Before building anything, ask: What was broken?
| Problem | Impact |
|---|---|
| Millions of calls per year | Human agents overwhelmed |
| Multiple languages (UK, Italy, France, Spain) | Inconsistent service quality |
| Simple queries took 5+ minutes | Poor customer experience |
| 24/7 availability impossible with humans alone | Customers left without answers |
| Tree-based chatbots ("press A or B") | Customers with unique questions got no help |
Not every problem needs AI. But when volume, language diversity, and 24/7 demands collide — AI agents become a strategic necessity.
Most companies measure containment — did the AI keep the customer from reaching a human?
Admiral measured something harder and more meaningful:
PRIMARY METRIC → First Contact Resolution (FCR)
Goal: 90% of customers get their problem solved on first contact
SECONDARY METRIC → Containment
(Only tracked after FCR was established)
| Metric | What It Measures | Risk If Used Alone |
|---|---|---|
| Containment | Did AI handle the call? | AI could "handle" calls without solving problems |
| First Contact Resolution | Did customer actually get what they needed? | Harder to game |
A deliberate handoff to a human is NEVER counted as a failure. Escalation ≠ failure. Unresolved customer need = failure.
Practical Example:
Admiral didn't build one giant AI. They built specialized sub-agents working together:
INCOMING CALL
↓
[SENTRY SUB-AGENT]
Checks: Is this customer eligible for AI handling?
→ Vulnerable customer? → Human priority queue
→ Customer in arrears? → Human priority queue
→ Standard customer? → Continue
↓
[AUTHENTICATION SUB-AGENT]
Verifies customer identity before anything else executes
↓
[MAIN AGENT]
Handles the actual request (e.g., settlement quote)
API-driven → pulls data directly, no screen waiting
↓
[FEEDBACK AGENT]
Asks customer to rate experience 1-5
↓
CALL ENDS
| Old Process (Screen-Driven) | New Process (API-Driven) |
|---|---|
| Agent waits for legacy screens to load | Data pulled instantly via API |
| ~5 minutes per call | ~2.5 minutes per call |
| Human reads screen, types, waits | AI queries backend directly |
The time savings came from workflow redesign, not just from replacing humans with AI. The architecture change was as important as the AI itself.
INNOVATION PRESSURE COMPLIANCE PRESSURE
"Deploy fast" vs. "Never harm customers"
"Iterate quickly" vs. "Meet regulatory standards"
Admiral's standard before going live:
"The agentic solution must be as good as our best human agents, or better — before it goes live."
Old world: Edge case knowledge lived in the instincts of experienced agents (tacit knowledge)
New world: Every edge case must be:
In insurance, identifying vulnerable customers is a legal and ethical baseline.
Admiral's approach uses redundancy by design:
VULNERABILITY DETECTION SYSTEM
Traditional ML Models + Generative AI Models
↓ ↓
└──────────┬─────────────┘
↓
If EITHER signal fires
↓
Route to human specialist
Why both? Neither model alone is trusted enough. Running both means vulnerable customers are caught regardless of which system detects the signal first.
Outcome-based regulation is actually flexible. Regulators care about what happens to the customer, not exactly how the technology works. This gives teams room to innovate on the "how" while holding firm on the "what."
Admiral doesn't push changes directly to live. They use gradual traffic splitting:
NEW CHANGE BUILT ON BRANCH
↓
Simulation Tests
↓
Manual Preview
↓
1% live traffic
↓
2% → 5% → 10% → 25% → 50% → 100%
↓
Data supports change? → Continue
Data doesn't support? → Instantly back to 0%
(Nothing to roll back)
Full cycle time: A few hours to one day Old way: Two-week sprints + two-week deployments = one month per change
Admiral built Olivia's prompts directly in French, not translated from English.
Why it matters:
English prompt → translated to French = Model reasons in English, outputs French
French prompt written natively = Model reasons in French from the start
Result: Significantly better performance when prompting in the customer's native language.
