← Proof library

Real Case Study

Renewal follow-up depending on inboxes, memory, and manual comparison

Confirmed by conversationInsurance brokingIndependent brokerage, ~8 staffRedacted real workflowUpdated 8 July 2026
01

Owner Pressure

Renewals are the revenue base of a brokerage, a lapsed renewal is a client someone else now owns. The principal knew renewals were slipping but had no view of which ones, or how close to the edge each was.

02

Current Workflow

Renewal reminders relied on staff memory and a shared inbox, with no overdue view. Quote comparisons across underwriters were assembled manually in Excel.

03

Workflow Leak

A renewal process can look “fine” from the outside while still leaking time through shared inboxes, manual quote comparison, unclear overdue visibility, and owner/staff memory. Near-lapses stay invisible until they are emergencies.

04

Economic Case

Estimated $26,000+/year in labour cost alone, before counting the revenue at risk from near-lapsed renewals.

05

Value Created

Labour capacity recovered, fewer near-misses, clearer owner oversight.

06

Implementation Design

The first fix is not necessarily a new platform. It is often a clearer renewal status workflow, follow-up rhythm, and exception view, every policy visible by days-to-expiry, with ownership assigned per renewal instead of living in a shared inbox.

“A business doesn't lose renewals because staff are careless, it loses them because the workflow only surfaces a renewal when a human remembers it. Memory is not a system.”

Want me to look at your workflow next?

Send one admin, follow-up, or handoff problem. I’ll tell you where I’d look first.

Request a Workflow Audit