One of the reasons change is so slow in the industry is because there are many must-be-coordinated changes, with various independent parties.
E.g. if I update my system, you need to update your system
From what I saw, one of the biggest motivators would be carving out legal protections for trialing some smaller % of total workflow under new systems.
E.g. If you moved < 5% of your claims handling to a new automated system, and it started rejecting claims that there was an informal understanding would be patched up on the insurance side, then nobody could be sued via intra-party contracts (but still beholden to national / federal guidelines, of course)
By decreasing that first burden of migration, you might get more traction in aggressive IT updates.
E.g. if I update my system, you need to update your system
From what I saw, one of the biggest motivators would be carving out legal protections for trialing some smaller % of total workflow under new systems.
E.g. If you moved < 5% of your claims handling to a new automated system, and it started rejecting claims that there was an informal understanding would be patched up on the insurance side, then nobody could be sued via intra-party contracts (but still beholden to national / federal guidelines, of course)
By decreasing that first burden of migration, you might get more traction in aggressive IT updates.