Efficient risk assessment: the transformative power of low code in underwriting

Insurers and brokers used to wait patiently for the technical implementation of their requirements by providers of broker management programmes or portfolio management systems. But those days are over. In this interview with Benjamin Zühr, we explore the important role of enterprise low code in underwriting, particularly for risk assessment and risk management. Enterprise Low Code is now helping to build a flexible and digital IT landscape and find secure, scalable solutions that fit seamlessly into the existing infrastructure.

Where exactly are enterprise low-code platforms positioned and what added value do they provide?

Benjamin Zühr: A typical policy management system or broker management programme primarily maps the actual status of a contract. In contrast, low-code platforms such as the A12 Cosmo technology enable the mapping of value chains and the modelling of processes that lead to a contract status. This not only offers efficiency, but also controlled quality. So it’s not a question of either/or, but of complementarity: by integrating low code across policy management systems, every insurer and broker can map their own processes in the form of products.

So that means the added value lies in the digital process?

Benjamin Zühr: Correct. And this is not just limited to standard business, but also includes highly customised business processes, although these can only be fully automated in the rarest of cases. However, every process can be controlled, no matter how complex and individualised it is.

A major advantage of low code is that experts at the insurer, underwriting agent or broker can model processes themselves. This enables individual agreements between customers and insurers to be modelled directly in the system. Thus, a business agreement between several parties is modelled systemically.

mgm A12 is a Low Code Platform. How do insurers and brokers use this platform to optimise risk assessment processes and underwriting?

Benjamin Zühr: It is customary to ask corporate customers questions about their risk in order to obtain a picture of the current risk situation. However, the trend now is to ask as few questions as possible. However, this can lead to a blurred picture of the actual risk. The sum insured and premium are determined in a kind of grid based on a small amount of imprecise data.

With the help of low code, however, industry-specific and sometimes even customer-specific risk models can be modelled. Based on these risk models, the risk information is stored accordingly in the system. Individualised underwriting takes place and coverages are tailored to the respective customer risk.

A practical example: it turns out that insurers who have more and more detailed risk information from customers often underwrite risks that they would otherwise have assessed as uninsurable or not insured. This is a great example of what can be optimised with the help of more risk information and risk models, which can be built very easily with low code tools.

How flexibly can changing requirements for customers in individual sectors be implemented with the help of low code?

Benjamin Zühr: Very flexible. One example: adapting framework agreements. Let’s assume I have a framework agreement for the fleet business with a customer. I can use low-code tools to map this framework agreement and build processes, data models and automation on it.

If the underwriting criteria now change, for example if certain vehicles are to be excluded or an automatic deductible is to be introduced, I can make these changes independently in a short space of time. This allows me to start managing my portfolio digitally and optimise the system.

Does this mean that adjustments that used to take months and may have required adjustments in several IT systems can be made in just a few weeks or days with an enterprise low code approach? Is this a realistic scenario?

Benjamin Zühr: Exactly. With low-code tools, I can change the framework conditions of a contract or a fleet quickly and easily. I can influence the coverage and even outsource sub-processes to partners or other parties. Customers, insurers and brokers see the changes in real time and work on the basis of the new criteria. In a digital, system-controlled world, manual processes and the associated errors are just a thing of the past.

A final important topic that is often discussed in the industry is the scalability and integration of low-code applications into an existing IT landscape. What is your practical experience of integration with legacy systems?

Benjamin Zühr: My experience shows that the integration options depend heavily on the interface capability of the legacy systems. However, we are extremely flexible and can adapt to different circumstances. It is important to compare costs and benefits. In some cases, it can make sense to set up a parallel world and gradually transfer the legacy systems into this world.

The advantage of low code lies not only in the data model and the processes, but also in the fact that we can integrate modern process systems such as Camunda. This allows us to control third-party systems without hard coding, which is not possible with outdated systems.

My advice would therefore be to carefully examine the integration options and decide whether an interface is really necessary or whether alternative paths can be taken.

What is your personal conclusion on the topic of low code in relation to efficient risk assessment in industrial insurance?

Benjamin Zühr: I personally firmly believe that flexible low-code and no-code-based platforms will prevail in the medium term. It is becoming increasingly important to trigger follow-up processes based on more accurate data and risk information.

The future no longer lies in simply mapping the basic data of a contract, but in processing real data in real time. Although this process is still ongoing, I am convinced that these platforms will establish themselves on the market in the next five to seven years.