The Challenge
Determine if Thimble BOP is ready to scale beyond the pilot group, or if critical coverage and usability gaps need to be addressed first.
All work
UX Research Case Study
Thimble BOP: Broker Research Study
Evaluating product-market fit for a Business Owner's Policy through mixed-methods research
- Role
- UX Researcher
- Timeline
- Q3 2026 (6 Weeks)
- Methods
- Surveys & Broker Interviews
- Team
- Product, Design, Underwriting
Overview
Thimble, an insurtech company, launched a Business Owner's Policy (BOP) product through its AppUnd/Wholesure broker platform. After ~5 months in market with a limited test group, leadership needed to understand whether the product was viable for broader distribution. I led the research effort — designing and executing a mixed-methods study combining quantitative surveys with in-depth broker interviews to surface what was working, what wasn't, and what needed to change.
The Approach
10 broker surveys capturing quoting behavior and coverage priorities, plus 4 in-depth interviews exploring decision-making, competitive dynamics, and deal-breakers.
The Impact
Research directly shaped 4 strategic product recommendations adopted by leadership to improve competitiveness and conversion.
Performance Snapshot
66
Total Quotes
Since April 2026 launch
21
Policies Sold
$29,991 premium
1 in 3
Quote-to-Bind Rate
BOP quotes converting
131
Days Live
AppUnd test group
Research Approach
N = 10 respondents
Quantitative: Broker Survey
10 surveys received from brokers who completed a quote. Covered frequency of building coverage needs, quote drop-off reasons, decision factors, enhancement preferences, BI/EE limit adequacy, and desired additional coverages.
N = 4 in-depth interviews
Qualitative: Broker Interviews
4 in-depth interviews with brokers across regions (Miami FL, San Diego CA, and others). Covered client base characteristics, building limit determination process, coverage expectations, competitive landscape, and deal-breakers.
Key Findings
- Finding 1
Property limits are the #1 deal-breaker
Supporting data & analysis
Building/BPP limits and appetite for older buildings ranked as top decision factors (tied at 2.50 avg priority position). At least one account was lost because Thimble's property limits were too low.
Broker voice
“Replacement cost. In fact, I wouldn't even write anything else.”
- Finding 2
BI/EE limits fall short for most accounts
Supporting data & analysis
All 4 interviewed brokers said the $25k BI/EE cap is insufficient. Many accounts need limits closer to $150k+. Brokers prefer Actual Loss Sustained coverage over fixed limits because business income needs are hard to estimate.
Broker voice
“A good property coverage and a BOP would be... including business income at an actual loss sustained. That's automatically included for 12 months.”
- Finding 3
Coverage transparency drives broker confidence
Supporting data & analysis
Brokers need to verify classification fit and see exclusion wording before recommending. 6 of 10 survey respondents were still comparing against other carriers. Access to specimen policies and clickable forms/endorsements were repeatedly requested.
Broker voice
“Exclusions are where the surprises live. I need to see the exact policy language before I put my client in it.”
Barriers to Conversion
Property limit alignment
Accounts requiring higher limits than currently available
Expanded BI/EE flexibility
Higher options needed for broader business types
Comparison shopping
Active shopping against other carriers (most common reason)
Classification confidence
Uncertainty causes brokers to move business elsewhere
Coverage fit considerations
Endorsements and exclusions need validation
Forms & coverage transparency
Need better visibility into forms and endorsements
Strategic Recommendations
- 1
Raise BI/EE limits or move to actual loss sustained
All four participants said $25k falls short. Evaluate raising limits well above $25k and explore an actual-loss-sustained option.
- 2
Increase property limits and allow precise selection
A hard property cap directly cost at least one account. Replace the $5k-increment dropdown with custom amount entry.
- 3
Default to replacement cost coverage
Make replacement cost the default property valuation, with ACV as a lower-cost alternative.
- 4
Make classification and exclusion language verifiable
Make form numbers clickable/downloadable from quotes, surface specimen policies before bind.
Evidence-based growth
This research validated critical product gaps and gave leadership a clear, evidence-based path forward. The findings directly informed the Q4 2026 product roadmap, prioritizing limit increases, coverage transparency, and replacement cost defaults.