If you are a computer enthusiast or know one, you know that software often comes with "Easter eggs"—extra treats that the software developer hid somewhere in the program. With the right combination of key strokes or actions on the screen, the user can find a software reward of some kind. This is often a video or game within a game—a special functionality that you could use only if you discovered it. But these were not limited to games: the 1997 version of Microsoft Office contained an Easter egg, a demo of "Flight Simulator" which was a popular game of its time.

These are fun activities both for the users and the developers, but it seems that for many companies, the supposedly obvious features of products that they have bought are as hidden to them as any complex Easter egg is to the average consumer. This happens in both large and small organizations, but for different reasons. This is, of course, something that no organization would want to admit to. There was a detailed and rigorous process involved in the selection and purchase of that software product. A detailed RFP was processed, and careful review and elaborate scoring of the results took many hours of the staff's time. A final ROI calculation was then made to justify the purchase. Also, there was the proof of concept, the model office, and the installation.

The idea that there would be features and capabilities in the software that are licensed and ready to be used but challenging to unlock is, well, not so good. But two strong forces are at work against the full utilization of tools. First, organizations very quickly move back to a steady state after a change. The day-to-day pressure to get work done, to add value to a process, and to get on with the work that is coming into the department is very great. After all, that is why the department is there—to select the risk, issue the policy, adjudicate the claim, and so on. Unless there is something to disrupt that steady state (a pain point), they are not necessarily continuing to seek changes. Then there is the question of how to be aware of the tools already in the tool box.

The other force is inertia (in this case, moving from the current knowledge state). While on assignments, it's not unusual for me to hear, "I didn't know our product could do that." This gap in expertise about the products is very understandable. How many applications does your organization use? How many are current within their versions' updates? How many have a subject matter expert (SME) reviewing their changes and features? For the most part, the applications and tools available to the insurance market today are very powerful and rich in feature sets. They are also very flexible in how they interact with the user and the user's processes; a new version may bring new functionality and changes that make unused features a real benefit to the organization. When the SME is aware of the capabilities of the new version, he or she must be able to compare it to the business area's needs and the business area's future needs.

What can your organization do to better leverage the capabilities of your application investments? Start by asking yourselves the following questions:

1. Are there identified SMEs assigned to understand the changes and features in the application?
2. Do you know which features you use and which you do not?
3. Is there an improvement process in place that the business uses to identify opportunities?
4. Is there a process for the business and SME to communicate in an organized manner?

Of course, the goal is not to try to use every feature of the products in-house, because some features don't fit and others don't improve the process or outcome. The goal should be to fully use the available tools that will best enable the organization to be successful in the marketplace. Take a look, and you might be pleasantly surprised to find a hidden Easter egg that will help your organization.