Beyond the Big Three: Is this the Mid-Sized Insurer’s Moment?

Why you don't need to be first to win the race 

A fireside chat with two Managing Directors 

Sometimes it feels like the Dutch insurance market is only about “the Big Three” companies. That’s a misconception, say IG&H Managing Directors Jan-Pieter van der Helm and Anouk Zevenbergen. “Small and mid-sized insurers are hot,” says Van der Helm, without any hint of irony. Together with Zevenbergen, he’s closely watching developments in the market’s second tier. “They’re facing major decisions that will shape their future,” Zevenbergen adds. And it’s not just a few insurers, but nearly all of them. 

Van der Helm and Zevenbergen divide small and mid-sized insurers into two categories: those that once positioned themselves broadly and the specialist, niche players. “Both groups are under pressure,” says Van der Helm. Broad insurers need scale to stay profitable, while specialists become vulnerable if their niche underperforms for an extended period. 

“Technology is also a huge accelerator. In the past, you could automate small tasks and save some costs. Now, you can transform your entire business model and create new concepts,” Van der Helm explains. Large insurers can invest tens of millions in this. The smaller players don’t have that kind of budget. 

Van der Helm and Zevenbergen notice that smaller insurers are questioning their relevance. “If the big players get really good at this, what does that mean for me? Do I even have a chance to survive?” Van der Helm clarifies. 

Can you really call that position “hot”? Isn’t it just threatened? “Definitely not,” say the two directors. “Currently, they can make choices from a position of strength,” Zevenbergen says. Most insurers are financially sound. “But if you don’t act now, you’ll almost certainly lose the freedom to set your own course in ten years.” 

Becoming a smart follower 

It’s well known that large insurers are investing heavily in technology. But should smaller players try to keep up? “No,” says Zevenbergen. “You don’t need to be a frontrunner in everything. But you can be a smart follower. Look around to see what works and make sure you have a clear vision for how you want to use technology.” 

According to Zevenbergen, technology isn’t a goal in itself and doesn’t always need to be grand or dramatic. “I see organizations digitizing processes where it adds value for the customer, advisor or the organization... and ideally for all three. But in other areas, they deliberately choose to keep the human touch. Think of impactful customer events, like a house fire. In those moments, people don’t want a chatbot. They want human contact, empathy and support,” Zevenbergen explains. “It’s about balance and making the right choices.” 

Rethinking AI 

Agentic AI, a technology that can perform tasks, is stirring up huge expectations in the market. It could take over much of the traditional work done by claims handlers and underwriters. Van der Helm says those savings often look big on paper, but the reality is more modest. He breaks it down: 60 percent of an insurer’s expenses go to claims. Around 20 percent is for commissions and the remaining 15 to 20 percent covers operating costs. That last slice of the pie is where you can save money. “But if you only focus on that, you’re selling yourself short,” Van der Helm says. The real value of AI comes when you combine it with other elements. AI should make you smarter. “If you can not only cut costs but also attract better risks and price them more intelligently, that’s where the real win is.” 

Smarter pricing with AI doesn’t mean the actuary’s job gets easier. “Not easier, but better,” Van der Helm says. “An actuary looks back and says, ‘this is what it should be.’ With AI models, you can look ahead. Or you can build tools into your claims processes that reduce fraud. That’s the learning capability you gain and it’s not as easily copied as replacing a claims handler.” 

 

Regroup, rethink and avoid the wrong ripple effects 

Large insurers are well into the process of streamlining their system landscapes into agile ecosystems. Mid-sized insurers can benefit from support in making that transition, not just during the transformation, but afterward too. Zevenbergen and Van der Helm compare it to swapping an old gas-powered car for an electric hypercar. “If you don’t know how to drive it, you’ll never get the most out of it. You need to dive in, get help in specific areas and learn to use all the supporting features. You have to drive very differently. So you need to adjust a lot to fully benefit from it,” Van der Helm concludes. 

“Staying future-proof requires more than a sharp proposition or a well-run operation, it demands an integrated approach,” Zevenbergen summarizes. “The line between the ‘front end’ and ‘back end’ of insurers is blurring. Think of customer portals where users find information, update details or report claims. What feels smooth on the outside needs robust tech, efficient processes and skilled people behind the scenes.” 

Zevenbergen believes the answer lies in this interconnectedness. “You need to understand what drives customers and advisors, how the market is shifting and what internal challenges you face. The goal should be to create working solutions. That way, you avoid the classic ripple effect - solving a problem on one end only to see it pop up elsewhere. That’s why it’s crucial to seek the right support today to become a smart follower tomorrow.”