Financial services & insurance
Connect customer, case, operational
and management information
without losing control.
ComplexityClarity
For financial-services and insurance organisations that need to improve the customer, case, workflow, finance and management processes around their specialist core systems. We help connect that work through Microsoft business applications, Power Platform, data and integration where the operating requirement fits.
Financial services depends on trust. The operating model has to make information, ownership and decisions easier to control.
In short
What financial-services leadership is actually trying to control.
Before capability, the question is which outcomes need to move. These are outcome areas to baseline, not benchmark promises.
Connected customer context
The next interaction starts with the relationship, open work and documents it genuinely needs.
Explicit process ownership
Who owns the case, the approval and the next action is visible without asking.
Visible decision authority
Decisions carry the authority that made them and the evidence that supported them.
Exceptions in the open
Overrides and departures from the normal process become more visible, not less.
Owned system boundaries
Each specialist dependency has a purpose, an owner and a defined failure behaviour.
Financial position people trust
Operational work and financial control connect without confusing ownership.
Management information with lineage
Measures leadership relies on can be traced back to a source and a definition.
Controlled change after go-live
Sensitive processes and governed access keep working while the platform evolves.
Scope
An adjacent, developing proposition rather than a sector specialism.
Financial services and insurance is not one of our eight primary industries. It is an operating context we can support around specialist core systems, and saying so is more useful than implying coverage we cannot evidence.
Processes in scope
- Customer relationship, opportunity and communication
- Case, service and complaint handling
- Onboarding coordination and document workflow
- Approval, task and exception workflow
- Corporate finance and management information
- Integration around specialist core systems
- Data ownership, reporting and governed AI assistance
Not claimed here
- Core banking capability
- Policy administration
- Claims adjudication
- Underwriting platforms
- Actuarial capability
- Payments infrastructure
- AML or KYC products
- Credit-decisioning platforms
- Regulatory consultancy or compliance advice
Operating context
Financial services is too broad to imply one operating model.
The segment shapes which processes are ours to improve and which specialist systems stay exactly where they are. Not every segment is a strategic target, and we would rather establish that early.
Banking and lending operations
Customer, case, servicing and internal workflow around a core banking or lending platform that remains in place.
Insurance operations
Customer, service, complaint and administrative coordination around policy, claims and underwriting systems that remain specialist.
Broker and intermediary
Relationship, opportunity, client servicing, document and commission-adjacent administration where the placing platform stays where it is.
Wealth and advisory operations
Client relationship, onboarding coordination, service and administrative workflow around the advisory or investment platform.
Specialist finance
Focused lending, funding or finance businesses where controlled case and approval workflow matters more than product breadth.
Corporate and internal finance operations
The corporate financial and operational core of a financial-services organisation, separate from its regulated product systems.
Service boundary
Be clear about where we help, and clear about where we do not.
The objective is not to replace every specialist system. It is to remove unnecessary gaps between the customer, the work, the decision and the financial position.
Where Microsoft business applications may help
- Customer relationship
- Opportunity
- Onboarding coordination
- Case
- Service
- Complaint
- Workflow
- Approval
- Document coordination
- Finance
- Management information
- Low-code processes
- Integration
- Governed AI assistance
Where specialist systems may remain
- Core banking
- Policy administration
- Claims adjudication
- Underwriting
- Lending decisioning
- Trading or investment platform
- Actuarial capability
- Payments infrastructure
- AML and KYC
- Credit and risk
- Specialist regulatory capability
Which of these apply depends on the operating model. We do not assume a specialist platform should be replaced.
The operating reality
The customer sees one organisation. Internally, the work may cross many systems and teams.
Customer information, product, request, case, documents, approvals, operational teams, third parties, finance, risk, communication, reporting and data all depend on each other.
A customer makes a request
The customer sees one organisation. Internally the work may cross several teams and systems before anything happens.
Someone has to assess it
Information, documents and evidence are needed before the next decision can reasonably be made.
Other teams become involved
Operations, finance, risk and third parties may all hold part of the same piece of work.
A decision has to be made and recorded
Authority, evidence, conditions and reasoning matter as much as the outcome itself.
The customer has to be kept informed
Communication is part of the process, not an administrative task bolted on afterwards.
Management needs to understand the position
Demand, ageing, backlog, approvals and exceptions should be visible without a reconciliation exercise.
When these are disconnected
- Ownership becomes unclear
- Cases move slowly
- Staff chase information
- Customers repeat themselves
- Reporting requires reconciliation
- Approvals are hard to track
- Management visibility arrives late
Control is not the same as adding more process.
