 acquisitions, and 12 in the 2nd half of 2018.

You don’t have to look any further than Caledonia, Michigan-based Acrisure to see the positive impact from the right private equity funding partnership. Greg Williams, founder of Acrisure, has become the most prolific acquirer in the U.S. Williams and his team made over 100 acquisitions in 2018 and has made more than 400 acquisitions since 2013. Williams acquisition strategy has grown Acrisure’s annual revenue from $650 million to $1.5 billion in two years and increased the company’s enterprise value to more than $7 billion today from $2.6 billion in 2016.

Acrisure has plenty of “dry powder” after a $2 billion investment by GSO Capital Partners and Harvest Partners SCF LP, both based in New York City, and Switzerland-based Partners Group late last year, so I expect that Acrisure will be active in 2019.

Industry data indicates that private equity firms’ “dry powder’’—the amount raised by firms that is not yet invested—is slightly over $1 trillion, according to a report in December of 2017 by Preqin. This is a clear indication that there is plenty of private equity funding available and no obvious ending in sight for the continued M&A activity and valuations.

Should I sell or Not?

Private equity firms are the new bankers for insurance brokerages. The valuations right now are at an all-time high, and that’s good for the seller. While price is important, a strong culture fit is critical too.

The last four years has seen the value continue to increase. Looking back to 2015 activity, the average base selling price was a pro forma EBITDA multiple of 7.6x  and based on the early data on 2018 sales and my personal knowledge of over 90 closed deals; the multiple increased to about 8.71. That means that the potential maximum payout for the 2015 sellers could reach 10.31x and the 2018 sellers could see a pro forma EBITDA multiple of 11.01.

With over $1 trillion of “dry powder” available, the next few years will see a lot of M&A activities.

Health & Welfare Prospecting

As an user of miEdge, I am very happy with the health & welfare, property & casualty, and retirement solutions that miEdge offers. The attached video will recap a meeting I had today with a national firm talking about their U.S. Strategy. They were impressed with my level of knowledge about their U.S. book of business, and understanding how they should attack certain other carriers and brokers book of business.

I owe thanks to Mark Smith and Darin Vick at miEdge for their partnership with me over the last three years. The access to accurate and current data gives me, and other miEdge users The Ultimate Unfair Advantage over those who are not willing to invest in their business. Trust me, if you are not using miEdge, other brokers and carriers who are will be knocking on the doors of your accounts soon with a wealth of intelligence.

Thank you Mark Smith and Darin Vick!

 

 

Aflac : The High Cost of Lapsed Premiums

 

Last week my post, Aflac: Behind the Numbers created emails and phone calls from many different people in regards to lapses and persistency. We all understand that lapse policies is a part of our industry, no matter what product segment we may be in. That being said, there are expectations and certain actuarial assumptions that are used when products are filed in each state.

Below is the definition listed in Aflac’s glossary regarding persistency.

Aflac definition of persistency – Percentage of premiums remaining in force at the end of a period, usually one year. For example, 95% persistency would mean that 95% of the premiums in force at the beginning of the period were still in force at the end of the period.

One of the emails I received last week said, “ Mr. Hyman, is it possible that Aflac has had more lapsed premiums in a year than they had sales?” So here is my answer after carefully researching Aflac’s SEC filings.

Aflac has had a very long history of high lapsed policies. I went back to 1993 and reviewed my data from SEC filings that showed the following data –

Sales year, annualized premiums in force beginning of year, new sales premium (including conversions), premiums lapsed and annualized premiums in force, end of year.

For 2017, annualized premiums in force was $5,896 billion
New sales, including conversions, of $1,552 billion
Premiums lapsed was ($1,525) billion
Annualized premiums in force, end of year was $6,052 billion

In 2016, annualized premiums in force was $5,760 billion
New sales of $1,482 billion
Premiums lapsed ($1,479)
Annualized premiums in force, end of year $5,896

In 2015, annualized premium in force was $5,668 billion
New sales of $1,487 billion
Premiums lapsed ($1,526)
Annualized premiums in force, end of year $5,760 billion

Since 1993, Aflac U.S. has had the following:
New Sales Premium – $26,491,000,000
Premiums Lapsed – $23,139,000,000 (87.34% of new sales premiums)

Since 2009, premiums lapsed exceeded new sales premiums in 2009, 2010, 2013, 2014 & 2015.

