Common Mistakes Agencies Make When Choosing an IMO, And How to Avoid Them

Choosing an IMO is often treated as a tactical decision when it should be a strategic one. Many life insurance agencies select IMOs based on short term incentives or incomplete information. These mistakes usually do not surface immediately, but they limit growth as volume and complexity increase.

Mistake One, Choosing Based on Commission Alone

Commission structures are easy to compare, which makes them an attractive decision point. However, agencies that optimize primarily for payout often sacrifice operational support, underwriting speed, and long term scalability.

Over time, marginal commission gains are outweighed by inefficiencies that slow placement and frustrate producers.

Mistake Two, Treating Carrier Access as a Checkbox

Having a long list of carrier contracts does not guarantee usable access. Agencies that fail to evaluate underwriting relationships, escalation paths, and communication workflows often experience inconsistent outcomes.

Carrier access should be measured by results, not logos.

Mistake Three, Ignoring Operational Infrastructure

Infrastructure is rarely visible during early growth. As agencies scale, lack of centralized case management, inconsistent underwriting coordination, and manual processes create bottlenecks.

Agencies that ignore infrastructure early often pay for it later through added headcount and lost productivity.

Most IMO mistakes are not obvious until the agency is already feeling operational strain.

Mistake Four, Evaluating IMOs Like an Individual Agent

Many agencies apply individual agent criteria to an organizational decision. Tools and support designed for single producers do not translate well to multi producer teams.

Agencies must evaluate IMOs based on how well they support leadership, visibility, and scale.

Mistake Five, Underestimating Long Term Alignment

Short term convenience often leads agencies to partnerships that do not align with future growth. As complexity increases, misalignment becomes more costly and difficult to correct.

Long term alignment ensures the IMO relationship strengthens as the agency grows.

How The Marketing Alliance Helps Agencies Avoid These Pitfalls

The Marketing Alliance is structured around long term agency growth rather than short term production incentives. TMA emphasizes operational infrastructure, underwriting coordination, and carrier relationships designed to scale with agencies.

Agencies partnering with TMA avoid common IMO mistakes by aligning early around systems, visibility, and support.

Making Better IMO Decisions

Avoiding these mistakes requires agencies to shift how they evaluate IMOs. Focusing on infrastructure, alignment, and leverage leads to stronger, more sustainable growth.