The Regulator Is Your Big Boss: Why InsurTechs Must Stop Surprising the FCA

I learned this the hard way in corporate marketing. InsurTechs are making the same mistake with regulators.

(And it's costing them years, not weeks.)

Early in my career as a senior marketer, I was leading a major rebrand project. We had an amazing agency, an awesome creative concept, months of work. I was very proud of it.

Then I made the mistake: I showed the founder the final product for the first time at the big reveal meeting.

He had notes. Small tweaks, really. Except in design and development, "small tweaks" meant going back six weeks. Redoing layouts. Reworking messaging. Burning budget we didn't have. And worse—I'd lost his trust by not bringing him along from the start.

I learned a tough lesson that day: the person with sign-off authority isn't a checkpoint at the end. They're a CRUCIAL stakeholder throughout the journey.

InsurTechs are making this exact mistake with regulators.

I was reading an article where Tom Burroughs, CTO at Synergy Cloud said what we're all thinking: "It would be really welcome if the FCA were to provide more guidance and specifics about their expectations for software platforms."

This is the pain felt on both sides. InsurTechs are building solutions to meet regulatory requirements that haven't been fully defined yet. Regulators are trying to provide oversight for technology that's evolving faster than they can write guidance.

But here's the thing: you can't wait for the guidance to arrive. You have to create it yourself—with incremental regulatory approval along the way.

The regulator is your "big boss."

The insurer might love your product. Their operations team might be desperate for it. But if the regulator hasn't been on the journey with you, you're one audit away from expensive rewrites, delayed rollouts, and lost trust.

This is why Blink Parametric's approach (from yesterday's post) wasn't just clever—it was strategic. They didn't build in isolation and hope for regulatory approval later. They went through the FCA Sandbox early, got feedback, shaped the product with regulatory input.

By the time they pitched insurers, the "big boss" had already signed off.

How to actually do this:

We should stop treating regulatory engagement as a compliance tick-box at the end. Treat it like stakeholder management from day one:

• Have early conversations (even informal ones) with regulators about your approach before you're too far down the build

• Design pilot programs that generate the data regulators actually care about, not just the metrics you think are impressive

• Build product features that make their job easier: reporting, auditability, transparency, evidence trails

• Partner with industry bodies that give you regulatory air cover and credibility

• Document everything as "guidance creation"—you're not waiting for rules, you're helping write them through proven use cases

It's Not a Tech Problem

Most InsurTechs spend 18 months building, then 12 months fighting regulatory objections they could have addressed in month two.

That's not a tech problem. That's a stakeholder management problem.

When you can tell an insurer "we developed this approach with FCA input through the Sandbox" or "we've been working with the regulator to establish best practice," you've removed their biggest objection before they even think it.

You're not asking them to take a risk on unproven tech. You're offering them a solution their "big boss" has already cleared.

Yesterday I talked about Blink making the regulator their sales channel. Today's the practical bit: take them on the journey early, or expect objection after objection, and expensive rewrites later.

I learned this with a rebrand that cost weeks and trust. InsurTechs are learning it with products that cost years and market position.

What's your experience? Have you brought regulators into product development early, or learned this lesson the hard way like I did?