Claims workflow integration
Core-to-edge claims workflow bridge
Design event contracts so new ML services stop breaking legacy workflow engines.
- Duration
- 11 weeks
- Format
- Workshops alternating with async documentation sprints
- Indicative fee
- ₩35,600,000
Overview
We document how tasks, reserves, and payments mutate today, then specify versioned events that allow gradual introduction of ML-driven recommendations without forked business logic.
What is included
- Current-state BPM-style narrative grounded in real tickets
- Target event schema with compatibility shims
- Error surface catalogue for partial automation
- Adjuster override semantics with audit expectations
- Test data strategy that avoids sensitive narratives in lower environments
- Cutover sequencing for one LOB at a time
- Training for release managers
Outcomes you can inspect
- Reduced bespoke integration glue per new model
- Predictable rollback that does not strand adjusters
- Shared backlog between claims ops and integration teams
Daniel Ahn
Claims domain consultant and former head of workflow for a multinational carrier.
FAQ
Not by default. We prefer extracting clearer contracts from what you already license unless there is a dead end.
We start with Korea operations and document deltas for regional variants without pretending they are identical.
If political ownership between business and IT is unsettled, workshops surface conflict—they do not magically assign budgets.
Experience notes
“Override semantics were the unsung hero. Adjusters stopped fearing “mystery automation” once language matched their screen.”