Dai-ichi Life: Six Analyses of Business Portfolio and Annuity Products

Which product, customer or distribution activities should receive attention when growth prospects and relative market share differ?

The Dai-ichi Life BCG Matrix provides a disciplined way to compare a portfolio rather than treating all insurance offerings as equally attractive. It applies the two underlying measures of market growth and relative market share, then uses Stars, Cash Cows, Question Marks and Dogs as analytical categories. For protection, savings and annuity activity, the useful question is how product demand, capital use, service capability and strategic relevance may vary across markets or customer needs. The framework does not assign a quadrant without evidence; it helps users test the information needed before setting portfolio priorities.

• Portfolio comparison. Contrast growth potential with relative market position instead of relying on product familiarity or gross premium volume alone.
• Capital conversation. Consider where long-duration obligations, distribution investment and operational attention may compete for finite resources.
• Working view. Use the Excel matrix to organise candidate activities, then use the Word analysis to document assumptions and questions behind each placement.

What industry pressures can influence the attractiveness and resilience of life insurance activity?

Dai-ichi Life Porter’s Five Forces examines rivalry, supplier power, buyer power, the threat of new entrants and the threat of substitutes around the relevant insurance market. Rivalry can involve competition for customers, intermediaries and trusted service positions. Buyer power matters where customers can compare coverage, fees, returns, service quality or alternatives. Supplier power can be explored through dependence on technology, data, specialist expertise or distribution relationships. New entrants may use digital models or focused propositions, while substitutes include other ways households meet protection, retirement-income or savings needs rather than only direct insurance competitors.

• Competitive boundaries. Define the need being served before comparing insurance with savings products, investment options or self-funded financial protection.
• Dependency check. Assess where systems, cloud services, analytics, external expertise or distribution arrangements could affect bargaining power.
• Evidence trail. Use Excel to compare force drivers and use the Word analysis to record the rationale, uncertainties and implications behind each assessment.

Which external developments could reshape customer needs, long-term risk and operating requirements for a Japanese insurance group?

The Dai-ichi Life PESTLE analysis, also commonly called PESTEL, separates Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal and Environmental influences. For life insurance, economic conditions can affect savings preferences, investment conditions and the assumptions used in long-duration products. Social change may alter household structures, longevity needs and retirement planning. Technology raises questions around data use, automation, fraud prevention, cybersecurity and digital accessibility. Political and legal categories help frame policy, supervisory and consumer-protection questions without assuming a particular new rule has been enacted. Environmental factors can be considered through physical risk, resilience and stakeholder expectations.

• External scan. Distinguish macro trends from company-controlled actions so management conversations do not confuse risk exposure with execution choices.
• Scenario prompts. Explore how demographic, interest-rate, technology or regulation-related changes might affect products, customers and operations.
• Prioritised review. Use Excel to sort external factors by relevance and use the Word analysis to add context, possible responses and monitoring questions.