A Word document, a folder and a long afternoon
A mid-sized manufacturer renews in three months. The account executive opens last year's submission, saves it with this year's date and starts editing. The business description needs a new paragraph about the second site. The schedule of values is an Excel file the client sent in a different layout. The risk survey recommendations from the insurer are a PDF that needs summarising. The claims experience comes from three places. The fleet list is out of date.
By the time the pack goes out, the broker has spent a day or two on formatting and copying rather than on how to present the risk. And the next account executive who works on the account will have to start by working out which of the attachments are current.
Why submissions get rebuilt each year
The submission is treated as a document rather than as data. The facts inside it, such as locations, values, turnover by activity, claims, risk improvements and the cover requested, are typed into prose and tables. Next year those facts have to be found and edited in place, and there is no record of which ones changed.
Attachments add to it. Surveys, schedules and certificates live in the document management part of the broking system, or on a shared drive, or in someone's email. Nobody is quite sure which version went to which insurer.
What the manual pack costs
| Problem | Effect on the placement |
|---|---|
| Days spent assembling | Less time to talk to underwriters about the risk |
| Stale details carried forward | Insurers query figures, which delays terms |
| Inconsistent packs to different insurers | Terms are not comparable |
| No record of changes | Hard to explain what is different this year |
| Attachments in several places | The wrong version gets sent |
Underwriters notice a tidy, current submission. They also notice one where the business description still mentions a site the client sold. The quality of the pack affects how seriously the risk is looked at.
The submission builder we put in place
- We define a structured risk profile for your commercial accounts: locations, values, activities, turnover split, employees, claims, protections and cover requested.
- Last year's profile is loaded as this year's starting point, and the client receives a request to confirm or update each part, with uploads for schedules and surveys.
- Schedules of values in the client's own spreadsheet layout are read and matched to your structure, with anything unclear flagged for the broker.
- Changes from last year are highlighted, so the broker sees at a glance what is new and can write the narrative around it.
- A language model can draft the business description and a summary of the changes from the structured data, for the broker to edit. It never sends anything unreviewed.
- The pack is generated in your house style as a PDF with the correct attachments, and a record is kept of which version went to which insurer and when.
- The profile and pack are filed back to the client record in your broking system.
A pack that starts from this year's facts
The broker opens a pack that already reflects what the client confirmed, rather than last year's document. Time goes on the parts that need judgement, such as how to present a poor claims year or which risk improvements to lead with. Each insurer receives the same facts. And the next broker to pick up the account can see the whole history of the profile, not just a folder of PDFs.
Is your team rebuilding packs every year?
- Submissions start by opening last year's Word file.
- Schedules of values arrive in a different layout every time.
- You are not sure which survey report went to which insurer.
- Underwriters come back with questions about figures that were out of date.
- Only one person really knows how the big accounts are presented.