Why Insurers Are Paying Millions in Excess Storage Costs

The relentless growth of data within the insurance industry is an undeniable reality, driven by everything from digitized policy administration and complex claims processing to an explosion in customer interaction points and the promise of advanced analytics. While this data can be a powerful asset, its sheer volume, if unmanaged by robust governance, creates a voracious appetite for storage capacity. Many insurers find their storage budgets escalating annually, often treating this as an unavoidable cost of doing business in a digital age. However, a significant and often unexamined portion of this expenditure is frequently attributable to excess storage – the costly housing of redundant, obsolete, trivial, or simply over-retained data. This isn't just a line item on an IT budget; it's a multi-million dollar drain directly impacting profitability, a symptom of underlying data governance deficiencies that demand strategic attention from the highest levels of the organization.

Simply accommodating more data by procuring more storage, whether on-premise or in the cloud, without a critical examination of what is being stored and why, is a financially unsustainable approach. The price per gigabyte may have fallen, but the exponential increase in data volume, coupled with the often-hidden costs of managing that data throughout its lifecycle, means that insurers are frequently paying a premium for digital landfills. This overspending isn't just about wasted dollars; it also ties up capital, consumes valuable IT resources, and can even mask deeper operational risks.

The Data Deluge in Insurance: More Than Just Policies and Claims

Insurers are data-intensive by nature, accumulating vast and diverse datasets essential for their core operations:

• Policy Administration Data: Detailed records for every policy issued, including applicant information, coverage details, endorsements, and historical changes, often retained for decades.
• Claims Data: Extensive documentation for each claim, encompassing first notice of loss, adjuster notes, investigative reports, photographic and video evidence, medical reports (for health and casualty), settlement details, and payment records. This data is often highly sensitive and subject to long retention periods.
• Underwriting and Actuarial Data: Large datasets used for risk assessment, pricing models, and reserving, including historical loss data, demographic information, property characteristics, and increasingly, telematics or IoT data.
• Customer Interaction Data: Records of communications across all channels – call center recordings, emails, chat logs, social media interactions, and website activity.
• Financial and Operational Data: General ledger information, payment processing records, regulatory reporting data, and internal operational metrics.
• Third-Party Data: Information received from agents, brokers, loss adjusters, medical providers, and various data enrichment services.

The long lifecycle of many insurance products (especially life and certain liability lines), coupled with stringent regulatory record-keeping requirements and the increasing digitization of all processes, contributes to this ever-expanding data universe.

Cory Bentley, Marketing Director of Helix International, often finds that storage costs are treated as an almost unavoidable operational expense, a tide that can't be turned back. "Many insurers see their storage bills rising relentlessly and simply budget for more capacity, as if it's an ever-expanding utility like power or water," he explained. "What's frequently missed in this calculus is that a substantial portion of that expenditure is actively wasteful – paying to house data that provides no ongoing business or regulatory value and, in fact, often increases risk and operational drag. This isn't just an IT issue; it's a direct hit to the bottom line stemming from a governance vacuum around data's true lifecycle and strategic worth."

Beyond the Price Per Gigabyte: Unmasking the True Cost of Excess Storage

The direct cost of disk space or cloud storage capacity is only the tip of the iceberg. The financial burden of storing unnecessary data is magnified by numerous indirect and often hidden costs:

• Escalating Backup and Disaster Recovery (DR) Expenses: Larger primary datasets translate directly into larger backup volumes. This means more storage capacity needed for backups, longer backup windows (which can impact system performance), increased network bandwidth for data transfer, and more complex, time-consuming, and costly disaster recovery testing and execution. Restoring critical systems after an outage takes longer when wading through terabytes of non-essential data.
• Increased Data Management and Administration Overheads: More data requires more IT staff time and effort for routine management tasks such as patching, monitoring, security administration, capacity planning, and data migrations. This diverts skilled IT resources from more strategic, value-adding initiatives.
• Performance Degradation of Core Systems: Bloated databases and file systems can significantly slow down the performance of critical insurance applications, including policy administration, claims processing, and underwriting systems. This directly impacts employee productivity and can even affect customer service levels.
• Inflated eDiscovery and Regulatory Compliance Costs: While not solely a storage cost, the volume of data directly impacts the expense of legal discovery and responding to regulatory inquiries. Sifting through vast quantities of over-retained or poorly organized data to find relevant records is incredibly time-consuming and expensive, often requiring specialized tools and external consultants.
• Higher Energy Consumption and Environmental Impact: Massive data centers, whether on-premise or cloud-based, consume significant amounts of energy for power and cooling. Storing unnecessary data contributes to this energy footprint, an issue of growing concern from an Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) perspective.
• Delayed or More Expensive System Modernization and Cloud Migration: Migrating massive datasets, especially from legacy systems, to new platforms or the cloud is a complex and costly undertaking. The more ROT (Redundant, Obsolete, Trivial) data that needs to be moved, cleansed, or rationalized, the higher the cost and the longer the migration project will take, potentially delaying critical business transformation efforts.

