Continuous Oversight: The New Standard for Delegated Authority & Third-Party Risk in 2026

Softening rates, tighter expectations on resilience, and growing supply-chain exposure are reshaping what “good” looks like in the London Market. Annual due diligence isn’t enough anymore. The firms that win in 2026 will prove—continuously—how their delegated authority (DA) and third parties are governed, monitored and improved.

Why continuous oversight now?

• Market dynamics. Softer pricing puts margin under pressure. Operational discipline—clear authorities, fast renewals, clean data—becomes part of underwriting strength.

• Regulatory scrutiny. Boards are expected to show live visibility of third-party performance, not just a point-in-time pack at year-end.

• Complex supply chains. From coverholders to TPAs and technology vendors, one weak link can ripple across claims, customer experience and MI.

  
  

The shift is from documents to data, from events to evidence-by-default.

Five capabilities of a 2026-ready operating model

1) Authority clarity you can prove

Treat appetite, scope and limits as structured data—not just clauses. That means territories, classes, attachments, referral triggers and sign-off rules are machine-readable and drive workflows, bordereaux checks and MI.

Outcome: faster decisions, fewer exceptions, less leakage.

2) Due diligence that writes its own audit

Standardise assessments (e.g., KYB/KYC, financials, cyber/ESG/OpRes) with mandatory fields, evidence upload and scoring guidance. Record outcomes (approve/conditions/decline) with rationale and next review dates.

Outcome: repeatable quality and a defensible trail—without extra admin.

3) Lifecycle monitoring of third parties

Move beyond annual questionnaires. Track SLAs, issues, incidents, and remediation as they happen. Route exceptions to owners with due dates and escalation. Close the loop inside the same system that runs the work.

Outcome: fewer surprises; faster recovery when things slip.

4) Contract control and version history

Centralise binders and agreements with approvals and change logs. Link every endorsement to the decision that allowed it. Make “what changed, when, and why” obvious in a single view.

Outcome: clearer audits and less time spent reconstructing intent.

5) MI you can trust (and share)

Build a minimal, reliable pack: days-to-bind, referral volume and turnaround, exceptions per 1,000 records (and time-to-close), audit findings to closure, loss trend deltas by class. One definition per metric. Show lineage.

Outcome: leadership confidence and better, faster course-correction.

A practical 90-day plan

Days 1–30: Stabilise

• Publish a single source of truth for appetite and referral rules.

• Map onboarding/renewal steps end-to-end; remove duplicates and unclear handoffs.

• Consolidate contract templates; align wording libraries to current appetite.

  
  

Days 31–60: Orchestrate

• Implement role-based workflows with SLAs and automated nudges.

• Stand up exception handling for bordereaux (owners, due dates, escalation).

• Launch a basic MI pack and agree metric definitions with governance.

  
  

Days 61–90: Prove & refine

• Run one renewal cohort through the new flow; compare before/after cycle time and touchpoints.

• Do a “tabletop audit” on two binders to validate evidence completeness.

• Share a one-page service summary with stakeholders and capture feedback for iteration.

  
  

What great looks like on review day

When asked for the story behind a delegated arrangement, you can open one record and show:

• Current scope/limits with version history and approvals

• Onboarding assessments, attachments and decision rationale

• Timeline of referrals, exceptions and endorsements

• Bordereaux exception log with actions to closure

• Audit findings with proof of remediation

• MI snapshots at quarter-ends and commentary on change

  
  

No hunting. No reconstruction. Just the facts.

Common pitfalls (and how to dodge them)

• “We’ll add evidence later.” Make approvals and uploads blocking steps. If there’s no proof, the workflow won’t advance.

• Bespoke everywhere. Standardise an 80/20 path; allow extensions only where risk demands it.

• Untrusted MI. Agree definitions once, show data lineage in dashboards, and retire shadow spreadsheets.

• Automation without guardrails. Ensure automated decisions follow the same referral and audit rules as manual ones.

  
  

The Albany Group approach

Albany Group’s Conect™ brings assessments, approvals, contract control, workflows, risk registers and reporting into one connected system—so evidence is captured as the work happens. Recent enhancements include:

• A ready-to-use Assessment Library (Cyber, ESG, Operational Resilience, Lloyd’s Q&A), all configurable to your risk profile.

• Contract Repository workflows for full version control and traceability of binders and agreements.

• An Enhanced Audit Module linking scoping, fieldwork, findings and reporting.

• SharePoint integration for versioned documents where your teams already work.

• An expanded Risk Register with custom fields and visual indicators, surfacing issues early.

  
  

Result: faster onboarding and renewals, fewer handoffs, and audits that feel routine—not events.

Metrics to track weekly

• Hit ratio within appetite vs. outside

• Referral volume and median turnaround

• Days-to-bind (new & renewal) and emails/handoffs per case

• Exceptions per 1,000 records and time-to-close

• Audit findings to closure and re-open rate

  
  

These signals tell you whether you’re defending margin with discipline—or donating it to process noise.

Final thought

Continuous oversight is not more bureaucracy; it’s less rework. By designing evidence into the flow of DA and third-party operations, you move faster and raise assurance—even as market conditions soften.

Get in touch to set up a short walkthrough of Conect to map these ideas to your process.

Ready to make your operations 2026-ready? Get in touch: info@albanygrp.com | albanygrp.com