83% of insurers would let AI run repeatable operational tasks, ISG study finds
Insurers want AI to execute routine work but prefer models built or governed for insurance. Ambition far outpaces advanced adoption.

Insurers want AI to execute routine work but prefer models built or governed for insurance. Ambition far outpaces advanced adoption.

83% of surveyed insurers support AI executing routine operational tasks, but only 6% would trust a general-purpose model alone for high-consequence decisions.
There is a wide gap between ambition and execution: 96% have AI-led redesign on the agenda, yet only 13% report an advanced AI-centric operating posture today.
# What the study measured The ISG study surveyed senior leaders across underwriting, operations, claims, technology and transformation in North America, Europe and Asia. It covered 20 operational activities across submission intake and triage, quote generation, bordereaux processing, claims adjudication and compliance screening.
# What insurers say they want
# What 'governed' means in practice The study draws a specific distinction between general-purpose AI and a 'governed' model. A governed model:
This governance framing helps explain why 86% of respondents said consequential decisions — those that create competitive difference — should remain with people, even when AI handles the routine work underneath.
# Why insurers see capacity benefits Carriers estimate one in nine broker submissions are declined or left unquoted not because of appetite but because operations cannot process them in time. Where AI is already in operations, respondents reported measurable operational benefits: 61% saw productivity improvements and 51% reported faster cycle times. Respondents expect operating costs to fall about 16% over two years.
Martin Henley, CEO of mea Platform, summarised the conditional appetite: insurers are ready to hand repeated work to AI if the model understands insurance and runs inside their rules. He added that capacity unlocked by AI matters most for what insurers choose to do with it, such as expanding appetite or entering new lines.
# The adoption gap: ambition vs reality Nearly all insurers (96%) have AI-led operational redesign on their agenda. Yet the portion that defines an advanced operating posture — where AI is central to workflow design — stands at just 13% today. Fully AI-native operations, in which AI executes defined processes end to end while people set policy and manage exceptions, is below 1% today and only 12% expect to reach that within two years.
# Practical implications for insurers and brokers
# Bottom line

Only 23% of the insurers that report real revenue gains from AI said they have achieved true enterprise-wide integration

Policyholders are fine with AI for general questions. Ask them to file a claim with it and trust drops to 45%.

Only 6% would rely on AI alone during an accident or major claim

A new survey of 350 senior commercial P&C underwriters finds AI stuck on admin while senior judgment drains away uncaptured

Insurance Business has just analysed the latest BLS figures. The results are intriguing

The carrier's benefit expense ratio reaffirmation signals claims are tracking at the high end of expectations
Loading more related stories...
Open the app view to save this story, compare related coverage, and continue from the same source.