Topic starter
08/07/2026 7:09 pm
TL;DR: P&V Group’s move from legacy systems to modular insurance software is framed as a business-led transformation that improves user experience, operating efficiency, and product responsiveness, according to Comarch. For identity teams, the real lesson is that modernization programs only stay controlled when governance, lifecycle discipline, and integration ownership keep pace with architectural change.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Comarch: “P&V Group fully embraces the digital age with Comarch”.
By the numbers:
- P&V Group distributes the P&V and Vivium brands through 170 exclusive P&V agencies and more than 1,000 brokerages.
- P&V Group has roots dating back to 1907.
- The transformation program launched in 2020 and has run for five years.
Key questions
Q: How should insurers govern access during large core-system modernisation projects?
A: Insurers should treat modernisation as an access governance change, not only a technology change.
Q: When does partner access create the biggest governance risk in transformation projects?
A: Partner access becomes highest risk when implementation roles blur into operational roles.
Q: What breaks when legacy entitlements are left in place after migration?
A: Legacy entitlements break governance by creating two operating models at once.
Practitioner guidance
- Map identity ownership to the new operating model Define who approves, provisions, reviews, and removes access for each modular component, including business users, brokers, agents, and internal support teams.
- Separate partner access from production entitlements Give implementation partners only the access required for the current phase, then remove that access as soon as their role changes or ends.
- Retire legacy entitlements with the old platform Confirm that accounts, integrations, and admin rights tied to the legacy estate are not left behind after migration and cutover.
Bottom line: Legacy insurance modernisation changes identity governance by redistributing control across modular components, partners, and internal teams.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
08/07/2026 7:34 pm
Legacy modernisation is an identity governance programme, not only an IT replacement exercise. When a regulated insurer moves from a monolithic estate to modular software, the access model changes with the architecture. Business workflows, partner interfaces, and internal control ownership all shift at the same time, so governance has to be redesigned around new trust boundaries. The practitioner conclusion is simple: modernisation succeeds when identity ownership is treated as part of the target operating model.
A question worth separating out:
Q: Should insurers re-evaluate IAM governance before or after modular transformation?
A: Before. If identity ownership is not defined up front, the transformation will inherit the old ambiguity and multiply it across more components, more parties, and more integration points. The right sequence is to establish approval, recertification, and offboarding ownership before decommissioning the legacy platform.
👉 Read our full editorial: Legacy insurance modernisation and identity governance in regulated change