Striking a Balance Between Instant
and Human Underwriting

Meeting the modern insurance customer where they’re at means implementing the digital processes that people have come to expect in all aspects of their lives. However, I’ve found that carriers can be misled into believing that modernizing inherently means less control and higher risk. 

I want to lend my experience in this realm to talk about why this is a false dilemma.

Instant underwriting has, without a doubt, expanded insurance access to millions, and many carriers have been able to leverage this technology to grow their applicant pool and revenue. But while some carriers hear “instant underwriting” and think “simplified,” it’s much more accurate to say “efficient.” 

The top-level takeaway for instant underwriting is that it addresses the different personas who apply for life insurance in a way that matches their needs and status. As an example, carriers can save time and money by asking fewer questions and pulling fewer data if the applicant has indicated they are an extremely healthy 22-year-old. Carriers also then eliminate the need for other costly steps like medical records. 

While it’s been a revelation, it’s also important to note that instant underwriting is not the only option for the modern insurance company. 

Carriers who want a bit more human control can opt for an applicant flow called “refer-to-underwriter.” This hybrid approach allows carriers to leverage the digital intake process of instant underwriting while creating an off-ramp for applicants that may require the keen eye of an underwriter to help them become insured. The best part is, this subset of applicants is established by your own rules and risk tolerance. 

Incorporating refer-to-underwriting allows more applicants to secure coverage that otherwise may not have been attainable. 

Ultimately, the most important thing is for carriers to find the right balance that minimizes risk while also ensuring that as many people as possible are able to apply for life insurance.