Aflac had $6,052 billion of inforce premium at the end of 2017. A 1% improvement in persistency is worth $60 million in premium. I reviewed Aflac’s pretax rate for each year since 1993. Based on 2017’s pretax rate of 19.8%, a 1% improvement in persistency equals about $12 million in pretax profits.

Last year, Aflac’s persistency was 77.5% (before inclusions). The ideal persistency would be 82.5%. A 5% improvement in persistency is equivalent to an additional $300 million a year in premium and about $60 million in additional pretax profits.

I am confident that Aflac will get this under control and over a period of time, we will see a big improvement in persistency.

Aflac – Behind the Numbers

In the United States, Aflac has earned the distinction of being the number one provider of voluntary/worksite insurance at the worksite when measured by annual premium and market share. Aflac is an excellent company, financially sound, more than 70,000 licensed sales associates, a growing Broker Sales segment and the iconic Aflac duck.

Aflac Career Segment

At Aflac, the career segment success hinges upon the number of recruited agents, the number of producing agents and the average productivity per producing agent.

From 2001 through 2017, Aflac recruited over 341,000 career associates and 36,262, brokers. In 2001, Aflac had an average of 13,089 licensed sales associates, who on average, produced business on a weekly basis with an average production of $70,319.

In 2017, Aflac had an average of 8,809 licensed sales associates produce business with an average production of $176,183. The 2017 numbers includes brokers production.

Aflac from 2000 – 2017

• In 2000, the Aflac Duck was born, and Aflac saw growth of 28.3% while the industry increased 19.23%.

• In 2001, new sales increased of 29.07% while the industry saw growth of 12.90%.

• In 2002, new sales increased of 16.4% and hit the $1 billion mark while the industry increased 15.05%.

• In 2003, new sales increased 5.4 % and outpaced the industry which increased 1.81%.

• In 2004, new sales increased 5.1% and the industry increased by 3.00%.

• In 2005, new sales increased 6.16%, and the industry increased 3.4%.

• In 2006, new sales increased 13.3%, and the industry saw a 7.99% increase.

• In 2007, new sales increased to $1,558 billion, a 9.48% increase and the industry had a 4.63% increase. Aflac had a 30.92% market share.

• In 2008, new sales had a slight decrease to 1,551 billion although the industry had an increase of 3.71%.

• Also in 2008, Aflac hired a management team to launch Aflac for Brokers with a launch date of January 1, 2009. This was the beginning of a strong focus on growing broker sales and having two distinct distribution systems. Prior to 2009, broker business was managed by the Aflac independent field force. Broker sales had decreased from $202 million in 2002 to $180 million in 2008 for a CAGR of (-1.90%).

• In 2009, the career segment produced $1,250 billion in new sales while broker sales produced $203 million. Career sales had a decrease of $121  million in 2009.

• In October of 2009, Aflac acquired Continental American Insurance Company located in Columbia, SC which added group products for Aflac.

• In 2010, career agents produced $1,106 billion in new sales while the broker segment increased to $276 million in new sales. Career sales had a decrease of $144 million.

• In 2011, career segment increased new sales to $1,152 billion, and broker sales increased to $325 million.

• In 2012, career segment had a slight decrease down to $1,116 billion, and broker sales increased to $372 million.

• In 2013, career sales had a new sales decrease to $1,068 billion, and broker sales had a decrease down to $356 million.

• In 2014, career sales had its third straight decrease producing 1,003 billion in new sales premium. Broker sales increased new sales to $430 million and was 30% of Aflac’s new sales.

• In 2015, career sales had a slight increase in new sales to $1,012 billion, and broker sales increased to $475 million, 32% of Aflac’s total new sales.

• In 2016, career sales decreased (1.88%) to $993 million in new sales. Broker sales increased to $489 million in new sales.

• In 2017, career sales increased to $1,009, and broker sales increased to $543 million. Broker sales is now 35% of Aflac new sales.

Aflac’s career segment CAGR is (-3.35%) percent since 2008. In that time period, the career segment has recruited more than 193,334 new associates.

