Informal communication via digital channels – such as WhatsApp, texting and direct messaging – has become embedded in day-to-day interactions for some professionals and revolutionised the way firms can both conduct and win business.
However, as may be expected, a more connected workforce brings new risks – especially when the boundaries between professional and personal communications become blurred.
This is particularly pertinent for the consultancy and professional services (CPS) sector, which relies on clearly defined advice, contractual boundaries, regulated conduct and documented communications to manage risk.
According to a recent Hiscox report focused on this issue, entitled Blurring the lines of communication: The new grey areas of professional advice in a chat-era, 86% of surveyed CPS respondents said that they received informal requests for advice weekly – with 71% concerned that informal communications could create risks for their business.
One of the primary concerns around the use of informal communications in the sector is that they can lead to “scope creep”, where a client and service provider’s agreed scope of work gradually expands beyond the original written contract.
This was the overarching view shared by Max Dobrov, CPS sector lead at specialist insurer Hiscox, who spoke during a recent Insurance Times webinar entitled Informal Comms, Formal Risk: A New Challenge for the CPS Sector, which was hosted on 30 June 2026 in association with Hiscox.
Dobrov explained that, because informal communications have an impact on formal contracts, “whenever a disagreement occurs” between clients and services it “may lead to an insurance claim or dispute”.
Fellow panellist Lucy Tolond, partner at DWF Law, noted that the content and the language of informal communication channels can also leave room for muddied interpretations and misunderstandings, particularly in a multi-generational workplace.
Even the use of emojis can be interpreted differently depending on the individual or circumstance, representing a “new frontier in terms of client communications”, she explained.
Tolond added: “Clients who are using these sorts of informal channels can create contractually and legally binding agreements and, if they then default on those agreements, or if they don’t deliver what the customer thought was being promised, then there’s a risk of being exposed to a claim.”
‘Scope creep’
The accessibility that informal communication channels provide to clients have grown expectations, with those working in the CPS sector expected to always be readily available.
This was reflected in the Hiscox report, which surveyed 250 owners of UK professional service firms and revealed that 42% of UK CPS staff said they felt pressured to always be available or respond quickly to client requests.
On the other hand, however, 45% of surveyed respondents said that informal communication tools help win business, retain clients or increase billable hours.
Additionally, Dobrov explained that the use of informal channels outside of working hours has led to CPS professionals feeling unsure of whether they were “acting within their authority and within the boundary of their duty” or “inadvertently stepping over the line”.
Tolond added that this risk has been exacerbated by the increasing use of informal communication messages, which was creating “flatter structures” in companies and less “hierarchical structures” of supervision over these communications.
She continued: “You’ve got more junior members of a project team or an accountancy practice who perhaps have exchanged numbers with a more junior counterpart from the other side.
“So, you’ve got more touch points for communication [and] there’s a risk there of more scope for misinterpretation and scope creep for misunderstandings about what has and hasn’t been agreed.”
This demand for consultants to be readily available during and after work hours has also added risk and complications associated with those using personal devices for corporate discussions off channel.
There is an additional level of risk, Tolond explained, when those conducting business have entered a written contact and “expanded the scope of the retainer” using a device which “the business may not even have any access to monitor or record”.
These off-channel communications are becoming of increasing interest to regulators in the financial services sector, she noted, particularly in the US.
“And, as we all know, what happens in the US tends to transfer its way over here,” she explained.
“On WhatsApp you’ve got features like disappearing messages where communications can automatically be erased and there’s concern about off-channel communications for more nefarious purposes like market abuse, anti-competitive behaviour or insider trading.
“There’s that increased layer of risk where you have not only an informal means of communication, but an informal means of communication that a firm can’t necessarily monitor and control.”
Navigating new risks
As the scope of misinterpretation and litigation risks grow, consultants have been left without the structure or safeguards that formal advice would usually require.
And, according to the Blurring the lines report, 52% of UK professional service firms currently have no formal policy or documented guidelines in place to meet these risks.
While it is common practice for businesses to adapt to technology, Chris Cotterill, client director at broker Konsileo, told the panel that “it’s really hard for a professional to use that as a defence”.
And, the “growing litigious environment” in the US and UK could lead to clients trying to “recuperate their losses” if the CPS professionals don’t keep up with guidelines, he added.
He said: “The only way we’re going to prevent a growth in [complaints of this nature] is that we do defend the matter [and clarify that] followed it up.
“As CPS professionals, our insurance policy should cover the legal defence costs to push back.”
Currently, Hiscox’s policies and underwriting procedures do not have any special exclusions or “conditions around informal means of communication”, Dobrov noted.
However, he warned that, in the “slowly changing claims environment”, that the insurer had observed a number of claims where informal communications presented a supplementary issue.
He continued: “If the legal environment starts bringing more and more cases to judgments, that inevitably will start costing insurers and clients money.”
Cotterill added: “Talking off the cuff has always been around in the insurance [and other CPS industries], whether it be negotiating with underwriters or talking with clients. You can do a deal and it’s insinuated, but with the FCA that verbal agreement is a contract of law.
“The important aspect is always to follow up informal communications with contract terms following on from that conversation. Without that, you’re putting yourself at risk, whether it be from the FCA or a formal claim notification.”
Webinar action points
- Set up a channel matrix that defines which issues belong on WhatsApp, email or require formal sign-off to ensure clear communication boundaries and oversight.
- Implement clear communication policies and procedures backed by governance to ensure there is compliance and that they are embedded into the firm’s culture.
- Establish clear escalation processes and response guidelines so employees can pass urgent issues to senior colleagues, while allowing flexibility for individuals to work outside standard hours by choice rather than expectation.
