What a well-run claims process actually looks like
Every broker has a claims process. Most have it working well enough. The question worth asking is whether it could work better, for the client and for the team handling it.
The typical version is easy to recognize.
A client emails in. Someone reads it, figures out what type of claim it is, and writes back asking for information. The client replies, but something is missing. Another email goes out. Maybe a phone call. Eventually enough arrives to build the file, and someone re-enters it all into the CRM by hand before sending it to the insurer.
One broker described it plainly: "We have flows of emails arriving that we need to take in, synthesize, and route to the right place. Today, that routing is mostly manual."
This process closes claims. But most brokers we talk to agree that it’s an inefficient process that takes more time than it should.
The well-run version covers the same steps. What changes is how each of those steps gets done.
"We have flows of emails arriving that we need to take in, synthesize, and route to the right place. Today, that routing is mostly manual."
Step one: identify what came in.
When a client email arrives, the first job is classification:
Is this a new claim?
An existing one?
What type?
In the manual process, a human reads it and decides. In an automated process, that classification happens immediately, based on the content of the email. The right workflow starts without anyone touching it.
Most automation stops here. But faster classification does not fix the underlying process. The client still sent an email. Someone still replies. Attachments go back and forth. The thread grows. The experience is the same as before, just cheaper to run. The question to ask yourself: Am I always aware of the status of all open claims?
The process was not a people problem. It was a design problem. AI that copies the design copies the problem.
The modern process starts with a case: structured, visible to both broker and client, with a clear status and a defined next step. Classification is what triggers the right workflow. It is the starting condition for the case, not the outcome. That's why we build a new model where each form and incoming email triggers a new case or updates an existing one. Read about that here.
When the routine steps run on their own, the people handling claims can spend their time on the decisions that actually need them.
Step two: collect what you need.
Once the claim type is identified, you know what information and documents are required. The client gets a structured request: a form built for that specific claim type, accessible from their phone, in their language. It tells them exactly what to upload. It does not ask for things you already have.
When the client does not respond, reminders go out automatically. The sequence is designed once and runs the same way for every claim. Nobody has to remember to follow up.
What many brokers say they want, and rarely have, is visibility into partial completion. As one put it: "We should be getting a notification that says: this was sent four days ago, the client filled in 90% of it. Then at least we'd know what to do."
Step three: read what comes in.
Documents arrive. A car accident report, a police statement, a photo of the damage. In the manual process, someone opens each file, reads it, and types the relevant information into the system. In the automated version, the documents are read and the data is extracted. By the time a human looks at the file, the fields are already populated.
This matters most for handwritten documents, which are common in claims. A handwritten accident report is still a structured document digital solutions can read and digest. The information is there.
Step four: push to the CRM.
The collected data needs to go into the system the insurer requires. In the manual process, this is re-entry: someone copies from one place and pastes into another. In the automated process, it is a sync. The file arrives complete.
Step five: close the loop with the client.
The client should know their claim was received, what happens next, and when to expect contact. When the acknowledgment goes out automatically the moment the form is submitted, clients who feel informed stop calling to check in. That alone recovers meaningful hours each week in a mid-sized brokerage.
"To save time in the medium term, you have to invest time in the short term. And that is time I haven't taken yet."
What good looks like in practice.
A client emails about a vandalism claim on a Saturday evening. By the time anyone opens their inbox Monday morning, the email has been classified, the client has received a structured request for the relevant documents, and two of the four required documents have already been uploaded. The case is open in the CRM, partially filled, waiting only for the remaining documents before it can go to the insurer.
Nobody worked the weekend. The process kept moving and serving the client.
The gap between this and what most brokers run today is not a technology gap. The tools exist. It is a process design gap. The manual version was built around what people could do. The automated version is built around what the case and customer actually need.
Changing that takes some upfront work. One broker said it well: "To save time in the medium term, you have to invest time in the short term. And that is time I haven't taken yet."
Most brokers know exactly what they mean by that. The question is when to start.