Market Share – Industry

Since 2007, the voluntary/worksite industry has had growth of 4.92% CAGR. Aflac U.S. had a (-0.04%) CAGR in the same time period.

In 2007, Aflac enjoyed a 30.9 percent market share in a $4.7 billion industry. Today, Aflac’s market share has decreased to 19.6 percent while the industry has increased to $8.1 billion in new sales.

MetLife, who is ranked 2nd behind Aflac has increased its new sales from $247 million in 2007 to $1,129 billion in new sales in 2017 and a 14% market share.

While it’s very clear that the Aflac career segment has had their struggles, even with such, its worth noting that if the career distribution was a separate company, their career distribution would have had the largest market share in the industry each year until 2017. In 2017, the career segment would have had a 12.39% market share.

Aflac for Brokers Segment

In October of 2009, Aflac acquired Continental American Insurance Company. CAIC, now known as Aflac Group was a very small company in the voluntary/worksite industry with a 1% market share in 2009.

Aflac’s acquisition of CAIC was a very strategic one, and it allowed Aflac to expand its product line. The addition of CAIC group products allowed   the sales associates and brokers to compete in the group space. Along with the acquisition, a national distribution of over 800 brokers came with it. CAIC, while small, had strategic relationships that the Aflac field distribution had not been successful in developing in past years.

Since the launch of Aflac for Brokers, Aflac has contracted 36,232 brokers and broker sales has increased new sales premium from $180 million in 2008 to $543 million in 2017. Brokers sales CAGR is 13.05% in that time period.

If Aflac’s Broker segment was a separate company, they would have the fourth largest market share at 6.6% and only trail MetLife at 13.9%, Aflac career  at 12.39%, (assuming the career segment was a separate company) and Unum at 6.9%.

Persistency

Many insurance companies are faced with persistency challenges, so this is an ongoing challenge in the industry. Takeover business is about 58% of new sales in the industry, up from 12% in 2006.

That being said, Aflac’s lower persistency has cost them more than one hundred million in profits based on their last twelve years. In that time period, persistency has been between 72.2% – 77.5%.

There are many underlying factors that contributes to low persistency. With most major group insurance companies going down to 5 lives, that puts Aflac’s individual products at high risk for replacement. The same could be said about Colonial and other carriers who over the years have sold individual products before moving to group platforms. For instance;

Colonial’s persistency the last seven years has been from a low of 73.8% – 75.7% for their accident, sickness, and disability products.

Colonial’s persistency for their cancer and critical plans have been between 81.2% – 85.7% in the same time period.

Unum’s persistency the last seven years has been from a low of 75.9% – 80.5% for their voluntary benefits products.

Unum’s persistency for group life in the same time period has been from 88.0% – 90.8%.

Unum’s group disability has been between 87.2% – 92.1% and their group short-term disability between 86.6% – 89.9%.

MetLife has about $10 billion of inforce premium, and Aflac’s last annual statement shows $6,052 billion inforce. They are about 38% of the inforce premium in the industry. A one percent move in persistency is a big number.

One final stat – in a typical year, it takes the first ten months of Aflac’s new sales premium to offset its annual lapses. From 2006 -2017, in-force premium has increased from $4.1 billion in 2006 to $6.0 billion in 2017. In that same time period, Aflac has written $17.427 billion of new sales premium.

Outlook for Aflac

I believe that Aflac will get it right on the career side, but they have a road with many bumps and curves along the way for them to regain the success they once had. Broker sales will continue to grow, and I believe broker sales will hit $600 million in new sales premium in 2018. If so, Aflac has the opportunity to hit a record, $1.6 billion in new sales for the year.

Full disclosure

I am a fan of Aflac, a former officer and a current shareholder. My comments are based on my own knowledge of Aflac from reading the last twenty years of quarterly, annual and 10-K reports.

2018 Critical Illness Survey

Critical Illness insurance continues to grow as employers look for ways to offer their employees solutions to help fill the gap with increasing out-of-pocket costs.

Critical Illness and other voluntary benefits are a cost-efficient way to provide additional coverage to employees at a lower group rate than purchasing an individual critical illness plan.

This survey produced some interesting findings about the current state of critical illness products offerings to employers, the distribution methods and a lack of understanding by many agents and brokers on the value of critical illness.

