📖 How to read this playbook (and how I read the FigJam)
Each page below is one decision point from the top-level map — one "play." The left pane recreates the FigJam tree exactly as drawn (same branch labels, same terminal boxes); the right pane is the same tree flattened into path → terminal state rows, so every route to an outcome can be checked line by line.
How I read each board: start at the entry decision, walk every arrow to a terminal box, and record the full condition path — then capture the sticky notes separately, because they answer a different question: not "what's the rule?" but "what do we do when the field is MISSING?" (look it up, assume a default, or follow up). Where two arrows overlap and the wiring is genuinely ambiguous, I did not guess — those became the questions at the bottom of the page.
Dashed-underlined terms open a ? glossary dialog — the shared vocabulary (UWing period, Knox Box, KYC, P(F), RCE…) captured while reading. Each page also notes where an agent helps: the exact spots a decision would stall on vague or missing info, and whether the unstick is a lookup, a derivation, the board's own assume-and-verify default, or one scoped question.
Replacement Cost
Compare submitted coverage against the calculated RCE: quote-friendly in every band, with documentation and a fraud check above 150%.
Notice how quote-friendly this is: EVERY band still produces a quote (as submitted, or at the calculated RCE) — the differences are the advisory attached (inspect after binding, align coverage) and the one hard stop: suspected fraud above the RCE. The 150% line is where trust shifts from the submission to documentation.
| Path | Terminal state |
|---|---|
| Submitted below the RCE | OK / QUOTEQuote as submitted + advise broker: we inspect after binding and adjust coverage to the determined replacement cost |
| Submitted at the calculated RCE | OK / QUOTEQuote as submitted |
| Submitted above RCE, within 150% | OK / QUOTEQuote as submitted — unless fraud is suspected, in which case do not insure at all |
| Above 150% + broker supplies documentation (e.g. a current dec page) | OK / QUOTEQuote as submitted + inspect-after-binding advisory |
| Above 150%, no documentation | REQUIREQuote at the calculated RCE + inspect-after-binding advisory |
- The band comparison is arithmetic on two numbers — an agent computes it the moment a lead lands and attaches the right advisory automatically.
- Above 150%, the documentation request is a single, precisely-scoped broker ask (“send the current dec page”) — the template writes itself from the rule.
- The fraud check is the human judgment; the agent's job is to surface the signal (how far above RCE, prior-carrier limits from the dec page) next to the decision.
- Who calculates the RCE (an internal model, a vendor tool?) — and does the underwriter see the inputs or just the number?