The strongest operating model gives people enough structure to understand what is happening, who owns it, what evidence is required, what decision is next, what has already been approved and what still needs attention.
A reusable controlled-work pattern
Connect the relationship to the work and the decision.
Nine stages, running across five threads. Controlled customer processes may cross several teams, systems and specialist providers. This is a reusable pattern rather than a universal financial-services operating model: regulated product journeys remain in their appropriate specialist systems.
- Customer
- Case
- Data
- Control
- Audit
Engage
Enquiries, requests and opportunities captured consistently rather than across inboxes.
Understand
Customer context, history, open work and relevant documents in one place.
Assess
Information, evidence and eligibility reviewed by the appropriate people, using the specialist systems where they apply.
Coordinate
Owner, contributing teams and any third parties identified and briefed.
Decide
Authority, evidence, conditions and reasoning recorded with the decision.
Deliver or resolve
Actions, communication and documents held against the case, not around it.
Monitor
Waiting work, ageing cases, overdue actions and escalations made visible.
Report
Operational and financial reporting drawn from structured work.
Improve
Where the process is slowing, where rework appears and where demand is changing.
Customer and case
Give teams the context they need before the next interaction.
Relationship, service, case and document processes. Not every organisation needs all of these, and access should always stay role appropriate.
- Account, contact, organisation, relationship, key contacts and services held
- Activity history, open requests, open cases, documents, tasks and communication
- Connected customer context, not a claim of a universal 360-degree view
- The aim is that the person handling the next interaction has enough context before it starts.
Complaints
A complaint should be one visible thread, not several.
Where customer policy defines deadlines or special rules, we configure against that approved model. We do not claim FCA-compliant complaint handling.
- 01Intake
- 02Classify
- 03Owner
- 04Evidence
- 05Action
- 06Communication
- 07Escalation
- 08Decision
- 09Closure
- 10Reporting
Onboarding
Coordinate the process without recreating the specialist check.
The business workflow should know the status and outcome it needs without recreating the specialist check itself.
Business process orchestration
- Request or application
- Information capture
- Missing items
- Document
- Task
- Review
- Communication
- Approval
- Handover
Approved specialist checks
- Identity verification
- KYC
- AML
- Credit
- Other approved specialist checks
Provided by approved specialist services. We do not provide KYC, AML, identity, credit or fraud capability.
Application architecture
Customer and financial processes should connect without confusing ownership.
The architecture question is not which system can store the data. It is which system should own each responsibility.
Engagement
Customer, relationship, opportunity and communication.
Operational workflow
Case, service, complaint, onboarding, approval and task.
Specialist core
Account, policy, claim, lending product, investment and regulated product process where relevant.
Finance
General ledger, purchasing, corporate finance and management accounting.
Documents
Approved document repository and the process around it.
Specialist control services
Identity, KYC, AML, credit, payment and other approved specialist services.
Data and analytics
Power BI, and Microsoft Fabric where the requirement genuinely justifies it.
Decision control
Make the next action explicit.
A controlled decision should show not only what was decided, but who had authority to decide it and what evidence supported it. Segregation, second approval, exception and override apply where the organisation's policy requires them. This is a design pattern, not a universal approval model.
Decision required
The decision point is named rather than assumed within a status change.
Authority
Who may decide, within what limits, and what happens beyond those limits.
Evidence
The information and documents that must be present before the decision is valid.
Review or recommendation
Where a second view, segregation or second approval applies.
Decision
The outcome, the decider and the date recorded together.
Conditions
Any conditions, limits or follow-up obligations attached to the outcome.
Action
The operational or financial action the decision authorises.
Audit
What was recorded, by whom, and what a reviewer would be able to reconstruct.
Review
Whether the decision pattern is still appropriate as volume and risk change.
- Assignment, approval, escalation, task, notification and document request
- Review, decision and handover made explicit rather than assumed
- Power Automate and Dynamics 365 capabilities where they genuinely fit
- Workflow should make responsibility clearer, not simply move emails automatically.
Exceptions and overrides
An exception should become more visible, not less visible.
Because it falls outside the normal process, an exception needs a reason, a risk view, a compensating control, an owner and an expiry.
- Control
- Exception
- Business reason
- Risk
- Compensating control
- Owner
- Approval
- Review or expiry
Where an override is possible, capture
- Who overrode the control
- Why the override was necessary
- What authority permitted it
- What the original recommendation was
- What the revised outcome became
- What evidence supports it
Regulatory responsibility
We can implement an approved control model. We do not define the regulatory obligations the organisation must satisfy.