About the survey

The critical illness survey was conducted between January 8, 2018, and February 9, 2018. A total of 511 employers responded representing 5.4 million employees.

Some of the findings are below:

  • 57% of employers who responded currently offer critical illness to their employees
  • 14% of employers offer critical illness as an employer paid benefit
  • The range of employer paid benefit was between $5,000 and $7,500 with 81% offering $5,000
  • 11% of employers started offering critical illness in the last 12 months
  • 27% of employers started offering critical illness in the last 24 months
  • 62% of employers are offering critical illness plans that are more than 36 months old
  • 81% of the employers not offering critical illness said their broker or agent didn’t recommend it
  • 31% of employers offering critical illness stated they were not happy with their current plan and were actively looking for a new critical illness product

About the author

Jeff Hyman is a recognized and respected insurance executive with a proven track record of developing and leading the execution of business plans and sales strategies that deliver growth and bottom line results. Jeff’s background includes leadership roles at Willis Towers Watson, Aflac, and General Electric.

Jeff Hyman can be reached at jhyman@jeffhyman.net

Leaping Forward from 2017 to 2018

As I sit here on this final day of 2017, I pause to take time to look back on the previous 12 months to evaluate my experiences and to think about how to get a jump start on 2018. I hope that you will benefit from me sharing some thoughts on how you can make 2018 a historic year for yourself.

STUDY YOUR POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE EXPERIENCES
Take time reflecting, in order to remember and write down every experience that stood out in the past year. Write down both positive and negative experiences because I know that I have learned from both. No one individual, organization, or even sector is immune from the disruptive changes at play. A few years back taxi drivers, photo technicians, music/video stores, and travel agents may have been the early face of this disruption narrative — but today even those with seemingly steady careers within traditionally stable sectors like banking, financial services, insurance, and other areas – are faced with disruption.

WHAT SURPRISED YOU IN 2017?
Reflect on the surprises that came your way – and then on how you responded. What do you notice about your ability to adapt and pivot within the unexpected? Those who are open-minded, innovative, nimble and quick are better primed to seize opportunities and work with change. Those who are a part of the “status quo” will be left behind and looking in from the outside.

WHAT DID THIS TEACH YOU?
My experience in life is that every experience for better or worse can be a ‘teacher’ if we use it well. How did you grow in 2017? What insights, knowledge, skills were gained or reinforced the last 12 months? Reflect on skills related to self awareness, trust, adaptability, resourcefulness, resilience. These core internal skills are critical today and in the year(s) ahead.

WHAT DID YOU DO THAT YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE DONE?
What did you spend a lot of time on? Was it a priority? Was it in your strength zone? Was it something only you could do, or should you have delegated it? What will you do differently in 2018?

WHAT DID YOU NOT DO THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE?
What did you not do that should have been a priority in 2017? What key action didn’t you do that would have had a major impact? What will you do differently in 2018?

WHAT DID YOU DO THAT HELPED YOU GROW MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE?
Is it repeatable? Do you want to make it a regular habit? How can you break it down into manageable “nuggets” to make it happen again in 2018?

2018 – THE YEAR AHEAD:

WHERE DO YOU NEED TO GO IN 2018?
What’s next for you professionally and personally? While you may not know the precise answers yet, keeping this question in your mind will keep you on your toes so that you can plan and be better prepared for opportunities. To quote the great Wayne Gretzky, “Skate to where the puck is going, not where it has been.”

HOW WILL YOU EVOLVE IN 2018?
While you can’t predict the whole year, it’s a good idea to start your strategy in developing and indentifying new skills, experiences and knowledge that will help you grow in 2018. Visualize yourself at the end of 2018 and ask yourself if you would be happy with your visualization?

WHAT ARE YOUR TOP GOALS FOR 2018?
Now it’s time to be specific and concrete about your 2018 goals. Goals – if meaningful, relevant and backed up with a plan — can provide focus, direction, a sense of purpose, and energize you with new motivation. How can I top last year’s accomplishments? How can I exceed my expectations, as well as the expectations of others? Don’t settle for good when great is a possibility.

I wish you a healthy, happy and a great 2018!

 

 

CAGR for Voluntary/Worksite Carriers

What Has Happen Since 2011? 