Language is not just a localization detail — it may fundamentally change how the model reasons. This has implications for any global AI deployment.
Admiral's Group Head of GenAI came from McKinsey's change management practice. She applied three principles directly:
Principle 1: People Support What They Help Build
❌ Wrong approach: Announce AI is coming, mandate adoption ✅ Right approach: Put the tool in front of skeptics
Admiral ran demos across the organization including:
Result: Leaders who were skeptical became advocates because they experienced it themselves.
Principle 2: It's Never Just About the Technology
The conversation should be about:
P&L Impact → "How does this affect our bottom line?"
Customer Experience → "How does this improve customer outcomes?"
Employee Experience → "How does this change what our people do?"
Not: "Here's a cool AI model we want to deploy."
"Once people align on the outcome, the technology options get figured out."
Principle 3: Build Governance Early
| Build governance early | Skip governance |
|---|---|
| Right KPIs from day one | Gut-feel decisions |
| Data-driven decisions | "Very nice artifact" no one uses |
| Metrics that matter | No movement on any metric |
Admiral's approach to scaling across markets:
STEP 1: Choose ONE part of the group
↓
STEP 2: Experiment deeply on ONE topic
↓
STEP 3: Extract learnings
↓
STEP 4: Fast follow in other markets
↓
STEP 5: Full rollout after validation
Anti-pattern they avoided: One use case in one domain, repeated from scratch in every market = reinventing the wheel ten times.
[HUB - Group Level]
/ \
Value Capture Side Technical Side
- Strategy - Engineers
- Roadmaps - Architects
- Product Design - Delivery
- A/B Testing - Standards & Integration
|
__________|__________
| | |
[SPOKE] [SPOKE] [SPOKE]
UK France Spain/Italy
Local Local Local
experts experts experts
Each project uses small cross-functional pods:
Process Expert + Business Owner + Product + Tech
↓
Build together
↓
Test together
↓
Give to real customers to break
The AI engineer of the future writes less code and does more of: understanding how GenAI works, structuring ideas properly, and leveraging agentic coding tools to deliver.
| Factor | Varies by Market? |
|---|---|
| Core technical build | ❌ Mostly the same |
| Prompting architecture | ❌ Mostly the same |
| Customer adoption behavior | ✅ Significantly different |
| Turn-taking conventions | ✅ Different |
| Tolerance for interruption | ✅ Different |
| Conversational rhythm expectations | ✅ Different |
Engineer (knows prompting + architecture)
+
Local Business Owner (knows market context)
=
Effective Deployment Unit
"If your customers don't trust it, if your customers don't understand it, they will immediately — in second number two of the conversation — say 'please transfer me to a human.'"
Admiral expects to spend more time on customer education than on the model itself:
TODAY: FUTURE:
Customer repeats themselves Customer NEVER repeats themselves
across every channel
Intent carried across channels
IVR → Voice Agent → Human Sentiment carried across channels
= Start over each time Vulnerability signals carried across
every handoff — not just transcript
Admiral's McKinsey-derived rule of thumb:
£1 spent on technology
£3 spent on process redesign
£5 spent on change management
Implication: If your AI budget is 90% technology and 10% everything else, you are likely to fail.
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ADMIRAL'S AI AGENT FRAMEWORK │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 1. DEFINE SUCCESS CORRECTLY │
│ → FCR first, containment second │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 2. ARCHITECT FOR SAFETY │
│ → Sub-agents, sentry layers, redundant detection │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 3. HOLD THE COMPLIANCE BAR │
│ → Raise validation, never lower compliance │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 4. DEPLOY GRADUALLY │
│ → Traffic splits, branch testing, fast rollback │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 5. MANAGE CHANGE DELIBERATELY │
│ → Co-build, outcome focus, early governance │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 6. SCALE THROUGH HUB AND SPOKE │
│ → Central standards + local market expertise │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 7. INVEST IN CUSTOMER TRUST │
│ → Education > model sophistication │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Test your understanding: