AI usage in insurance is an ‘evolution, not revolution’ – Hiscox

Artificial intelligence may drive change across the UK general insurance market, but this is no revolution. Rather, it marks a shift in mindset, an adjustment in tools and a sharpening of strategy. 

This was the clear message from Adam Atkins, head of technology underwriting at Hiscox, who addressed the inaugural TechTalk Live webinar hosted by Insurance Times in association with Hiscox. The session focused on AI’s potential to reshape back-office functions for brokers, with a shared view that AI is here to enhance, not replace.

“It’s using AI as a tool to enhance existing practices. It’s evolution, not revolution. We’re not replacing – we are enhancing,” Atkins said.

This pragmatic, measured approach was echoed throughout the discussion, which included contributions from Joe Newbury, director at Brunel PI Brokers, and Dan Henry, account chief technology officer for insurance and investments at Microsoft. Each is navigating the challenges and opportunities AI presents to the UKGI space, from underwriting and renewals to the core challenge of delivering speed and service without sacrificing accuracy.

For Newbury, the need to reform renewal processes is a critical starting point. “We’re building a system – it’s in build at the moment – to sort of automate the renewal process as much as possible,” he explained.

The intention is not solely about speed. “It basically allows our clients to renew their form and complete all that hopefully within five clicks,” he added, highlighting a sharp contrast to traditional, manual-heavy methods. “We’re hoping the vast majority of our clients will be able to renew that form within 24 hours.”

Despite the drive for rapid turnaround, Newbury was clear that human oversight remains non-negotiable. “This is a human-in-the-loop process where the AI is doing the heavy lifting, but the broker is ultimately checking the data to ensure quality at the end.”

A shared pain point

In an industry where regulation, trust and clarity are paramount, cutting corners is not an option – no matter how fast technology advances.

The burden of routine administration is a shared pain point. “Spending a lot of our time on admin and creating documents and inputting data will sort of effectively impact our bottom line because we’re not spending that time meeting clients,” Newbury said.

This bottleneck is all too familiar. Henry pointed to AI’s role in streamlining such processes, freeing up brokers and underwriters to focus on higher-value activities. “It’s that same way, right? It’s allowing brokers and underwriters to focus more on the strategic – and having all of those kind of regular-type activities done by AI.”

That distinction between routine and strategic ran to the heart of the conversation. AI is not about reducing headcount – it is about empowering people to do what only people can: exercise judgment, build relationships and deliver insight. “If you spend more time on the mundane tasks, you can’t actually work on what makes brokers good at what they do,” Henry said.

Perhaps the most revealing moment of the session came when Atkins reflected on his own approach to talent and what it says about the demands of today’s market.

“For me, it’s always finding that balance between speed and detail. So whenever I interview new underwriters, I always ask that. It’s kind of like a philosophical start. And it’s always really interesting – the response you get – because, in my view, there is a right answer, but it’s also one of these where there isn’t necessarily a right answer, because you always need detail, but absolutely you need speed as well.”

Atkins continued: “You need to deliver something meaningful and quickly. I’m sure we’ve got many brokers joined us here today that have probably dealt with underwriters where it feels like there are unnecessary barriers – huge amounts of information being requested in order to progress a quote or enact a change on a policy.”

“I can see from my many dealings with brokers that this can be hugely frustrating. I think that, in a nutshell, is the biggest challenge that insurers have. As the market becomes increasingly more competitive, we need to be excellent at servicing. We need to meet the needs of brokers quickly, efficiently and meaningfully so that they can provide the onward service to clients.”

Speed vs detail

In a competitive and fast-moving market like UKGI, the pressure to reduce turnaround times is intense. However, Atkins warned against losing sight of insurance’s purpose.

“If you don’t get that balance right between speed and detail, and you skimp on the detail in the aid of getting things done faster, that might not solve the overall issue – because we’re here to pay claims. We’re here to sort out fortuitous situations that could be really meaningful to a client.”

“And in the age of trying to be faster, trying to be quicker, trying to be better, you don’t want to create a product or a process that, in the end, loses sight of that ultimate goal – which is that a claim is to be paid.”

Atkins acknowledged the fine line that brokers and underwriters must walk between responsiveness and responsibility. “The speed there could cause danger around the regulatory responsibility and the ultimate outcome of insurance as well.”

For Newbury, the automation gap in brokers’ back-office systems is already having consequences. “I think the biggest frustration that we have with the sort of back-office functionality – and the lack of automation within it – is that, of course, there’s quite a detrimental impact to the front end and the customer journey.”

Handled carefully, AI-driven tools could help resolve this frustration. It is not about headline-grabbing revolutions or Silicon Valley hype – it is about making meaningful, incremental gains that support brokers where they need it most.

As the session concluded, Atkins brought the discussion full circle, reinforcing why the insurance industry must get this right.

“In the age of trying to be faster, trying to be quicker, trying to be better, you don’t want to create a product or create a process that in the end would lose [sight of] that goal.”