In 2012, Voluntary/Worksite sales continued to grow with premiums hitting $6,030 billion. Premiums continued to grow in 2013 reaching $6,644 billion, and 2014 exceeded $6,890 billion. 2015 saw more growth with premiums topping $7,138 billion, and 2016 premium hit $7,630 billion. The industry CAGR over the five-year period was 6.17%.

CAGR Since 2011 

1.     Sun Life – 25.81%

2.     MetLife – 22.10%

3.     Transamerica – 13.33%

4.     Liberty Mutual – 11.99%

5.     Principal – 11.94%

6.     Guardian – 10.24%

7.     Voya – 10.12%

8.     Trustmark – 9.96%

9.     Lincoln – 9.42%

10.  Mutual of Omaha – 8.20%

11.  UnitedHealthCare – 7.28%

12. Colonial Life – 5.75%

13. American Fidelity – 5.29%

14. Prudential – 5.12%

15. Unum – 5.00%

16. Cigna – 3.87%

17. The Hartford – 2.12%

18.  Allstate – 2.03%

19. Aflac – 0.08%

20. Aetna – (-4.66%)

21. Humana – (-14.09%)

The five-year industry net growth hit $1,973 billion. The following are the top leaders in year-over-year growth;

1.     MetLife – $517m

2.     Sun Life – $142m

3.     Transamerica – 127m

4.     Colonial Life – $119m

5.     Guardian Life – $118m

6.     Unum – $107m

7.     Lincoln Financial – $83m

8.     Liberty Mutual – $54m

9.     Prudential – $51m

10.  Principal – $50m

11.   Allstate – $44m

12.   Voya – $39m

13.   Cigna – $38m

14.   Allstate – $38m

15.  American Fidelity – $35m

16. Trustmark – $31m

17.  Mutual of Omaha – $28m

18. UnitedHealthCare – $24

19. The Hartford – $19m

20. Aflac – $6m

21. Humana – (-$58m)

Some of the trends over the last five-years are;

1)    MetLife has clearly made a big bet and investment in the voluntary/worksite industry, and it is paying off. They, like other carriers, have invested in their voluntary platform and have benefitted from having a large base of traditional core voluntary clients to cross-sell worksite to. MetLife has seen double-digit growth in the jumbo size employers with 25% of the clients being employers with 5,000+ employees. MetLife’s market share grew from 5.30% in 2011 to 10.70% in 2016.

2)    Aflac remains the leader in new premium written each year and in market share, but their market share continues to fall. In 2016, it fell to 19.42% from 26.09% in 2011.

3)    Cigna is the largest writer of voluntary/worksite of the major medical carriers with about 3.8% market share with Aetna at about 1.7%, UnitedHealthCare at slightly over 1%, Humana at about 0.8% market share and Anthem barely over 0.4%.

4)    Group products continues group out-pace individual products. In 2011, group was 55%, and individual was 45%. Last year, group products was 70%, and individual was 30%.

5)    Takeover business continues to increase and accounted for almost 54% last year compared to about 42% in 2011.

CAGR for Products Since 2011

Critical Illness continued its growth since 2011 with a CAGR of 18.05% to lead all products.

Term Life – 11.89%

Dental – 11.30%

LTD – 10.09%

STD – 5.85%

Accident – 5.38%

UL/WL – 1.91%

Hospital Indemnity – (-2.80%)

Cancer – (-4.03%)

 

CAGR for Voluntary/Worksite Carriers

Since 2001, I have been involved with the Voluntary/Worksite Industry directly or indirectly. Most years, Aflac, Allstate, Colonial Life and Unum have led the industry in annual premium and market share.

I recently reviewed the last 15 years of data that I have compiled in addition to industry data and other data compiled from my years of consulting and my involvement directly with different carriers. This segment of my article will be focused around four leading carriers who have led the industry throughout this time span.

