A P&C insurer had its claims intake process live on Pointee for eight weeks. Cases were completing, so nothing looked broken — but the median case took 2.9 days against a 1-day target and the credit bill was running 38% over the go-live forecast. Three one-click changes later, the process was hitting its target, costing $104,000 a year less to run, and the evidence behind it sold six more processes.
The situation
A six-state intake: receive, classify, triage, review, assign, close. Cases completed, but the median was 2.9 days against a 1-day target, 11% looped back through review, and the credit bill ran 38% over the go-live forecast. Opening cases one at a time explained nothing.
What the team did with Pointee
The results
| Results | Before | After | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Median time per case | 2.9 days | 0.9 days | −69% |
| Idle time per case | 2 days | 0.2 days | −90% |
| Cases within the 1-day target | 9% | 71% | +62% |
| Rework (multiple reviews) | 11% | 4% | −7% |
| Credits per case | 41 | 24 | −41% |
| Annual run cost (40,800 cases) | $251k | $147k | −$104k |
What changed the conversation
- The wait was visible, not guessed at. Splitting time per case into machine, human wait and idle showed that 2.0 of the 2.9 days were a timer setting — not a staffing problem.
- Cost traced to a step. The 38% overrun was one step on an over-specified model: classification alone accounted for 25 of the 41 credits a case consumed.
- Fixes were one click, not a project. All three changes were proposed as actions and published the same week they were approved.
Conclusion
Eight weeks after go-live the process was completing every case and still missing its target on nine cases in ten. The map showed where the days and the credits actually went; three changes, none of them a rebuild, took the median from 2.9 days to 0.9, cut the run cost by $104,000 a year.
