Build vs. Buy: When to build or buy your Underwriting Workbench for Commercial & Specialty Underwriters

The build vs. buy decision

The build vs. buy decision is becoming more complicated as more options enter the market.

The question being asked is: do we build a custom solution or is there an option on the market?

Typically, insurers have had to consider building with more control at greater expense and risk, or buying a solution that can be deployed quickly with less customisation.

How do we think about this?

In an increasingly complex insurance landscape, this is more than a technology decision.

It is essential for insurers to assess their current underwriting strategy and where they are within their underwriting journey.

Insurers may encounter limitations with off-the-shelf solutions that lack specialisation or face the complexity of managing low-code or self-build options.

Assessing your underwriting strategy

Building a solution is challenging but may suit some insurers who are focused on their own software.

However, building is inherently complex, and we encourage insurers to make sure your build vs buy decision fits within your underwriting strategy.

Buy	Send	Build
✅ Stable, scale applications	✅ Designed for commercial specialty insurance	✅ Highly flexible and customisable
✅ Functionally rich	✅ Rich out-of-the-box product	✅ Lower license cost
✅ Insurance data models	✅ Highly flexible & configurable	✅ Cross functional solutions
❌ Not built for underwriting	✅ Reduced delivery scale and cost	✅ No / limited insurance accelerators inc. data models
❌ Not purpose built for Commercial Speciality	✅ Best Cost: Value ratio	❌ High overall TCO
❌ Inflexible workflows & screens	❌ Underwriting only	❌ Complex delivery
❌ High license costs		❌ Ongoing support challenge

---

The best of both

Insurers will find benefits in both build or buy options with process-driven underwriting. But things become more difficult as insurers move towards data-driven underwriting.

These could be limitations from off-the-shelf solutions who are not offering a specialised Underwriting Workbench, or the sheer complexity of keeping up with low-code or self-build options.

Send provides insurers with a best of both approach at each stage of their underwriting maturity with predictable costs, highly customised, and continued underwriting focus:

Solution	Out-of-the-box ready	Configuration required	Further configuration required	Significant development required
Buy	Ready-made product templates and workflows enable setup through configuration and there are industry integration adaptors. Configuration is still a substantial task due to the size of the platforms and changes outside of the standard platform are complex and costly.	N/A	N/A	Benefit from insurance roadmap features, however these may not be specific to commercial underwriting. These platforms are not set up to be customized- doing so significantly increases TCO and create maintenance and upgrade challenges These will be a relevant product roadmap to benefit from however these will be commoditised and no differentiators. Roadmap is not likely to be primarily aimed as Speciality Underwriting.
Send	Preconfigured for operational readiness for a solid base that can be built on.	Benefit from additional out-of-the-box features, configuration and connectivity to enable flexible, rapid delivery of customer requirements.	Benefit from Send's underwriting-focused roadmap and continued partnerships / connections such as market placing platforms, Provides the platform flexibility to allow you to achieve all other goals through ever increasing self-service configuration and orchestration of capabilities such as other applications, analytics and AI.	N/A
Build	N/A	Build simple, standalone workflows very simply and at pace.	The benefits of low-code (primarily speed of change) are almost entirely eroded past a certain application scale. To construct a core application such as a workbench effectively will require extremely astute software development strategy. It will take considerable time and investment to build and report.	There will be no/ limited underwriting specific product roadmap and integrations from which to benefit. Low code is very capable of leveraging integrations and applying business logic / rules. However, this will be layering complexity on top of an already substantial code base, this drives up support costs and further increases system stability and reduces speed of change.

---

When to consider building

Some insurers are more comfortable at managing their own systems and software. If you have the expertise, time, and resources to manage this process - then building may be a good option.

Another key consideration is what you decide not to do as you prioritise as part of your underwriting strategy …what could you be focused on instead?

Do you have unique requirements?

Most workbenches can be configured for highly specialised insurers – whether by line of business or by specific functionality. If the bulk of your underwriting requirements are unique and beyond what an underwriting workbench has to offer, then you should consider building a solution.