Between 2001 – 2016, the industry had a CAGR of 5.33%. During this time period, Aflac, Allstate, Colonial, and Unum dominated the industry in total premium each year. Below are the CAGR results over the last 15 years; 

1) Unum – 9.95%

2) Allstate – 8.63%

3) Colonial – 4.69%

4) Aflac – 3.24%

Between 2001 – 2006 the CAGR for the Voluntary/Worksite industry was 6.14%. Below are the CAGR results for this time span;

1) Unum – 18.41%

2) Allstate – 18.26%

3) Aflac – 9.85%

4) Colonial – 5.33%

Within this same time span, the industry enjoyed year over year growth of $1,215 b. Aflac represented $551 m of the industry growth within this time period, and Aflac’s market share increased from 26.25% in 2001 to 31.20% in 2006.

Unum, Allstate, Aflac and Colonial’s combined percentage of annual premium grew from 39.9% in 2001 to 49.4% in 2006.

Colonial Life experienced a slight decrease in market share from 6.90% in 2001 to 6.70% in 2006.

Unum’s market share increased from 3.40% in 2001 to 5.90% in 2006.

Allstate increased its market share from 3.30% in 2001 to 5.70% in 2006.

What Has Happen Since 2006?

The industry increased $939 m from 2007 -2011. New carriers jumped into the industry, and major medical carriers started actively offering VB products too and wanted their share of the market. 

Aflac peaked in 2007 with $1,558 b in annual premium although its market share fell slightly to 30.92%. By the end of 2011, Aflac’s market share had fallen to 26.09%, and its annual premium gain was only $6 m for the five-year period with a CAGR of 0.08%.

Unum continued to see yearly success reaching $460 m in 2010 and a 8.77% market share before falling to $387 m in 2011 with a market share of 6.84% and a CAGR of 6.92% for the five-year period.

Allstate continued to grow from 2007 – 2011 and benefitted by winning Walmart from Aflac. This accelerated Allstate’s growth in the large employer market. Their net growth in annual premium over the five-year period was $94 m  with a CAGR of 6.24%.

Colonial saw its market share decrease in 2007, 2008 and 2009 before increasing market share to 6.84% in 2010. This increase was short-lived when its market share fell to 6.47% in 2011. For the five-year period ending in 2011, Colonial’s net premium growth was $51 m with a CAGR of 3.05%.

MetLife, who had been building their VB/Worksite products under the radar was no longer a secret. They grew their annual premium from an estimated $232 m in 2006 to about $300 m in 2011. Met’s market share grew to about 5.30% in 2011 with a CAGR of 5.28%.

Medical carriers Humana, Cigna, and Aetna, had CAGR of 46.51%, 24.18%, and 11.21% respectively.

Sun Life, Lincoln Financial, and Transamerica made their mark in the five-year period with a CAGR of 20.48%, 17.93%, and 15.84% respectively. 

Part two of my article will cover what has happen since 2011.

A 3-Step Plan for Turning Weaknesses into Strengths

Yan Wang, the former CFO of VitalSmarts, didn’t survive Mao’s China by taking outlandish risks such as questioning those in positions of authority. As our CFO, she did impeccable work with the highest ethical standards. But challenging the status quo was deeply unsettling to her — especially if it meant critiquing the actions of one of our company owners.

She was literally trembling one day when she suggested to my colleague Al that the few dollars he was bringing home from selling copies of our book at public events was hardly worth the time it took our accounting team to process them. She fumbled around the issue until Al said, “So what are you suggesting I do, Yan?” She gulped an enormous amount of air and finally confessed, “It would be smarter to just give them away.” Al agreed. Yan was almost always right. It just took a while to figure out what her opinion was.

Fast-forward a decade. Our company had grown tenfold, and so had Yan. She had become the backbone of accountability in our company. No one, including major shareholders, was off-limits when it came to maintaining standards and creating a culture of fiscal stewardship. Her team was at the forefront of identifying ways to maximize our margins.

