When catastrophic events strike, the insurance industry focuses first on insured losses. Headlines highlight billions in damage, claim volumes surge, and response plans are deployed. Yet behind those visible figures, another cost begins to accumulate — one that rarely appears in reports but deeply impacts operations, people, and long-term performance: manual vendor management during CAT events.

In North America and particularly the United States, the rise in costly extreme weather events has become undeniable. According to data from NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information, the U.S. has seen a striking increase in weather and climate disasters, causing more than $1 billion in damages, rising from an average of about 9 events annually between 1980 and 2019 to an average of 23 events per year between 2020 and 2024.

Despite this clear trend toward more frequent and expensive events, many insurance operations still rely on manual workflows for vendor coordination — a mismatch that becomes painfully obvious when pressure becomes constant.

Manual vendor management may feel familiar under normal conditions. Emails, spreadsheets, phone calls, and static lists can appear manageable when claim volumes are predictable. During CAT events, however, the limitations of these approaches are exposed rapidly and conspicuously. Disasters do not break systems; they reveal their limits.

When manual coordination meets catastrophe-scale volume

As catastrophe pressure builds, the weaknesses of manual vendor coordination become increasingly visible. Claims spike across regions simultaneously, assignment times stretch, and real-time visibility into vendor availability evaporates. Coordinators spend critical hours on administrative tasks instead of driving claims forward.

The economic impact of this inefficiency is rarely tracked in financial reports, yet it compounds quickly. Time lost to manual processes extends cycle times, increases internal costs such as overtime for adjusters and operations teams, and drives up expenses for emergency or last-minute vendors. Duplicate inspections and work caused by miscommunication further inflate costs, often without appearing as explicit catastrophe claims.

Beyond dollars and hours, manual vendor coordination also drains operational capacity. Skilled adjusters and managers shift from decision-making and policyholder engagement to administrative juggling — precisely the kind of work that technology should absorb. This loss of capacity has both operational and human consequences.

The human toll is significant. Adjusters and operations teams face intense workload spikes, frequent context switching, and emotional fatigue. In an environment where claims arrive by the thousands and coordination bottlenecks persist, burnout becomes a real operational risk, not simply a human resources concern. For policyholders, the effects are immediate: delays, inconsistent updates, and unclear timelines erode trust at a moment when clarity and responsiveness matter most.

A structural mismatch and the need for change

The persistence of manual vendor coordination is not due to a lack of effort. It stems from the fact that many systems were originally designed for a different reality: isolated, infrequent disasters with predictable patterns. Today’s CAT events are more frequent, more intense, and geographically overlapping. Recent studies show that what used to be rare peaks are now becoming the baseline operational pressure insurance systems must withstand.

Industry data also points to the scale of the broader trend: between 1980 and 2023, the U.S. recorded 417 weather and climate disaster events with losses exceeding $1 billion each, resulting in more than $3.1 trillion in damages — a figure that underscores the escalating financial stakes for carriers and risk managers alike.

As these trends continue,insurance carriers must rethink how vendor coordination is handled. Real-time visibility into vendor capacity and location, dynamic assignment processes, and systems engineered to scale under sustained pressure are no longer optional — they are operational imperatives. Without this evolution, carriers risk absorbing hidden costs that quietly erode efficiency, degrade customer experience, and strain human and financial resources.

In this context, the true cost of manual vendor management is not just measured in time and dollars. It is measured in delayed recoveries, exhausted teams, and lost trust — costs that will only grow as catastrophes become more frequent and less predictable.

Ready to rethink how vendor coordination works during catastrophes? Visit atlisai.com to learn how insurers are modernizing vendor management, reducing operational friction, and scaling catastrophe response when manual workflows no longer hold.

Key questions insurers are asking about manual vendor management

Why does manual vendor management fail during catastrophe events?

Because workflows designed for predictable, low-volume claims cannot scale when CAT pressure produces simultaneous surges across regions.

What is the economic impact of manual vendor coordination during CAT events?

Beyond insured losses, manual coordination increases cycle times, internal operating costs, and customer dissatisfaction — costs that are rarely measured but deeply felt.

How should insurance carriers rethink vendor management for future CAT events?

By adopting systems built for real-time coordination, dynamic capacity management, and sustained operational pressure rather than isolated disaster scenarios.

Have questions about this topic or want to discuss what this shift means for your organization?
You can schedule a time to talk with us here.