If these unique requirements only make up a small part of your underwriting processes, consider an existing workbench and discussing how further configuration can be used to help satisfy your requirements.

Do you need complete control of the roadmap?

Insurers who want to control which features are built and when may consider building their own solution. This approach offers the flexibility to add new features and capabilities as your business evolves, without relying on third-party updates. However, it requires ongoing development to keep your workbench competitive over time.

Building your own solution also means you miss out on the latest developments and UX improvements that come standard with a licensed workbench. This also means that insurers must stay on top of the latest technology, trends, and regulatory requirements.

Do you have a long-term software strategy?

Building software can be effective if managed well as part of a long-term strategy. Insurers need to evaluate both their current and future core competencies and areas of focus.

A well-defined long-term strategy should also consider the potential challenges of maintaining and upgrading the software over time. This includes staying informed about technological advancements and continuously improving the user experience.

Do you have dedicated software engineering teams?

While many insurers have robust developer and IT teams capable of supporting various projects, few possess in-house software engineers with the specialised expertise or available time to develop and maintain underwriting software.

However, if an insurer does have a dedicated software development team with the necessary skills and experience, building a custom solution could be a natural and viable choice. This allows for greater control over the development process and ensures that the software meets the specific needs of the organisation.

---

When to avoid building an underwriting workbench

Building is usually more complex than it appears. Even insurers with robust developer and IT resources do not typically have dedicated software engineers focused on building internal software.

When deciding whether to build or buy, it is important to also think about when to avoid one or the other.

What are your existing underwriting processes?

Are you replacing an existing solution or making improvements to your underwriting process? Consider how standardised your current processes are and how much of this has been documented.

Underwriting processes and workflows can take time to develop and standardise on your own. Today’s workbenches can be configured quickly to get you up and running with standardised journeys throughout your underwriting process.

Is there any execution risk?

‘Build’ projects are largely unknown in terms of time and resources required. What are the probabilities of the project not delivering, or other delays?

When speed is critical, buying software can significantly reduce the time required and reduce the risk to implement and deploy a solution. Consider pre-configured workbenches that can deliver operational readiness within weeks, not years.

What are the cost considerations?

How does this compare to buying a solution? Building your own often comes with higher upfront costs and ongoing maintenance expenses. Building software can lead to higher costs associated with hiring and maintaining a development team to manage ongoing updates and support, which can further increase longterm maintenance costs.

Consider ‘buying’ when you need to control expenses and need predictable costs [to avoid overspending] through subscription models or licensing fees.

Do you have the available expertise?

Do you have the subject matter expertise in-house to build and maintain a solution? Building without a dedicated resource means the complexity is pushed on to your existing teams. How many resources (underwriters, operations, developers, etc.) are available to develop, document and test the necessary workflows? And what is the level of disruption or change management expected?

How does this integrate with our existing technology?

How does ‘build vs. buy’ fit within your existing technology? Does your business build internal software or use a legacy PAS system? Even with no-code, insurers are often left building from scratch or having to figure out how best to integrate data, processes and technology.

When building, it is important to think about the integrations, workflows or lines of business required –both now and as you grow.

---

When to consider buying an underwriting workbench

Buying a solution is often the most practical choice for insurers looking to leverage the expertise and best practices of providers who have successfully implemented workbenches.

Modern workbenches are highly configurable and allow insurers to quickly new features and capabilities without the need for extensive in-house development.

This gives your workbench has the best chance for a successful implementation.

Expertise

Buying allows insurers to leverage the expertise and best practices of providers who have successfully implemented workbenches numerous times.

This ensures your workbench has the best chance for a successful implementation, optimising workflows and underwriting processes as standard.

Time-to-market as a strategic advantage

Speed of change is at the heart of a successful implementation. Workbenches offer a solid foundation that can be easily configured, significantly reducing the time required to implement.

Whether buying a workbench or developing a new product on your workbench, reduced time-to-market is a strategic advantage in the highly complex and competitive insurance landscape.

