Human-Oversight Decision Matrix
Determine when insurance AI requires human command, pre-action approval, active monitoring, periodic review, or redesign. Rate inherent exposure first, then apply mandatory overrides.
1. Rate the use
0 Limited · 3 SevereHow consequential is the decision or action influenced by the AI?
Choose a rating to see the anchor.
What harm could a wrong, delayed, or unfair result cause?
Choose a rating to see the anchor.
What can the system do without a person approving the specific action?
Choose a rating to see the anchor.
How completely and quickly can an error be contained and corrected?
Choose a rating to see the anchor.
How much time exists for effective review before harm or a deadline?
Choose a rating to see the anchor.
Can a reviewer understand the recommendation and see the evidence needed to challenge it?
Choose a rating to see the anchor.
How likely is a material failure to be detected before impact?
Choose a rating to see the anchor.
How broadly or quickly can one error pattern affect people or operations?
Choose a rating to see the anchor.
Does the use involve sensitive data or exposure to manipulation and untrusted content?
Choose a rating to see the anchor.
Can qualified reviewers perform the required review consistently under real workload?
Choose a rating to see the anchor.
2. Apply mandatory overrides
Complete all sixDoes law, regulation, filed practice, contract, company policy, or risk appetite require a qualified person to make or approve the final decision?
Effect: Human in commandCan the use deny, terminate, materially restrict, price, settle, or delay coverage, benefits, payment, appeal, or another consequential consumer outcome?
Effect: Human in commandCan the system execute an external, financial, coverage, legal, safety, or difficult-to-reverse action?
Effect: At least human in the loopCan an agent select tools, expand its plan, exceed defined limits, or act across systems without reliable confirmation and containment?
Effect: Redesign before useWould the reviewer lack necessary evidence, time, training, independence, authority, or a practical way to disagree and stop the process?
Effect: Redesign before useCould action before qualified human review cause physical safety risk, loss of legal rights, missed deadlines, or harm that later correction cannot repair?
Effect: Human in commandOversight modes at a glance
The system may operate within narrow low-impact limits. People review samples, performance, changes, incidents, and exceptions on a defined cadence.
The system operates within tested boundaries while a qualified person monitors performance and can intervene promptly.
The system pauses at defined decision or action points and a qualified person approves, rejects, or modifies the proposed outcome.
A qualified person owns the decision and uses AI as bounded support. The person determines the outcome and authorizes any consequential action.
No oversight label can compensate for an infeasible review, prohibited action, unbounded authority, or control design that cannot prevent unacceptable harm.
Official foundations: NAIC Model Bulletin · NIST AI RMF · New York DFS Circular Letter 7