Yan’s story is not uncommon. Our research shows that 97% of people can readily identify a career-limiting habit they have. We’re unreliable, lack empathy, avoid conflict, or fear risk. While we’re clear that our weaknesses cost us both personally and professionally, few of us make any progress in turning them into strengths. In fact, managers report that after giving people feedback in a performance review, fewer than 10% of them look any different a year later. But it doesn’t have to be that way. Like Yan, we can make substantial change in relatively short order. The key to improving most weaknesses is to:

Identify Crucial Moments

Chronic weaknesses are usually not due to simple cognitive or behavioral gaps in our abilities. When you’re sitting in your office with a daunting presentation to prepare, and you keep checking your inbox and returning calls instead, it isn’t because you are bad at prioritizing. Rather, you are playing out a deeply habitual and practiced response to feelings of anxiety, inadequacy, or fear. Most of our bad habits have this same nature; more is going on than meets the eye. The way to make progress is to identify the nature of the moments that provoke these ineffective responses. Pay attention to the times, places, social circumstances, moods, physiological states, or risk perceptions that incite you to act in ways that lead to bad results. These are your crucial moments. The good news about crucial moments is that they shrink the size of your problem. Change seems daunting when you think it requires eternal vigilance. In fact, it’s usually about handling a few minutes per day better than you have in the past.

Yan became aware that her crucial moment was when she felt a need to disagree with someone with greater organizational power. She was pretty blunt with peers and direct reports, but speaking up to the owners of the company contradicted every instinct. She felt encouraged when she realized that she didn’t struggle with candor in general — only in those specific circumstances.

Design Deliberate Practice

The Swedish psychologist Anders Ericsson has shown that our learning curve steepens the most when we engage in what he calls deliberate practice. These are brief episodes of intense focus where we practice a skill under relatively real conditions. If these intense practice episodes are coupled with immediate feedback, learning accelerates even more. Psychologist Albert Bandura refers to this as guided mastery and found that we can overcome profound emotional barriers to success if we engage in this kind of skill rehearsal under circumstances with the right mix of safety and challenge.

Once you identify your crucial moments, do what Yan did: Identify moderately challenging situations where you can practice the target skill. For Yan, simply framing these occasions as “practice” lowered the stakes and increased her motivation to attempt them. Following each attempt, she did a mental debrief, rating her effectiveness and stress level. Over time, she found the first rating went up and the second went down, which gave her a greater sense of competence and confidence for the next round. She was careful not to jump into the deep end of the pool at her first attempt. She began by challenging business owners who were late in turning in their expenses. Later she addressed concerns about their spendthrift tendencies — something she felt even more anxiety about.

An important element of deliberate practice is the focus on a discrete skill. Yan studied up on skills for crucial conversations and decided to focus on one: creating safety. She opened a conversation by making an overt reference to the common purpose she hoped she shared with the person she was confronting. In her first attempt, she found this gave her a sense of confidence by suggesting a script with which to begin. But her confidence grew even more when she saw how it put the other person at ease and reduced defensiveness.

Develop Emotional Competence

Be sure your plan includes development of skills for managing the inevitable emotions that accompany confronting a weakness. Simply forcing yourself to attempt a terrifying or uncomfortable behavior is not a success in and of itself; provoking these unpleasant emotions will simply reinforce that this is an act to be avoided. You must seek out tactics you can use to make the unpleasant act more pleasant, or at least manageable. By doing so, you gradually retrain your brain to change its formula for predicting how you’ll feel in your crucial moments.

Yan found that her emotions calmed if she took a moment to clarify her motives prior to opening a crucial conversation with a more powerful person. Before scheduling the conversation, she paused, took a deep breath, and asked, “What do I really want?” Historically, her desire was to avoid conflict with powerful people, but this conflicted with her deeper values. As she pondered what she really wanted, she connected with her desire to be a person of integrity and strength. This awareness helped her subordinate her fears to something more important — and quieted them significantly. It gave her a feeling of focus and determination.

One of my most cherished memories of Yan is the day she let me know that I had wronged her. She told me with great conviction that I had been unfair in the stock award she had been given, relative to others in the firm. She tactfully expressed her disappointment and laid out her case for a different calculation. I ultimately agreed with her argument. But more important, I was struck that the person who admonished me that way was markedly different from the one who trembled out a suggestion to Al just a few years earlier.

You can change your own career-limiting habit if you identify your own crucial moments, seek out brief and intentional opportunities for deliberate practice, and build skills in addressing emotional barriers to your progress. Don’t let fear or inertia hold you back.

Joseph Grenny is a four-time New York Times bestselling author, keynote speaker, and leading social scientist for business performance. His work has been translated into 28 languages, is available in 36 countries, and has generated results for 300 of the Fortune 500. He is the cofounder of VitalSmarts, an innovator in corporate training and leadership development.