Core Platform Implementation
Most RequestedGreenfield policy, claims or billing builds — configuration, product model, integration and test capacity alongside your programme.
- Configuration
- Product model
- Integration
Core platform programmes fail on people, not software. We staff carriers, MGAs, brokers and delivery partners with engineers who already know Guidewire and Duck Creek — so the first sprint is delivery rather than orientation.
Policy, claims, billing, rating, integration and digital. Contract, contract-to-hire, dedicated pods and full project teams.
Two insurers on the same version of the same product have almost nothing in common under the surface. The product model, the rating structure, the rules and the integrations are all specific to the business. An engineer without prior platform experience spends the first sprint reading code, and the second asking questions.
That is the whole reason to staff this narrowly. A generalist agency covering every technology matches keywords because it has to. We cover a handful of platform families, so screening is done by people who have worked on them — and when a requirement is genuinely hard to fill, you hear that on the intake call rather than three weeks later.
All ExpertiseMost briefs arrive as one of these. Tell us which and the team shape follows.
Greenfield policy, claims or billing builds — configuration, product model, integration and test capacity alongside your programme.
Moving to a hosted platform, or catching up on versions, with the remediation and regression that entails.
Product definition through rating, forms and testing, on a date the business has already announced.
Recurring rating change with the regression discipline that keeps premium correct through each release.
Rules, assignment, financials and adjuster workflow — the areas where claims programmes take criticism.
Rating engines, documents, payments, bureau data, finance and the data platform, owned end to end.
Agent, policyholder and claimant journeys built on top of core platform services.
A standing team for the change that never stops once the platform is live.
Requirements get mapped against this grid before we send anyone, so you can see depth by area instead of reading it out of a CV.
Named specialists for a defined period — a release, a rate revision, a peak.
DetailsWork together first, convert to permanent once the fit on your codebase is proven.
DetailsA standing pod that stays with your platform roadmap release after release.
DetailsA scoped outcome — a new line of business, an upgrade wave, an integration workstream.
DetailsFour steps, and you hear from us at each one.
Platform, module, version, on-premise or cloud, product lines in scope, and what your team already covers.
A reviewer with core insurance background probes actual work: configuration owned, rating decisions, production defects.
Profiles arrive with a written view on depth by area, notice period, rate and known gaps.
We coordinate panels, handle paperwork and stay involved through the first weeks on your codebase.
Starting points rather than fixed packages — each one gets sized against your brief.
Fixed launch date · product-led
Version currency · remediation-heavy
Live platform · continuous delivery
Team compositions are illustrative starting points, not fixed packages. Actual shape, rates and availability are agreed against a specific requirement.
Both, and often on the same programme from different sides. Partners typically come to us when a client programme ramps faster than their bench allows and they need people who can work inside an existing configuration standard from day one.
Yes. Implementations, upgrades and new line of business launches are usually staffed as a pod — see project team staffing. The team shapes above are the usual starting points.
Coverage. An agency spanning every technology has to match on keywords; we cover a small number of platform families, so screening is done by people who have worked on them. The trade-off is that we will decline briefs outside those families rather than take them on speculatively.
Sometimes, for the integration, data, QA and delivery roles that surround any core platform. For core configuration on a platform we do not cover, we will say so rather than learning on your programme.
Yes. Implementations and upgrades usually need a project pod; live platforms usually need contract or dedicated cover. The models page compares the four options.
A JD if you have one. If not: platform and module, version, cloud or on-premise, the product lines in scope, the programme driver, seniority, engagement type and location expectations.
Send a JD or a two-line outline. We come back with the team shape that fits, what the market looks like for those roles, and a shortlist against your requirement.
Two minutes now, a shortlist conversation next.