The future of delegated authority depends on how early insurers and MGAs get aligned. For Allianz Commercial, 2025 is the year that front-end engagement becomes non-negotiable.
Across the market, carriers are narrowing the field. Delegated authority programs are now defined by rigor at the onboarding stage, not just performance metrics years later. Governance standards, data quality, and risk transparency are under the microscope long before bind authority is granted. This is a response to regulatory pressure, but also a strategic decision to protect capital and consistency.
Julie Gibbs (pictured), who leads the portfolio solutions and delegated authority function in North America, said success hinges on shared clarity, not control. For her, the most valuable MGA relationships begin before the paperwork, in conversations about how risk is assessed, how decisions are made, and whether both sides can commit to the same long-term view.
For Gibbs, 2025 marks an inflection point – not necessarily a pivot, but a strategic shift. "2025 marks a pivotal point for us in managing delegated authority relationships. We are fostering transparency by regularly engaging with our MGA partners and having deeper conversations to support mutual growth," she said.
The focus on deeper partnerships begins during MGA onboarding.
"Getting out in front with the MGA early to discuss their objectives is critical," Gibbs said. "From a carrier perspective, the delegated authority market is evolving towards more focused, strategic partnerships. Within our organization, we are intentional about selecting MGA partners with specialized expertise, a proven track record of performance, and a long-term mindset.”
This mirrors a wider move across the insurance market, where delegated authority programs are becoming more selective. Carriers are increasingly focused on front-end due diligence – evaluating an MGA's operational controls, governance standards, and exposure data quality before bind authority is granted.
Data sharing remains a key issue – particularly around sanction screening and catastrophe exposure. “MGAs are becoming increasingly adept at managing and delivering data, which carriers view as a substantial advantage,” Gibbs said. “We foresee ongoing improvements in collaboration as both parties invest in enhanced tools and tighter integrations.”
Across the industry, carriers are investing in centralized data platforms and bordereaux automation tools to reduce reporting delays and improve data consistency. While implementation methods vary, the goal is often the same: faster access to structured, decision-ready data from MGA partners.
These tools are becoming essential for underwriting governance, especially as regulatory and capital pressures increase insurers’ need for accurate exposure and claims data in near real-time.
Gibbs said Allianz takes a comprehensive view when vetting new MGA partners, looking beyond financial performance to technical competency and underwriting rationale.
“We want to know their background, history, where they come from,” she said. “How they have expertise in them helps build that trust and confidence in the partnership early on.”
Allianz wants clarity on how MGAs make risk decisions. “What tools do you use to help you underwrite?” Gibbs said. “That just helps with their risk selection.”
This level of scrutiny has become more common. Insurers are asking MGAs to show how they use third-party tools, like hazard scoring platforms, geospatial analytics, or engineering reports, to make more consistent risk selections.
The goal is better performance and alignment on risk appetite and methodology.
“Beyond the specifics of the business they write, we scrutinize the MGA’s underwriting expertise and methodologies. Understanding the underwriters' backgrounds, their tenure in writing specific classes of business, their depth of knowledge, and the tools and processes they employ for profitable risk selection is crucial,” Gibbs said. “We seek MGAs that adopt proactive risk management strategies, whether through loss control partnerships, upfront site engineering, or preemptive modeling to understand AALs and OEPs. A successful delegated authority relationship today is founded on technical expertise, operational discipline, and a shared commitment to managing exposures thoughtfully.”
Gibbs also pointed to catastrophe modeling as a shared responsibility between MGA and carrier.
“How do they manage their accumulations from the CAT side?” she said. “Because then we, in turn, have to balance that with our accumulations for in-house.”
In the last two years, insurers have faced increasing scrutiny from regulators and rating agencies over catastrophe risk aggregation. As a result, many are now requiring delegated partners to submit more granular, geo-coded data to assess potential accumulation overlap across shared zones.
For Gibbs, shared intent and operational clarity are the markers of a successful delegated authority relationship. “It’s transparency, collaboration, data sharing, and shared commitment between the partners,” she said.