The boundary matters more here than in most sectors. We do not give legal or regulatory advice.
Customer compliance, risk and legal owns
- Regulatory interpretation
- Policy
- Risk appetite
- Mandatory controls
- Approval requirements
- Record requirements
- Retention requirements
- Regulatory reporting requirements
InteliSense may implement
- Agreed workflow
- Data capture
- Approvals
- Access
- Audit and logging
- Integration
- Reporting capability
Third-party dependencies
A third-party control is still part of the operating model even when another supplier runs it.
For each material provider, the same questions apply. Where an approved specialist service already meets the requirement, integration may be preferable to rebuilding that capability in a general business platform.
- Provider
- Business purpose
- Data
- Identity
- Service dependency
- Failure mode
- Owner
- Escalation
- Change
- Exit
Providers this may cover
- Identity verification
- AML and KYC
- Credit
- Payments
- Document and e-signature
- Core financial system
- Communications
- Data provider
- Other specialist system
Operational resilience
A controlled process needs an answer for what happens when one of its dependencies is unavailable.
This is a business-operating model rather than a regulatory compliance claim. Can work queue safely, what manual fallback exists, how are customers informed, and who approves the return to normal service?
Critical process
Which customer or operational processes cannot simply stop.
Dependency
Which internal systems and third-party services each one relies on.
Failure
What actually happens when an integration or provider is unavailable.
Fallback
Whether work can queue safely, and what manual fallback exists meanwhile.
Recovery
How the service resumes and how queued work is released in a controlled order.
Reconciliation
How recovered data is checked, and how customers are informed where relevant.
Review
Who approves the return to normal service and what the event changes.
Security and access
Security should follow the sensitivity of the information and the authority of the action.
Access design is part of the operating model, not a configuration task at the end of a build.
- Named users
- Role-based access
- Privileged access
- Segregation of duties
- Sensitive fields
- External access
- Service identities
- Integration identities
- Audit
- Access review
Data minimisation and retention
A connected platform should not become a reason to retain information without a defined purpose.
For each important set of information, the same dimensions need an answer. Retention periods are set by the organisation, so we do not publish universal ones.
- Purpose
- Classification
- Source
- Access
- Retention
- Archive
- Disposal
- Analytical copy
- Test data
Integration
Integration boundaries can become significant operational dependencies and should be designed and owned explicitly.
For each material integration, these are the points we would expect to be agreed before anything is built.
- Purpose
- Source
- Target
- Authority
- Data
- Identity
- Timing
- Failure
- Monitoring
- Support owner
- Third-party responsibility
Platform fit
Use each platform for the process it is best suited to manage.
Financial-services organisations vary enormously in structure, regulation and scale. The combination should follow the operating problem, not the other way round.
Dynamics 365 CRM
The customer relationship, the case and the service work around it.
- Accounts, contacts, opportunities, relationships and communication
- Case management, customer service, queues, escalation and knowledge
- Role-based access for sensitive customer information
- Not the default owner of regulated product or account information
Business Central
A corporate financial and operational core where the combined requirement fits responsibly.
- Legal entities, finance structure, approvals, projects and corporate purchasing
- Intercompany needs, reporting, integrations, security and governance
- Dimensions to support entity, product or business-line reporting
- Qualified against the operating model, never against organisation size alone
Dynamics 365 Finance
Where the future operating model needs deeper enterprise financial control.
- Enterprise finance, multi-entity structures and intercompany
- Financial controls, governance, reporting and integration depth
- Not simply a larger Business Central, and not a turnover threshold
- Platform fit follows operating complexity, not turnover alone
These are InteliSense qualification patterns, not Microsoft company-size rules.
Focused business processes
Not every controlled workflow needs another enterprise application.
Power Apps, Power Automate, Dataverse and Power Pages can support approvals, case workflows, internal requests and operational tracking where a full application would be disproportionate.
- Power Apps for focused operational processes
- Power Automate for approvals and routing
- Dataverse as the shared data layer
- Power Pages where external access is genuinely required
- Internal requests and operational tracking
- Case workflows that do not need a full application
Low-code governance
The easier it becomes to build, the more important it becomes to govern.
- Environment strategy
- Ownership
- Data
- Security
- Deployment
- Support
- Change
- Application lifecycle
- Application inventory
- Retirement
Management insight
Controlled decisions depend on information people trust.