The Governance Gaps Fueling the Storage Crisis

The overspending on data storage is rarely due to a single cause but rather a confluence of governance weaknesses that allow data volumes to grow unchecked and storage resources to be utilized inefficiently.

1. Absence of Proactive Data Lifecycle Management (DLM) with a Focus on Disposition:
Many insurers lack a comprehensive, enforced DLM strategy that explicitly addresses data from creation through to its eventual, defensible disposition.

• Governance Failure: Retention policies may exist, but there's no robust, auditable process for actually disposing of data once it reaches the end of its required lifecycle. The "D" in DLM is often missing in action.
• Impact on Storage Costs: Data accumulates indefinitely, occupying expensive storage tiers long after its business or regulatory value has expired.

2. The Pervasiveness of ROT Data:
A significant percentage of stored data in most large organizations, including insurers, is ROT – Redundant (duplicate copies), Obsolete (outdated and no longer useful), or Trivial (of no significant business value).

• Governance Failure: Lack of processes and tools to identify, classify, and systematically eliminate ROT data. Data duplication across departmental silos or different systems is common without centralized oversight.
• Impact on Storage Costs: Insurers pay to store, back up, and manage multiple copies of the same data, or data that serves no purpose, directly inflating storage requirements. Industry analysts often estimate ROT data can consume 60% or more of an enterprise's total storage capacity.

3. Ineffective or Non-Existent Data Tiering Strategies:
Not all data requires the same level of performance or accessibility. Storing infrequently accessed or archival data on expensive, high-performance primary storage is a major cost inefficiency.

• Governance Failure: Lack of clear policies and automated mechanisms for classifying data based on its access frequency, age, and business value, and then migrating it to appropriate storage tiers (e.g., from high-performance SSDs to lower-cost disk or cloud archival tiers).
• Impact on Storage Costs: Paying premium rates for storing "cold" data that could reside on much cheaper archival storage.

4. A Deep-Seated "Data Hoarding" Culture:
The fear of deleting potentially needed information, coupled with a lack of clarity on what can be safely deleted, often leads to a culture of keeping everything "just in case."

• Governance Failure: Insufficient guidance from legal and compliance on defensible disposition, lack of clear business ownership for making deletion decisions, and a general risk-averse culture that defaults to over-retention.
• Impact on Storage Costs: Digital landfills are created and maintained at significant expense, driven by fear rather than by strategic data value assessment.

5. Poor Governance Over Unstructured Data Storage:
Unstructured data – such as emails, documents, images, videos, and call recordings – typically constitutes the largest and fastest-growing portion of an insurer's data, yet it is often the least governed from a storage optimization perspective.

• Governance Failure: Lack of tools and processes for classifying, de-duplicating, archiving, and disposing of unstructured content. It's often stored in disparate repositories with little oversight.
• Impact on Storage Costs: Unstructured data consumes massive amounts of storage, much of it redundant or obsolete, significantly contributing to overall storage expenditure.

6. Legacy System Inflexibility and Delayed Decommissioning:
Older core insurance systems can be notoriously difficult and expensive to extract data from for disposition or tiering purposes. Similarly, data from decommissioned systems is often retained wholesale without proper rationalization.

• Governance Failure: Lack of a strategic approach to data management within legacy modernization programs; failure to allocate resources for data cleanup and disposition when old systems are retired.
• Impact on Storage Costs: Paying to maintain storage for entire legacy databases or application environments long after they are actively used, simply because extracting and disposing of the data is deemed too complex or risky without clear governance.

7. Inefficient Post-Merger Data Integration and Rationalization:
Mergers and acquisitions in the insurance sector frequently result in redundant IT systems and duplicated datasets.

