“Knowledge is power,” as the saying goes. The more you have, the better equipped you are to navigate the world. Knowing more helps us feel protected, less susceptible to disinformation, deception, or exploitation; more likely to know better than.
In this age of AI deepfakes, phishing scams, and fake news, educating ourselves, especially when it comes to things like money, insurance, and risk, can feel more important than ever. But while knowledge and education are easier than ever to access, vetting information and knowing who and what to trust are arguably harder than ever.
This might explain why, when we conduct customer research about insurance topics, it’s common and unsurprising to hear people say they want to be more educated. Many approach insurance with caution, confused by the language, unsure of the value, and skeptical about whether the policy will really come through when it counts. They want to understand the terms, the options, and the fine print. Not because they’re curious, but because they don’t want to get burned.
We hear things like:
- “I just don’t want to be surprised later.”
- “I wish I knew what that meant.”
- “I want to know that I’m actually covered.”
It’s easy to see how these kinds of insights plant the idea that customers need and want more “education” around insurance. Customers themselves sometimes explicitly frame it this way: “I guess I just need to educate myself.” And our clients, with their ears tuned toward their customers, hear these things and think: education, great, let’s write some FAQs, publish more help articles, get to work on an explainer video, or even, let’s build a resource center!
Understandable interpretation, but as designers, we know it’s best not to jump to solutions, and in product development terms, “education” usually implies a range of solutions, like those articles and explainers that may help users, but fail to address what’s at the heart of the problem.
So if we take a step back and ask ourselves why customers might feel like they need to educate themselves, what we might infer is that customers are intimidated by buying an overly complex product and want to feel confident that they are making a wise decision, and, when push comes to shove, know that their insurance will come through for them.
It’s not an education gap. It’s a design gap.
What some people interpret as an education problem, we see as a design problem, because insurance doesn’t need to be explained; it needs to be designed.
When we talk about design, we don’t just mean visual polish or UX flows. We mean intentionally shaping how the insurance product works and how it’s experienced, so people can understand it without needing a translator. That might mean simplifying the policy itself—fewer exclusions, commonsense criteria for approving claims, more intuitive options—or rethinking the way people shop for, buy, and use their coverage, so they don’t have to decode every step on their own.
In well-designed systems—purchase flows, service access points—people don’t have to step out of the experience to figure things out. The design itself communicates what matters and what’s next.
Take GPS. It didn’t eliminate the need for spatial awareness, but it changed the way people learn how to navigate. You don’t need to study a map in advance—just follow the prompts. Over time, people build an intuitive sense of direction by doing, not by studying. That’s the power of design: it lets people learn through action, not instruction.
Design guides people through the decision-making process without requiring them to become experts along the way. Through structure, language, and flow, good design anticipates what people need to know and surfaces that information when it’s most useful.
When considering insurance, most people aren’t trying to become experts in exclusions and endorsements. They’re trying to make an informed decision that protects them when it matters. They want to know: Will this cover me if something goes wrong? Is this the right amount of protection? What am I actually paying for?
When we see support content picking up too much of the slack—when someone has to pause to read an article mid-flow, or watch a video just to finish getting a quote—we see that as a sign that experience isn’t doing its job.
Educational content can support a good experience. But it can’t make up for a bad one.
These stops and starts are not education gaps. They’re design gaps. And the right experience can work to close them by taking some of the complexity off the user, not asking them to take on more of it.
So, how can design do that?
Five ways to design complexity out of the customer experience
In our work, we’ve found that the best way to make insurance feel simpler and more intuitive isn’t to pile on information—it’s to design experiences that reduce the need for explanation in the first place. Good design doesn’t remove important information. It makes it easier for people to understand what they’re choosing, what they’re doing, and why it matters. That clarity helps people feel more confident in their decisions and more in control of their coverage.
And when we say “people,” we don’t just mean customers. Insurance is a complex ecosystem, and the burden of interpreting that complexity often falls on the professionals inside it—agents, brokers, service reps, and operations teams. Many of the same pain points we see in customer experiences show up behind the curtain, too: unclear flows, dense language, and tools that require translation before action.
Of course, there’s still a lot that carriers can do to simplify the product itself—fewer exclusions, clearer language, more consistent rules for how claims are evaluated and paid. But as experience designers, our influence often lies in how those products are presented, explained, and navigated.
That’s where we focus: not on teaching people more, but on helping them need to learn less. No “learn more” links, no reading assignments, no expectation that anyone—internal or external—should have to study to get through a task. The experience should carry the weight.