Leadership should not need several spreadsheets to explain the same operation. Power BI can bring operational and financial information into a clearer decision view, and Microsoft Fabric may be relevant where governed integrated data has to cross several operational systems.
Data lineage
A number is easier to trust when leadership can understand where it came from and how it was defined.
For each important management measure, the chain should be traceable end to end.
- Source
- Transformation
- Definition
- Measure
- Report
- Owner
From information to assistance
Use AI where the information burden is slowing the work.
Human oversight should follow consequence, authority, reversibility and organisational policy. An agent should have boundaries before it has autonomy.
Retrieve or summarise
AI may assist within approved information boundaries, using only what the user is already entitled to see.
Prepare or draft
Human review where required, because the output represents the organisation.
Recommend
Oversight follows consequence and authority rather than a single universal rule.
Controlled administrative action
Automation may act inside explicit approved limits, with the action recorded.
High-consequence decision
Stronger human authority and control apply according to organisational policy and applicable requirements.
Responsible uses
- Summarise customer history
- Summarise case history
- Draft routine communication
- Find approved knowledge
- Extract information from documents
- Identify missing information
- Prepare management summaries
- Support operational analysis
Controlled agent use cases
- Prepare an account review
- Gather case context
- Find missing information
- Prepare a service summary
- Coordinate low-risk administrative tasks
- Draft responses for human approval
Not offered as generic AI capability
- Underwriting
- Credit decisioning
- Regulated suitability
- Fraud
- AML decisions
- Claims adjudication
- Pricing
- Actuarial modelling
These require separately approved capability and evidence. Where operational questions such as case ageing, backlog pressure, service demand or process bottleneck are worth exploring, they are assessed against your data rather than offered as products.
- Case ageing
- Backlog pressure
- Service demand
- Process bottleneck
The detail underneath
Where the qualification goes deeper.
Complaints, specialist checks, finance, knowledge, reporting and data ownership. Open only what is relevant to your situation.
Orientation
Find a likely starting point before anyone proposes anything.
Four questions. It suggests a commercial route rather than a product, and every answer remains changeable.
Indicative signal
Answer the questions and we will show a likely starting point. This is orientation rather than a recommendation, and we do not decide platform fit, control design or acceleration from a form.
Your answers are carried through, so you will not be asked to repeat them. Final qualification is always a conversation.
Commercial route
The right route depends on how much is still undecided.
Eight routes answer different starting points. We will tell you which one your situation actually supports.
Capabilities that sit outside the route list
Signals that recovery is the honest answer
- CRM not adopted
- Case management fragmented
- Approvals untracked
- Integration broken
- Backlog growing
- Customisation excessive
- Implementation stalled
- Reporting untrusted
Confidence gates
Go-live confidence should come from evidence that the process and its controls operate together, not simply that configuration is complete.
Four decision points. Each one can send the work back as easily as forward.
Gate 1
Before commitment
Operating and control context
Whether the situation is one we can support responsibly, and whether enough is known to commit to anything beyond a diagnostic.
Confirmed at this gate
- Segment and business model
- Business process in scope
- Customer journey
- Specialist systems that remain
- Intended business outcome
- Decision points
- Compliance and risk owner
- Sensitive information
- Third parties
- Critical dependencies
Decision
Proceed · Assessment first · Transform first · Out of scope
Gate 2
Before build
Platform and control design
Whether the architecture and the control model are agreed, including what stays in the specialist system.
Confirmed at this gate
- Authority by data domain
- CRM scope
- ERP scope
- Power Platform scope
- Specialist systems retained
- Identity and access
- Approval and control model
- Integration design
- Data and audit
- Reporting and AI where relevant
- First-release scope
Decision
Proceed · Re-scope · Retain specialist system · Different architecture
Gate 3
Before go-live decision
Operational and control proof
Whether a representative controlled process runs end to end, including the paths people prefer not to test.
Confirmed at this gate
- Request through to evidence and review
- Approval, decision and communication
- Operational and financial action
- Reporting from the same records
- Unauthorised access attempt
- Exception and override handling
- Third-party failure
- Integration failure
- Missing information
- Complaint and audit evidence
Decision
Proceed · Remediate · Re-test
Gate 4
Before cutover
Production readiness
Whether live customer commitments, controls and financial position are protected through the transition.
Confirmed at this gate
- Active customer and case records
- Open work and approvals
- Documents and financial position
- Integrations and identities
- Privileged access
- Reporting and audit
- Trained users and support
- Fallback, recovery and reconciliation
Decision
Go · No-go · Controlled deferral
Shared responsibility
We can implement an agreed control model. The organisation remains accountable for the rules and risk decisions behind it.
