Home / Solutions / Deployment routes
Three routes. Not three choices.
Different parts of a book need different distribution. An insurer can run all three at once — and most should. What matters is the rule for what happens where two routes reach the same household.
Which route fits
Tell us who you are and what you are trying to do.
I am
and I want to
The three routes, side by side
| Insurer direct | Agent distribution | Independent broker | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Who funds it | The insurer | The insurer | The broker |
| Whose brand | The insurer’s | The insurer’s, given to agents | The broker’s |
| Who converts | Digital, then the insurer’s contact centre | Digital, then the agent | Digital, then the broker |
| Who keeps the client | The insurer | The agent | The broker |
| Panel | Single insurer | Single insurer | Broker’s panel |
| Amanati is paid | A percentage of the commission on every sale the app generates — lead delivery, digital conversion, omnichannel handoff | ||
| Best for | Digital-first segments and new households | An agent network with an underworked book | A large book with poor cross-sell visibility |
Insurer direct
The insurer runs the digital broker engine as its own direct-to-consumer channel. The app is insurer-branded, the panel is the insurer’s own products, and conversion runs through the insurer’s contact centre where the digital journey stalls. This is the route for segments the agent force does not reach efficiently and for households acquired through the safety proposition rather than through insurance intent.
Agent distribution
The insurer funds a branded app and provides it to its tied agent network as a distribution benefit. The app generates leads, surfaces renewal dates across every line the household holds, and identifies cross-sell and upsell with named exposures. The agent converts and keeps the client. Amanati is paid a share of commission for processing the sale and handing it over. This is the route that turns an existing agent force into a materially more productive one without restructuring it.
Independent broker
A large independent broker deploys the platform across its own customer base, under its own brand, on its own panel. The broker funds it and takes the corresponding economics. The mechanic is identical; the ownership and the commercial shape differ.
Where two routes reach the same household
This is the second question every serious partner asks, and it deserves an answer before it is asked. Three rules govern it.
- Attribution follows the route that first established the household in the platform, not the route that closed the sale.
- Ownership follows the agreement: where a household sits in an agent’s book, the agent route takes precedence over the direct channel for that household.
- Commission is settled per the route that owns the household, with the sale processed once and only once.
The detailed carve-outs, territory and exclusivity terms belong in the commercial agreement rather than on a public page.
Not a conflict problem
Insurers, agents and brokers are not competing for the same scarce lead here. The app creates households that did not previously exist as insurance opportunities, and the routes determine who serves them. Treating that as channel conflict misreads where the leads come from.
Work out which routes your book needs.
Usually more than one, and rarely the one assumed at the outset.