Insurance is often described as a promise. Operationally, it behaves like a long-running, distributed workflow. A claim is not a single interaction, but a sequence of decisions, communications, validations, and handoffs that unfold across channels, teams, partners, and systems of record.
Customers experience this as one relationship with their insurer. Internally, it is executed across policy administration, claims platforms, CRM systems, document management, third-party vendors, and contact centres. The operational risk does not lie in any single system, but in how work moves between them.
That movement has become increasingly fragile.
Related Resources
Explore connected blog and comparison pages for this industry topic.
The Challenges
Volatility, scrutiny, and the cost of inconsistency
Claims volatility is no longer episodic. Natural catastrophes, secondary perils, supply-chain disruption, and inflation have driven sustained pressure on both volume and severity. At the same time, regulatory focus has expanded beyond solvency into claims handling practices, response times, documentation, and customer outcomes.
In this environment, how an insurer executes during a claim matters as much as the final decision. Delays, inconsistent answers, or long periods of silence are interpreted as risk by customers, regulators, and partners alike.
Operational resilience is no longer abstract. It is experienced directly through communication.
Fragmentation is the dominant failure mode
The operational problems insurers recognise are rarely caused by complex adjudication. They emerge from fragmentation.
Claims begin in one channel and continue in others. Customers move naturally between phone calls, messages, emails, portals, and follow-ups over weeks or months. Internally, each channel is often handled through separate tools and workflows. Context degrades as interactions shift. Information is repeated, re-entered, or re-interpreted.
Many delays originate at intake. Missing documents, unclear incident details, or incorrect identifiers enter the system early and turn the remainder of the process into recovery work. During catastrophe events, these weaknesses are exposed at scale, overwhelming frontline capacity precisely when customers are most stressed and least tolerant of friction.
These are not edge cases. They are structural characteristics of insurance operations.
Why automation alone does not resolve this
Most automation in insurance is built around channels rather than workflows. IVRs optimise calls, chatbots optimise chats, portals optimise forms. Each performs well in isolation.
The moment a case crosses interfaces, such as when a call becomes a message, a form requires clarification, or a document arrives later, automation stops and manual coordination begins. Context must be reconstructed, assumptions creep in, and work slows.
The limitation is not intelligence. It is ownership of the end-to-end execution.
Where Elba Fits
Elba fits into insurance operations as an agentic AI workforce designed to keep execution intact as she moves work across channels, systems, and time.
She is not another customer interface layered onto existing processes. Elba operates as a coordinating execution layer that carries context, intent, and state forward, ensuring that workflows continue rather than restart when interactions change form.
In claims and FNOL intake, Elba answers calls immediately, no waiting in queues to get a response, she captures the required data conversationally, any supporting documents needed can be collected and validated real-time during the call, claim creation or updates happen immediately. Customers receive updates and confirmations immediately via their preferred channel. Information gathered once remains attached to the case as it progresses, reducing downstream rework and recovery effort. The customer leaves the call satisfied and not frustrated.
As customers move between phone, messaging, portals, and follow-ups, Elba preserves continuity. A clarification provided in one channel is immediately available in the next. Documents submitted digitally are reflected in subsequent conversations. The workflow remains coherent even when interactions pause and resume days or weeks later.
Elba also coordinates outbound communication. Status updates, follow-ups, and confirmations are triggered as part of execution rather than handled ad hoc. Outcomes are captured and written back into systems of record, maintaining a clear operational trail.
Across customer support and policy servicing, routine requests can be handled end-to-end across channels while preserving session context and executing changes directly in backend systems. Human teams engage where judgment is required, not to reconstruct history, but to resolve the case. Elba is your end to end Agent working tirelessly for you 24x7x365.
Elba does not replace core claims or policy systems. She enables them to operate as a connected whole under real-world conditions. The customer gains the perception that their insurance company is "on the ball" and relays this across their social network.
How This Benefits the Organisation
Customers rarely judge the organisation by the policy they bought; they judge it by what happens when something goes wrong
When execution remains intact across a claim, customers experience momentum instead of silence
Information does not disappear between touchpoints, status updates arrive before they need to ask
Even when outcomes are not immediate or favourable, the process feels active, transparent, and under control
Claims teams spend less time recovering from incomplete intake, missing documents, or fragmented histories
Follow-ups decrease because context is preserved, escalations are driven by real exceptions
Organisations that preserve continuity can absorb higher volumes without linear increases in staffing
Reduced repeat contact, fewer handoffs, and lower recovery effort translate into lower cost per claim over time
Consistent execution reduces the number of moments that turn into public failures, protecting trust
Why This Context Matters
Insurers rarely lose trust because of a single adverse decision. Trust erodes through inconsistency: different answers across channels, missing follow-ups, unclear statuses, and prolonged silence during moments of stress.
In an environment shaped by elevated volatility and scrutiny, execution failures translate directly into cost, complaints, and exposure. Organisations that preserve continuity across workflows reduce variability without scaling headcount. Those that do not are forced to compensate manually, precisely when pressure is highest.
This context explains why continuity has become decisive and why insurers are rethinking how execution is coordinated across their operations.
Ready to see Elba in action?
Experience how Elba coordinates execution across your workflows.