Brands
Life insurance sector sees falling advocacy and rising passives: Hansa Research report
Axis Max Life, Kotak lead NPS as passive customers pose growth risk
MUMBAI: Hansa Research’s latest Life Insurance CuES 2026 flags a growing challenge for India’s life insurers: delivering customer delight, not just satisfaction.
While overall experience scores have remained steady, the report points to what it calls a “delight dilution” trend, where insurers are struggling to convert consistent service into strong customer advocacy. Nearly 30 percent of customers now fall into the ‘passive’ category, signalling a potential engagement gap that could impact long-term loyalty.
Based on feedback from over 3,500 customers across 12 insurers, the study highlights how rising expectations, limited brand differentiation and a lack of standout experiences are flattening customer enthusiasm.
At the top of the rankings, Axis Max Life Insurance leads with a Net Promoter Score of 61, followed closely by Kotak Life Insurance at 60. HDFC Life, ICICI Prudential Life Insurance and Tata AIA Life Insurance share the third spot, while Life Insurance Corporation of India recorded the sharpest decline in advocacy, with its score dropping 10 points year-on-year.
Explaining the shift, Hansa Research CEO Praveen Nijhara said, “Most life insurance companies have improved operational performance, but experience delivery has now stabilised. Brands are blending, reducing their ability to stand out and limiting true customer delight.”
The report also underscores structural challenges, particularly in the agency channel, which continues to dominate distribution but is increasingly seen as an “engagement bottleneck”. Interactions often peak at purchase, with limited follow-up, weakening long-term brand connection.
Adding to this complexity is a shift in customer expectations, especially among younger segments. Hansa Research CX executive vice president Piyali Chatterjee said, “Gen Z is emerging as the most demanding segment, expecting seamless, transparent and self-directed experiences. One-size-fits-all strategies will no longer work.”
The findings also reveal that digital capabilities are no longer a differentiator but a baseline expectation, while premium customers are demanding more personalised and proactive engagement.
As insurers navigate this evolving landscape, the message is clear: consistency alone will not cut it. Turning satisfaction into advocacy will require sharper segmentation, deeper engagement and experiences that truly resonate.
Brands
Godrej clarifies ‘GI’ identifier after logo similarity debate
Says GI is not a logo, will not replace Godrej signature across products.
MUMBAI: In a branding storm where shapes did the talking, Godrej is now spelling things out. Godrej Industries Group (GIG) has issued a clarification on its newly introduced ‘GI’ identifier, addressing questions around its purpose and design following a wave of online criticism. At the centre of the debate were two concerns: whether the new mark replaces the long-standing Godrej logo, and whether its geometric design mirrors other corporate identities.
The company has drawn a clear line. The Godrej signature logo, it said, remains unchanged and continues to be the sole logo across all consumer-facing products and services. The ‘GI’ mark, by contrast, is not a logo but a corporate group identifier intended for use alongside the Godrej signature or company name, and aimed at stakeholders such as investors, media and talent rather than consumers.
The need for such a distinction stems from the 2024 restructuring of the broader Godrej Group into two separate business entities. With both continuing to operate under the same Godrej name and signature, the identifier is positioned as a way to differentiate the Godrej Industries Group at a corporate level.
The rollout, however, triggered a broader conversation on design originality. Critics pointed to similarities between the GI mark’s geometric composition and logos used by companies globally, raising questions about distinctiveness.
Responding to this, GIG said its intellectual property and legal review found that such overlaps are common in minimalist, geometry-led design systems. Basic forms such as circles and rectangles appear across dozens of brand identities worldwide, the company noted.
It added that the identifier emerged from an extensive design process and was chosen for its simplicity, allowing it to sit alongside the Godrej signature without competing visually. While acknowledging that elemental shapes may appear less distinctive in isolation, the group emphasised that the mark is part of a broader identity system that includes a custom typeface, sonic branding and other proprietary elements.
Following legal and ethical assessments, the company said it found no impediment to using the identifier, reiterating that the GI mark is a corporate tool not a consumer-facing symbol.
In short, the logo isn’t changing but the conversation around it certainly has.