• Governance Failure: Lack of a clear data integration and rationalization strategy post-merger, leading to the indefinite retention of multiple, overlapping data stores.
• Impact on Storage Costs: Paying to store and manage two or more sets of largely identical data from the merged entities.

Stop Paying for Digital Landfills

Excess storage costs are a symptom of deeper data governance failures. Without proper lifecycle management, insurers waste millions on redundant, obsolete, and trivial data while increasing risk and operational complexity.

Helix International's AI Governance solutions provide the framework, policies, and oversight needed to implement defensible disposition, eliminate ROT data, and transform storage from a cost center into a strategic asset.

Optimize Your Data Lifecycle Management →

Taming the Storage Beast: Strategic Governance for Cost Optimization

Addressing the multi-million dollar problem of excess storage costs requires insurers to move beyond tactical fixes and implement strategic, governance-driven solutions.

1. Champion Enterprise-Wide Data Lifecycle Governance with Executive Mandate: The board and C-suite must sponsor and oversee a comprehensive DLM framework that explicitly includes policies and processes for data minimization at creation, effective tiering during its active life, and robust, defensible disposition at its end-of-life.
2. Implement Rigorous Data Classification and Value-Based Tiering: Establish clear criteria and deploy technologies to classify data based on its business value, access frequency, regulatory requirements, and risk profile. Automate the migration of data to the most cost-effective storage tier that meets its service level requirements.
3. Invest in and Execute Defensible Disposition Capabilities: Overcome the organizational fear of deletion by establishing clear, legally vetted disposition policies and auditable processes. Implement technologies that can securely and permanently delete data from all relevant systems, including backups and archives, when its retention period expires and it’s not subject to a legal hold.
4. Aggressively Target ROT Data for Elimination: Launch initiatives specifically focused on identifying, classifying, and securely disposing of Redundant, Obsolete, and Trivial data across all enterprise systems, both structured and unstructured.
5. Develop and Enforce Specific Governance for Unstructured Data Storage: Implement solutions for managing the lifecycle of unstructured content, including tools for indexing, de-duplication, applying retention policies, and facilitating secure deletion or archival.
6. Integrate Data Rationalization into Legacy Modernization and Post-Merger Activities: Make data cleanup, migration, and disposition a core component of any IT system modernization or M&A integration plan, rather than an afterthought. This prevents the perpetuation of legacy storage inefficiencies.
7. Foster a "Data Value" Culture, Not a "Data Volume" Culture: Through communication, training, and performance metrics, encourage a shift in mindset where data is retained and managed based on its demonstrable business or regulatory value, not simply accumulated by default.

The shift from merely managing storage capacity to strategically governing the data lifecycle is critical. Bentley later emphasized this strategic pivot: "The conversation within insurance needs to evolve urgently from 'how can we procure more storage capacity for less per terabyte?' to 'what data do we truly need to create, capture, and retain, for precisely how long, and why?' That is a fundamental governance question. Answering it effectively not only slashes millions in unnecessary storage and associated management costs but also significantly enhances cybersecurity posture, improves operational agility, ensures ongoing compliance, and ultimately allows data to become a more focused, valuable asset."

Beyond Terabytes: Strategic Data Stewardship as a Financial Lever

The millions that insurers are paying in excess storage costs are often a clear symptom of deeper data governance deficiencies. Addressing these underlying issues is not just about reducing an IT expense line; it's a strategic imperative that impacts risk management, operational efficiency, regulatory compliance, and the ability to leverage data effectively for competitive advantage.

By embracing a governance-first approach to data lifecycle management, insurers can move beyond the reactive cycle of ever-increasing storage spend. They can transform their data environment from a costly, unwieldy liability into a streamlined, cost-optimized, and strategically valuable asset, freeing up resources and capital that can be reinvested in innovation and growth. Taming the storage beast is achievable, but it requires unwavering commitment to intelligent data stewardship from the top of the organization down.

Ready to Turn Storage Costs into Strategic Savings?

Stop treating storage as an inevitable expense. Helix International helps insurers build comprehensive data governance frameworks that identify ROT data, implement defensible disposition policies, and optimize storage spending while maintaining regulatory compliance.

Discover Our Data Lifecycle Governance Solutions | Transform excess costs into competitive advantage.

‍