Underwriting Review
Underwriting review is one of the most common starting points for using Nairo.
This guide describes a practical way to use Projects, Insight Table, Library materials and Experts to support the review of an underwriting document pack.
Nairo supports the review process. It does not make underwriting decisions or replace the organisation’s authority process.
Scenario
An underwriting team receives a new document pack, such as application forms, loss runs, financials, prior policies and supporting correspondence.
The team needs to:
- Understand the risk quickly
- Identify relevant information in the documents
- Compare the case against available guidelines or appetite materials
- Identify missing information or possible referral points
- Prepare review notes or a draft referral summary for human review
Materials to prepare
Before starting, confirm the relevant materials are available in Nairo.
| Material | Where to use it in Nairo |
|---|---|
| Case documents | Upload to a Project or add to an Insight Table |
| Underwriting guidelines | Store or select from the Library |
| Appetite materials | Store or select from the Library |
| Prior examples, if available | Upload as reference materials where appropriate |
| Authority and referral rules | Apply through the team’s own process, and optionally reflect in Expert instructions or column prompts |
The quality of the review depends on the quality and completeness of the materials available.
Suggested approach
1. Create the review context
Choose the surface based on the type of review.
Option A - Project
Use a Project when the team is reviewing one document pack in a focused workspace.
Create a Project and upload the relevant documents. Then use the Assistant inside the Project to ask questions, summarise materials and prepare first-pass analysis.
Option B - Insight Table
Use Insight Table when the team needs to ask the same questions across multiple documents or cases.
Create an Insight Table, add the relevant documents and define columns for the questions your team wants to ask consistently.
2. Extract or structure key information
In a Project, use structured extraction where configured.
In Insight Table, define column prompts such as:
- What is the primary business activity?
- What limits are requested?
- What information appears to be missing?
- Are there any points that may require referral?
- What exclusions, conditions or subjectivities are mentioned?
Review the outputs and inspect available references before relying on them.
3. Use an Expert for specialist review
Open an Underwriting Expert where available.
Use the Expert to apply a more consistent underwriting review pattern over the available materials.
Example questions include:
- Does this risk appear to fit the available appetite materials?
- What information is missing before the case can be reviewed further?
- Are there any points that may require referral?
- Are there exclusions, endorsements or conditions the underwriter should consider?
- What are the main reasons to proceed, refer or decline for review?
Expert outputs should be treated as draft analysis. They should be reviewed by a qualified underwriter before use.
4. Human review checkpoint
Before using the output in a business process, the underwriter should review:
- Whether the available materials support the output
- Whether important documents or facts are missing
- Whether the conclusion follows the organisation’s appetite and guidelines
- Whether authority limits or referral rules apply
- Whether the output needs correction before use
Nairo helps structure the review. The underwriting decision remains with the human underwriter and the organisation’s approval process.
5. Retain outputs according to the team’s process
Teams may choose to retain useful outputs, notes or summaries according to their own governance process.
Examples include:
- Extracted fields reviewed by the team
- Draft referral notes
- Summaries of key risk information
- Notes on missing information
- Outputs used to prepare broker communication
Nairo does not automatically turn every output into an approved underwriting record. Teams should decide what must be retained, where it should live and who must approve it.
What this guide is not
This guide does not describe autonomous underwriting.
It does not bind cover.
It does not replace the underwriting system of record.
It does not replace referral rules, authority limits or formal approval processes.
All underwriting decisions require qualified human review following the organisation’s own governance.
Related areas
- Projects - focused document workspaces
- Insight Table - structured review across documents
- Experts - specialist assistants with configured instructions
- Library - uploaded reference materials
- Policy Comparison - related guide for reviewing policy language
Getting started
Start with a historical underwriting case your team already knows.
Upload the document pack, run the review using a Project or Insight Table, and compare the output with how the team previously reviewed the case.
This helps identify where Nairo adds value, where materials are missing and which parts of the process should remain under human review.