Insurers and brokers that want to see their whole delegated authority book of business in one place (an utterly basic requirement) are currently forced to use one of two operating models to resource the processing of bordereaux into standardised and validated data.

So what are these models?

Model A – Insurers and brokers do it all

Insurers or broker’s licence and install a complex technical tool and establish an ever growing team to process the incoming bordereaux data. The process is dependent on highly experienced and trained individuals. If the project gains any traction at all, it is constantly at risk of process collapse if key staff depart. Each of these teams are duplicating the processing of the same bordereaux across the market, and furthermore duplicating the data questions back to coverholders and TPAs.

Model B – Service providers do it all

Service providers deploy their in-house processing teams (using their proprietary technical tools) to process bordereaux data sent from the insurers or brokers. Insurers or brokers have to buy into the service for their whole book of business to effectively use the platform, but are also locked into using a single service provider (irrespective of service levels/costs). They also need to retain a large team to respond to the inevitable data questions from the service providers who can’t make decisions about the data they are handling.

And that’s it! 

Market participants are forced to choose between two unenviable operating models for managing their delegated authority data. 

But what about C onwards…?

Model C -  Coverholders and TPAs complete the bordereaux submission process

Allow the coverholders and TPAs who created the data to complete the submission process, including transformation and validation, using an intelligent and structured process (this means not presenting them with technical tools). Coverholders and TPAs can answer any questions immediately as they understand the data, removing any further downstream questions. Insurers and brokers bordereaux work is thereby eliminated, and they can focus on using the data.

Model D -  Coverholders and TPAs submit real-time XML

Provide a mechanism for those coverholders and TPAs that can, to submit their data in real-time XML, pre-bind. They know data and contract requirements have been met - insurers and brokers get an immediate view of the risks they are on and the claims being processed.

Whilst insurers, brokers, and service providers are the right resources for many contracts, there are some important adjustments to the status quo required. So let's make some adjustments to A and B.

Model A – Anyone at insurers and brokers can do it, where selected

Let’s get away from technical tools and move to solutions that understand DA data and can therefore guide users through a structured process, asking the right questions at the right time. Therefore, allowing anyone within an insurer or broker to complete the process (without a degree in Excel). And the market should process the data once, then visible to relevant parties in a centralised platform.

Model B – Service providers can do it, where selected, in a competitive market

Enable insurers and brokers to use their selected service providers wherever they wish to. If service levels dip or costs rise, then switch to another for selected contracts. Outsource your marine book, but do property in-house - your choice.

All these models should be available to the market. Insurers and brokers managing their delegated authority book in a single platform, but with complete flexibility as to ‘who does what’ for each and every contract. Whilst it may take time to shift to coverholder and TPAs completing the submission process themselves (C & D), this must be an option, given it fundamentally solves the data process issues today.

https://www.ctinsuretech.com/solutions/insite-delegated-authority