Customer stories
Blog articles
Do You Need an Underwriting Workbench?
If you're considering an underwriting technology upgrade, you might be thinking about buying an underwriting workbench. But is it really what your organization needs? We’ll take a look at the role of the underwriting workbench in the insurtech stack, its overall effectiveness, and alternatives.
What is an Underwriting Workbench?
An underwriting workbench (UWWB) is a software solution commonly used to support the underwriting workflow. Traditionally, these workbenches have been designed to automate previously manual tasks—such as extracting data from electronic forms to eliminate the need for manual data entry.
What is an Underwriting Workbench Used For?
The primary goal of an underwriting workbench is to enhance efficiency for individual underwriters. Many insurance organizations implement workbenches hoping to speed up their workflows, and enable their underwriters to process a higher volume of submissions more quickly. Some workbenches also incorporate decision support features intended to assist underwriters in making risk assessments.
Underwriting workbenches are frequently marketed as a comprehensive platform where underwriters can access everything they need to complete their work - although in practice, this vision often falls short. Many underwriters still find themselves juggling multiple systems throughout their workflow.
Underwriting Workbench: Pros vs. Cons
Pros:
- Well-established, mature technology with widespread industry adoption.
- Useful for insurers who do not want to change their existing workflows and are satisfied with incremental efficiency gains.
- Time savings vs manual data entry
Cons:
While underwriting workbenches offer familiarity and minor efficiency gains, they struggle to address the core challenges of modern underwriting.
Are Underwriting Workbenches Outdated?
As a technology category, underwriting workbenches have not kept up with the needs of underwriters. Workbenches were a game-changer in the 1990s when insurers were transitioning from paper-based underwriting to digital systems. However, they don’t fundamentally change how underwriting is done—rather, they speed up existing processes without addressing deeper inefficiencies.
In an increasingly volatile risk environment, underwriting workbenches fall behind in a number of areas:
- Siloed decision-making. Workbenches do not integrate broader portfolio-level insights that modern insurers need to evaluate risks.
- Ineffective decision support. While workbenches can offer suggestions based on static guidance, lack of AI and real-time portfolio feedback mean those suggestions are frequently inaccurate or outdated.
- Lack of real-time data. Insurers often receive performance data at a significant delay, a problem workbenches typically do not address
- Inadequate third-party data integration. Third-party data tools typically cannot be accessed through a workbench, forcing underwriters to divide their attention between an increasing number of systems.
Underwriting Workbench Alternatives
The best alternative? A RiskOps platform like Federato’s.
The RiskOps framework focuses on the portfolio as a whole, and how each underwriting transaction impacts strategic portfolio goals. Instead of just incrementally improving an inefficient legacy workflow, RiskOps empowers insurers to put their underwriting strategies into action, and create a more efficient and effective underwriting process.
With real-time data insights and the portfolio-level focus, RiskOps delivers substantial improvements over an underwriting workbench in a number of crucial functions:
Conclusion
For insurers looking to make meaningful improvements to their underwriting processes, an underwriting workbench is unlikely to move the needle. While workbenches may still fit niche insurers with rigid workflows, most underwriting organizations would be better served with a modern RiskOps platform that offers real-time portfolio insights to help underwriters sign the right deals.
Ready to move beyond outdated underwriting workbenches? Learn more about the Federato platform with a self-guided product tour, or connect with us for a live demo today.
FAQs
1. What is the difference between an underwriting workbench and a RiskOps platform?
An underwriting workbench digitizes existing workflows, while a RiskOps platform leverages AI to enhance decision-making and optimize portfolio management in real-time.
2. Why are underwriting workbenches considered outdated?
They were designed to automate manual processes in the 1990s but haven’t evolved to meet the dynamic, data-driven needs of modern underwriting.
3. Can an underwriting workbench integrate AI?
Some workbenches offer AI-powered add-ons, but they lack the deep, integrated AI capabilities found in RiskOps platforms like Federato.
4. Who benefits most from a RiskOps platform?
Carriers, MGAs, MGA aggregators, and mutuals seeking to enhance underwriting efficiency, improve risk selection, and drive portfolio profitability benefit most from RiskOps solutions.
5. How does Federato’s RiskOps platform compare to traditional underwriting workbenches?
Federato’s RiskOps platform provides real-time AI-driven insights, integrates diverse data sources, and optimizes underwriting decisions at both individual and portfolio levels—capabilities that traditional workbenches lack.
