The unsurprising news that Blueprint Two had been cancelled has left the sector in a void, but the digitisation of the market remains necessary step-forward
This article by Stuart Favier, Client Manager – Insurance, Northdoor plc looks closer at the issues.
Let’s be honest, the announcement caught few in the market off guard. When Blueprint Two was introduced in November 2020, it came with real ambition; a sweeping vision to digitise placement, accounting, and claims across the Lloyd’s market. It was both necessary and forward-looking but ultimately proved far harder to execute than was originally anticipated. What was initially positioned as a programme delivering full digital adoption by the second quarter of 2024 instead became defined by repeated delays, shifting timelines, and a gradual loss of confidence from the market.
By February 2026, when it was reported that the initiative had been shelved, following the quiet wind-down of the market engagement team at the end of 2025, the announcement felt less like breaking news and more like confirmation of what many had already presumed.
Why did it Blueprint Two fall short?
The failure of Blueprint Two is not due to a lack of ambition or clarity of vision. Rather, it was overwhelmed by the size and complexity of the task. Attempting to modernise, in one sweep, a marketplace made up of hundreds of interconnected organisations, each with its own distinct legacy systems, operating models and risk tolerances was always going to be a huge challenge.
At the centre of this effort, the Velonetic platform, joint initiative between Lloyd’s, DXC Technology, and the IUA, encountered ongoing issues with testing and system integration. Despite multiple deadline extensions, these challenges persisted and remained unresolved.
As delays accumulated, the project began to feel like it was on the brink of collapse. Firms across the market, many of which had either paused or limited their own technology investments in anticipation of the central platform, became increasingly frustrated. Without clarity, organisations struggled to plan their own digital roadmaps, and confidence in the programme diminished with each missed milestone.
The project looked finally doomed when Patrick Tiernan stepped in as CEO in June 2025, there was a clear shift in perspective. His arrival brought a willingness to draw a line under Blueprint Two and the negative sentiment surrounding it.
What this means for London Market organisations
The key point here is that the problem Blueprint Two set out to solve has not gone away, and if anything, are even more prominent. Inefficient legacy processes, manual workflows, and fragmented data structures continue to impact the London Market’s competitiveness. The need for modernisation is not in question. It has been needed for years. What is in doubt is the approach and ownership.
Many have maintained that organisations should not tie their own technology progress to the fate of a market-wide initiative. The demise of Blueprint Two absolutely reinforces this view. Firms that continued to invest in their own data capabilities, automation, and integration readiness are now in a far stronger position than those that delayed in expectation of Blueprint Two being introduced.
For those that chose to wait, the demise of Blueprint Two should not be a cause for panic but should drive decisive action. Advancing data management, automating workflows, and improving claims processes can all deliver immediate value, regardless of what if anything replaces Blueprint Two. For organisations that found the programme’s requirements particularly complex because of their existing systems, alternative approaches do exist that provide access to digital messaging without requiring full-scale transformation.
What comes next after Blueprint Two?
Ultimately the goal has not changed. There is still a need and a desire to modernise the market. What has changed is the way it will be delivered.
The plans changed overtime for the roll-out of Blueprint Two, from incremental, phased and big bang. The new plans will include a gradual roll-out, but the strategy planning will be incremental too. There has been a recognition that part of the issue has been trying to push forward one huge programme of work, this has proved to be too complex to be able to deliver. Instead, there is talk of a five-year rolling strategy plan.
This seems sensible as it splits a huge task and perhaps more importantly, allows the market to keep an eye on new technologies as they appear, merging them into the roll-out. This is preferable to the old approach which meant a technology would have to be decided upon and kept in place no matter the advances in solutions in the meantime.
The London Market remains a global leader in complex risk. While the cancellation of Blueprint Two represents a setback for collective transformation, it does not undermine the market’s capacity to evolve. That capability already exists, within its organisations, its data, and its people. The challenge now is to harness it more effectively, whether through a central initiative or a more decentralised path forward.
Be the first to comment