Why pre-screen climate risk insurance specialists before the interview
Pricing rests on the assumption that the past describes the future, and for weather-related perils that assumption is failing. Models calibrated on historical events underestimate frequency, exposure has grown in the wrong places, and reinsurance is repricing accordingly. Specialists worth hiring adjust explicitly for that. A short screen asks how they handled the change in hazard frequency.
What actually matters when screening Climate Risk Insurance Specialist candidates
- 01
Technical command
Check fluency with catastrophe models (RMS, Verisk/AIR, Oasis LMF), CMIP6 downscaling, RCP/SSP pathways, exceedance probability curves, and how they adjust vendor event sets for climate signal.
- 02
Deals and deliverables that closed
Probe deliverables that shipped: repriced wildfire or coastal flood portfolios, ORSA climate scenario chapters, TCFD or ISSB disclosures, reinsurance submissions, or Solvency II internal model change files.
- 03
Risk judgement
Test how they set risk appetite where data is thin: unmodelled perils, accumulation limits by CRESTA zone, attachment point choices, and refusing or surcharging exposures under political pressure.
- 04
Explaining it to decision-makers
Assess how they brief underwriters, actuaries and boards: translating return periods and average annual loss into pricing and capital decisions without hiding tail assumptions.
Pre-screening questions to ask Climate Risk Insurance Specialist candidates
12 questions grouped by what they test. Ask the same set in every screen and score answers on a consistent scale, or send them as an async video screen and compare answers side by side.
Portfolio work done
3 questions01Can you describe your experience with climate risk modelling and assessment?
Listen forModelling applied to a real portfolio, with the perils and geographies they covered described.
Experience described as research, or no portfolio they assessed for an insurer.
02Can you describe a complex project you led in this area?
Listen forA project with a decision attached, such as repricing, reinsurance or exposure reduction.
Projects producing analysis alone, or work that did not reach an underwriting decision.
03Can you give an example of a risk mitigation strategy you implemented?
Listen forA specific measure such as exposure limits or resilience incentives, with the effect measured.
Mitigation described as recommendations, or strategies that were never implemented.
Models used critically
4 questions04What methods do you use to forecast climate-related losses?
Listen forCatastrophe models used with an explicit adjustment for changing frequency and severity.
Historical calibration used unchanged, or model output accepted without adjustment.
05How do you assess physical and transition risks separately?
Listen forBoth assessed using different methods and timescales, with their interaction also considered.
The two conflated, or transition risk ignored for a general insurance portfolio.
06Which tools or platforms have you used for this analysis?
Listen forVendor models used with an understanding of their assumptions and known weak regions.
Model output treated as authoritative, or vendor assumptions never examined.
07Have you used spatial analysis tools for exposure assessment?
Listen forExposure geocoded accurately, with the effect of location precision on results understood.
Exposure aggregated at postcode level without regard to the error that introduces.
Pricing changed
3 questions08How have you worked with underwriting teams on pricing?
Listen forAnalysis translated into pricing or terms, with underwriters engaged rather than sent a report.
Work delivered as reporting, or underwriters unconvinced and pricing left unchanged.
09How do you evaluate the effect of climate change on an insurance portfolio?
Listen forAccumulation by peril and by region assessed, with concentration risk identified explicitly.
Portfolio assessed at aggregate level, or accumulation risk never quantified.
10How do you prioritise where to focus when assessing exposure?
Listen forPriorities set by exposure size and hazard change, targeting where the loss potential is greatest.
Focus driven by data availability, or the largest exposures not examined first.
Regulator satisfied
2 questions11Can you discuss your experience with regulatory expectations in this area?
Listen forSupervisory expectations known in detail, with scenario analysis produced to the standard required.
Regulatory requirements unfamiliar, or scenario work produced without documented method.
12What is your experience communicating climate risk to stakeholders?
Listen forFindings expressed in exposure and pricing terms, with uncertainty stated rather than removed.
Communication in scientific terms only, or uncertainty dropped to strengthen a case.
How to score responses
Score every candidate on the same four criteria immediately after the screen. At this stage you are shortlisting for panel interviews, not making the final call.
Technical command
35%5Names specific model versions and perils, explains secondary uncertainty and demand surge handling, and where vendor views understate flood or wildfire.
Deals and deliverables that closed
25%5Cites named portfolios with premium, exposure or loss ratio movement, and the regulator, reinsurer or board that accepted the work.
Risk judgement
25%5Distinguishes model uncertainty from genuine trend, states thresholds triggering withdrawal or subsidised cover, and owns a call that proved wrong.
Explaining it to decision-makers
15%5Turns EP curves into concrete underwriting guidance, surfaces key assumptions plainly, and has changed an executive decision with a single clear exhibit.
Pricing assumes the past describes the future, and for weather that is failing. A one-way video screen asks about it.
Try it on HirevireScreening FAQ
Process basics
How long should a pre-screening round for this role take?
Fifteen minutes across eight to ten questions, answered async. Enough to establish the portfolio work they did, test their modelling depth, and check underwriting and regulatory experience.
What background suits this role?
Actuarial or catastrophe modelling experience combined with climate science literacy. Someone with only one side will either misuse the models or produce science with no pricing consequence at all.
Evaluating answers
What is the strongest signal when screening this role?
How they adjusted for changing hazard frequency. Specialists doing real work describe explicit adjustments to model output. Anyone using historical calibration unchanged is underpricing the risk.
How do I judge whether their work landed?
Ask what changed in underwriting. Real answers include repriced exposure, changed terms or withdrawal from a region. Anyone whose analysis never changed a price has produced reporting.
Go deeper on this role
Sanat has been hiring since 2012 and watching the recruitment industry change up close ever since, and turned that screening process into Hirevire's video screening platform. LinkedIn