Saying this clearly before delivery starts is more useful than discovering it during a control review.
The organisation owns
- Regulatory interpretation
- Compliance policy
- Risk appetite
- Decision authority
- Approval policy
- Segregation requirements
- Customer and product policy
- Specialist-system decisions
- Data classification
- Retention
- Security policy
- Accounting treatment
- Management definitions
- User acceptance testing
- Cutover
- Continuity
- Adoption
InteliSense may provide where agreed
- Process design
- Business-application architecture
- Configuration
- Development
- Integration
- Data migration
- Security configuration
- Testing
- Reporting
- Delivery assurance
- Cutover support
- Risk visibility
Delivery and cutover
Validate against real operational scenarios, not abstract requirements.
Sensitive processes, controlled access and audit expectations all shape how a platform should be introduced. There is no single cutover pattern, so the approach is designed against what has to stay protected.
Understand
The customer, case, approval and finance processes as they actually run today.
Design
Process ownership, data authority, security, approvals and integration boundaries.
Validate
Tested against real operational scenarios, including the awkward ones.
Configure or build
Configured against agreed decisions, with customisation kept deliberate.
Connect
Integration to specialist core systems, finance, documents and identity where real.
Migrate and rehearse
Migration proved through rehearsal rather than assumed at cutover.
Prove
Evidence that the process, controls and reporting hold up together.
Prepare
Users, support, fallback and reconciliation ready before the date is confirmed.
Cutover
A controlled transition that protects live customer commitments.
Stabilise
Early live period with heightened attention on exceptions and integrations.
Operate
Dependable service, controlled change and continued improvement.
What cutover has to protect
- Active cases
- Queue and work ownership
- Complaints
- Open approvals
- Customer communications
- Documents
- Integration state
- Security
- Reporting
- Audit
- Fallback
- Reconciliation
Foundations
Migration, adoption and licensing decide whether control survives contact with the live business.
Each has a dedicated page. What matters here is how it applies to a controlled financial-services process.
Data migration
Migration should preserve the information the future process needs without reproducing every legacy data problem in the new platform. Sensitive history is not moved simply because it exists.
- Customers
- Organisations
- Contacts
- Relationships
- Active cases
- Complaints
- Tasks
- Approvals
- Open opportunities
- Documents and reference links
- Relevant preferences
- Operational reference data
- Relevant finance reference data
Adoption
A controlled process cannot remain controlled if the real work continues outside the system.
Audiences
- Relationship and customer teams
- Service teams
- Operations
- Approvers
- Finance
- Managers
- Compliance and risk where relevant
Risks
- Spreadsheets remain
- Approvals stay in email
- Status is not updated
- Customer communication is recorded elsewhere
- Finance reconciles manually
Licensing
Role, access and licence design should be considered together before the operating model is committed.
- Relationship managers
- Service staff
- Operations
- Finance
- Managers
- Occasional approvers
- External users
- Service and application identities
After go-live
Four different things, deliberately kept separate.
No change remains a valid review outcome.
How we work
Be clear about where we help, and clear about where we do not.
We are honest about where we can help
We help financial-services organisations with customer, case, workflow, finance, data and reporting processes. We do not present ourselves as a core banking, policy administration or actuarial specialist.
We design around specialist capability rather than assuming replacement
Identity, AML, credit, risk and payment services are mature markets. Where an approved specialist service already meets the requirement, integration may be preferable to rebuilding that capability in a general business platform.
We design control into the process
Ownership, approval authority, evidence and audit are design decisions, not settings applied at the end of a build.
We keep people accountable for decisions
We can implement an approved control model. We do not define the regulatory obligations the organisation must satisfy.
Evidence
Customer experience of working with InteliSense.
Our current published customer videos evidence Dynamics delivery with InteliSense. We will publish financial services or insurance-specific customer evidence when it has been verified.
Customer voice
What customers say about working with us.
Customer voices
InteliSense customers
Hear our customers talk about InteliSense
These are general company evidence rather than sector evidence. We do not infer financial-services or insurance experience from process similarity, and approved logo usage carries no verified industry, engagement or outcome information in our central evidence model.
Common questions
Questions financial-services leaders ask.
Make ownership and decisions easier to control
Where is information making control harder than it should be?
If customer context, case ownership, approvals, finance or reporting are becoming harder to coordinate, we can help understand where the operating model needs to connect more clearly. Please do not include customer personal information or confidential case details in a first enquiry.