How Do We Get More Customers?
in Insurance Brokers

The short answer

More renewal accounts is an outcome. The decision is which commission route you can afford to repeat. What makes this harder for insurance brokers is structural: 71 percent of revenue flows through carrier commissions while shifting an incremental 8 percent to fees would require replacing 142 renewal accounts and cut near-term margin by 1.8 to 2.3 points. Any credible answer therefore has to hold 19.0 and 91.2 in the same view, which is exactly where most internal analysis stops because the two live in different systems.

Almost every insurance broker can name several ways to get customers through risk-control or captive feasibility and few can say which one pays back against the 47.8 million dollars in total revenue from commissions and fees. That is the actual constraint: not a shortage of tactics, but no evidence about which tactic to do more of, especially when shifting an incremental 8 percent to fees would require replacing 142 renewal accounts and cut near-term margin by 1.8 to 2.3 points.

The productive framing is route economics. For each plausible route — standard commissions, contingent commissions, referral — what does it cost to acquire one customer, how long until they pay that back against 19.0 or 91.2, and can it be repeated without the cost rising as you scale it to 664 or 31.

Most routes fail the third test. They work at small volume because they depend on the founder's network or attention, and quietly stop when either runs out.

How to tell this is actually your problem

These three together are the signature. One on its own usually points somewhere else.

✓ Growth depends on renewal retention of the 664 accounts
✓ Cost per customer is unknown or known only in aggregate across the 47.8 million dollars
✓ Every channel is being tried a little and none is being tested properly around the 31

The move that usually makes it worse. Running several channels at sub-scale simultaneously, which produces no conclusive result on any of them and costs more than testing one properly.

Who this is for — and who it is not

It is for you if you run or finance an insurance broker and growth depends on one person's relationships. It is the situation where the numbers are available but nobody has put them in an order that produces a decision.

It is not for you if Percision is the wrong tool if you already know the answer and only need execution capacity, or if the business is pre-revenue — then the constraint is evidence about the market, not analysis of your own figures. Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library. Also wrong if you need facilitation, politics, or someone to sit with a lender or buyer. Those are human jobs.

Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library.

What this looks like when the analysis is actually run

Below is an excerpt from a real run of this analysis on an insurance broker. It is a sample profile rather than a customer, and it is unedited engine output — this is the format you get, on your own numbers.

The subject is Kesterline Risk Partners, a sample company profile used for testing rather than a customer — 47.8 million dollars in total revenue from commissions and fees.

This is one move out of a full analysis. Read a complete report — every page, no email required.

What the engine does with this question

This question routes to Go-to-Market & Commercial Strategy, one of 29 engagements the platform runs. For insurance brokers it works through 19.0, 91.2, 664 and 31, then produces the sequence rather than a list of options — which move first, what it funds, and the observation that would say the sequence is wrong.

You watch the analysis get built before paying anything. Read a complete report here if you would rather see the depth first.

Questions people ask about this

Which acquisition channel is best?

The one where your buyer already is and where you can pay back the acquisition cost within a period you can finance. That is business-specific, and the general answer is worth very little.

How many channels should I run?

One that works, then a second. Running four at a quarter of the necessary budget reliably produces four inconclusive results and the belief that nothing works.

How long before a channel proves itself?

Your sales cycle plus one payback period, with enough volume to distinguish the result from noise. Setting that number in advance is what stops the decision being made by whoever is most persuasive.

Is this different in insurance brokers than in other industries?

Materially, yes. 71 percent of revenue flows through carrier commissions while shifting an incremental 8 percent to fees would require replacing 142 renewal accounts and cut near-term margin by 1.8 to 2.3 points — which changes both the diagnosis and the order of the fixes. The metrics that decide it here are 19.0, 91.2, 664, and an answer built on industry-general benchmarks will usually point at the wrong one first.

What data do I need before this analysis is worth running for an insurance broker?

Less than most people expect. Your last twelve months of revenue and cost split the way you already split it, plus whatever you hold on 19.0 and 91.2. The analysis is explicit about what it is assuming where your data stops, which is more useful than waiting for numbers you may never have.

When is Percision the wrong tool?

Percision is the wrong tool if you already know the answer and only need execution capacity, or if the business is pre-revenue — then the constraint is evidence about the market, not analysis of your own figures. Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library. Also wrong if you need facilitation, politics, or someone to sit with a lender or buyer. Those are human jobs.

Does Percision replace a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, or AI implementation team?

Percision is not a lawyer, tax advisor, auditor, licensed appraiser, clinical or regulatory filer, or an AI implementation shop. It does not do HR casework, creative-only brand work, or impersonate a named consulting firm. It is a strategy analysis engine — not a template library.