Specialised data services and integrations

Effectively managing and incorporating underwriting data is key to a successful workbench. Specialised data services ensure that your workbench can seamlessly integrate with new and existing data sources, enhancing the accuracy and efficiency of your underwriting data.

These integrations allow you to leverage real-time data to make better risk decisions and improve your underwriting performance.

Predictable costs and mitigated risk

Buying a solution offers clear pricing structures and licence fees, enabling insurers to allocate resources more effectively and avoid the risk of overspending. This financial predictability is a significant benefit of purchasing a workbench.

Additionally, buying a solution reduces execution risk through a proven delivery methodology and the expertise of experienced teams. This combination ensures a smoother implementation process and ongoing stability.

---

Key questions to consider

These are a few key questions you should be asking yourself when thinking about ‘build or buy’ for your underwriting workbench software:

All Types of Insurers

• How will the workbench fit in with your insurance ecosystem?
• What is the best approach to implementation, should you work in-house or use a systems integrator?
• Is your technology team experienced enough to build a workbench?
• If you build your workbench, do the underwriting and operations teams have the time to develop the necessary workflows?

Start-up

• Do you have the underwriting expertise to build efficient, compliant processes?
• Can you afford to build and maintain a workbench from scratch, rather than focusing on core aspects of your business?
• Are subscription fees or upfront costs too expensive?
• If you have an existing solution, does it support you in gaining a competitive advantage?
• If your existing solution is fit for purpose, is it easier to build a limited number of features from scratch?

Legacy insurer

• Is it easier to build a custom workbench which integrates with your specific legacy technology and allows you to control the entire user experience?
• Can you avoid a complex transformation project by building a limited number of features by scratch?
• Are the features on a pre-built workbench customisable enough for you to maintain underwriting processes and adhere to market standards?
• Does your legacy PAS support integrating a pre-built underwriter workbench?
• Is the implementation risk of replacing an established, reliable solution worth the investment in a new solution?
• Would you prefer to update the workbench in-house or have technology updates handled by a workbench provider or integration partner?

Commercial focused insurer / MGA

• Does commercial underwriting require so much customisation and control that building it from scratch is justified?
• Would you prefer to update the workbench in-house or have technology updates handled by a workbench provider or integration partner?

Specialty / MGA

• Will building an underwriter workbench from scratch allow the flexibility to write rules which are suited to your specialty line of business?
• Do workbench providers offer specialty underwriter workbenches?
• How unique are the needs and expectations of your underwriters?
  

Why Send?

The Send Underwriting Workbench offers insurers a platform designed as a best-of-both solution to ‘build vs buy’.

Rapid deployment and easy configuration enables you to create a tailored, best-in-class solution that meets your unique underwriting needs.

Designed for the commercial and specialty insurance market, our workbench provides you with an operationally-ready workbench with deep insurance domain functionality and insurance-focused UX.

Our product baseline contains a mature underwriting workflow for specialty insurers writing complex business, data services connectors and system integration connectors all available to accelerate your implementation.

Benefits of Send’s Underwriting Workbench:

Become a data-driven underwriting function and drive performance growth with a platform built to manage complex commercial and specialty risks.

Accelerate your underwriting evolution with a rich workbench platform out-of-the-box that delivers all the essential functionality you need as an insurer to get up and running quickly.

Regain control and improve underwriting capacity to drive GWP growth with open market and delegated business managed together in a single platform.

Easily take advantage of the ecosystem integrations, data and AI you need to fuel the next stage of your underwriting growth.

Reduce operational friction and improve the broker experience through data integration, digital connectivity and faster turnaround.

Make better underwriting decisions to improve profitability with rich MI, real-time portfolio insights, and improved risk selection.

As more options enter the market, the build vs. buy decision is becoming increasingly complex. It is essential for insurers to understand their current underwriting strategy and where they are in their underwriting journey before making a decision. Whether you're looking to build, buy, or find a balance between the two, discover how Send is here to help.