Survey: Underwriters say AI trims admin time but rarely improves decision quality

# What the survey found A June survey of 350 senior commercial property & casualty underwriters in the US and UK, conducted by Coleman Parkes and published by AI underwriting vendor hyperexponential (hx), shows a clear split between where AI is being used and where underwriters want it applied. Most users report time savings on administrative tasks. Far fewer report improvements in the quality of underwriting decisions.

# Numbers that matter

• 51% of AI users say its biggest contribution is saving time on manual admin.
• 21% say AI has improved the quality of their decisions.
• Manual data entry across systems is the top workflow blocker at 42%.
• Key drags on decision quality: inconsistent submission data (44%), pressure to bind quickly (38%), and no context on similar prior risks (35%).

# Where organizations are investing — and where they are not Underwriters reported a mismatch between worries and investments. The single biggest worry is losing senior judgment without passing it on (44% list it as a top-three concern). Despite that, only 8% of respondents say their organization will invest in coaching and knowledge transfer in the next 12–18 months. The top investment areas are end-to-end workflow automation (52%) and submission ingestion (48%).

# Geographic difference on expertise capture Underwriters in the US report senior judgment resides in people's heads more than in the UK: 37% in the US versus 26% in the UK. Across both markets, 40% say expertise is captured poorly or not at all.

# How underwriters want AI used

# Why the gap matters

# Bottom line AI is delivering operational speed in underwriting workflows. Underwriters want AI to support contextual reasoning at the moment of decision, not replace it. The critical choices for carriers are where to direct investment: toward more automation today, or toward capturing and transferring senior judgment that shapes long-term pricing and portfolio performance.