Here are five go-to design strategies that help make that happen
1. Structure around user intent, not internal categories
Most insurance flows—whether you’re buying a policy, filing a claim, managing a book of business, or servicing an account—are built around how the product is structured internally. But that’s not how people think.
Customers don’t ask about “dwelling coverage” or “bodily injury liability.” They ask:
- What happens if my basement floods?
- Will this cover me if I hit someone?
- Does this pay to replace my stuff?
And professionals don’t think in policy language either when they’re trying to help. A broker might be trying to quickly match a client’s needs with the right plan. A call center rep might be fielding a question about whether a repair is covered. If the systems they use are organized around underwriting logic or legacy codes, they’re stuck translating rather than helping.
Instead of making people—on either side of the interaction—work backward from menus and policy terms, design for the questions they’re already asking. Use natural language. Reorder the flow. Reframe what’s on the screen so it reflects real-world intent, not internal structure.
2. Use progressive disclosure, not information dumps
In the name of transparency, we’ve seen clients overload every step with options, exceptions, legal notes, and edge cases. But when everything is surfaced at once, people can’t see what matters.
Progressive disclosure is a design strategy that reveals information gradually, only as it becomes relevant to the experience, so people don’t have to sort through everything upfront. It’s not about covering up complexity; it’s about pacing the experience so users can focus on one decision at a time.
For example: Instead of listing every possible deductible option and legal disclaimer on one screen, you might start with a recommended choice, then offer the option to explore how higher or lower deductibles would affect premiums, and link out to more detail only if they want it.
Progressive disclosure helps everyone focus on the current task while keeping the deeper details accessible. It can help during quoting—like when choosing a deductible—and also during service and support:
- Adding a teenage driver
- Making a one-time payment change
- Filing a water damage claim
- Looking up state-specific underwriting rules for a niche business class
Designing with progressive disclosure reduces the burden on everyone. Customers can move through decisions with more clarity and confidence. And internal teams can focus on helping, not translating.
You don’t have to hide anything. Just don’t make people sift through all of it up front.
3. Use examples, not just definitions
People rarely misunderstand insurance because they didn’t read. It’s because they don’t know how to apply what they read.
We’ve tested terms like “loss of use” and “comprehensive,” and even when people can repeat the definition, they still can’t explain what it means in real life. The same thing happens inside the organization: a service rep or agent might know the technical definition, but still struggle to confidently explain how it plays out in a real scenario.
Instead, show them:
- If your home is damaged and you can’t live in it, this helps pay for a temporary place to stay.
- If your dog bites someone and they need medical care, this helps cover their expenses.
Scenarios build confidence—for customers making decisions, and for internal teams trying to guide them.. They help people see how the product works, not just what it’s called.
4. Make pricing logic visible, even if it’s not precise
We’ve seen users spend 20–30 minutes comparing policies and still walk away not knowing why one costs more than another. Brokers and agents can have the same problem: they’re asked to explain or justify price differences without being able to see what’s actually driving them.
You don’t have to reveal the full pricing algorithm. But you do need to show what’s driving the cost:
- This policy has higher limits.
- This includes flood coverage.
- This deductible lowers your premium.
People don’t expect exact numbers. But they need to see that the pricing is grounded in something real.
5. Give people a benchmark, not just a breakdown
When buying insurance, especially when it’s the first time, people don’t always know what’s “normal” or what others like them are choosing. That uncertainty leads to second-guessing, over-insuring, or going with the cheapest option and hoping for the best.
We’ve had success in projects where we’ve layered in simple, non-prescriptive benchmarks:
- Most homeowners in your area choose this coverage level.
- Drivers with similar vehicles tend to select this deductible.
- People with pets similar in age usually choose this plan.
Benchmarks don’t need to drive the decision. They just help people feel like they’re not making it in a vacuum.
Better design makes education less necessary
When people are confused, it’s tempting to throw more information at the problem. But in our experience, that rarely addresses the root cause.
Most of the time, people are confused because the system wasn’t designed for a user; it was designed around internal logic.
When we treat uncertainty, confusion, or distrust as a design problem, not an education problem, we ask better questions: Why didn’t this make sense the first time? What are we assuming people already know? How can we reduce the need for explanation altogether?
Education can be empowering, but it shouldn’t be a prerequisite. The best experience isn’t the one that teaches people the most. It’s the one that makes people feel capable from the start.
And when product and experience design move in sync—simpler coverage, clearer claims logic, cleaner interfaces—that’s when insurance stops feeling like something people have to decode and starts feeling like something they can count on.
Related
by Emily Smith Cardineau
