Sections

How Fintechs And Banks Can Get Along – Go Modular

Tom Groenfeldt

For the last year or two a fairly lackluster debate has – hmm, raged isn’t the word, perhaps wafted – over the financial services industry: Will banks be displaced by fintech firms with better and easier to use technology? Or will individuals and corporations stick with nice, stable, secure banks with the huge columned headquarters downtown and slick branches in the ‘burbs?

Now Oliver Wyman, the global consultancy, has wandered into the fray to suggest, just in time for Davos, that the solution is modularity – financial services are becoming modular.

“New technology is making it easier for customers to buy from multiple product providers,” the firm announces in a whitepaper, Modular Financial Services: The New Shape of the Industry. “The number of financial products used by the average customer is increasing. We call this modular demand.”

“Modular financial services are emerging at different speeds across markets. Currently, banking in the US is more modular than in Europe and Asia.  Property & casualty insurance has become more modular than life insurance.  Now, the modular industry structure will go deeper and spread to new markets,” said partner Oliver Wyman and co-author, Matt Austen. “Since the crisis, most firms have focused on optimizing their existing, integrated business model. Now, the industry is going to move towards a new, modular structure.”

Admirably enough, Oliver Wyman waits until the third paragraph of its paper before introducing the terribly familiar “seamless.”

“Financial services firms are using more third party suppliers. Providers of specialist services, back office processes, and risk capital can now seamlessly plug into a supply chain. New entrants have new, focused business models. We call this modular supply.”

Although the “modular” branding may be new, the idea isn’t especially. I recently wrote about Currency Cloud and Quicken Loans’ Rocket Mortgage, which link to other partners and platforms to deliver their services. Loan companies such as Lending Club and Lenddo have tapped new sources beyond FICO for rating borrowers. They then partner with individuals, banks, foundations, hedge funds, and pensions to provide the loans.

Oliver Wyman expects that fintechs, banks, or other established financial institutions will benefit from a modular financial services model.

“Distribution will become dominated by digital ‘platforms’ that can steer demand to any supplier, allowing new product providers to proliferate. Regulatory changes, particularly around customer data, will also weaken financial firms’ hold on their customers.”

Modularizing forces are not unopposed, however.

“Large integrated financial services firms continue to enjoy advantages, including their existing customer relationships, secure at-scale operations and the fixed costs of regulatory compliance.”

In Europe and Asia, bank customers are more likely to hold most of their financial accounts – credit cards, loans, and mortgages – with one bank.

However, if they are going to compete as modular firms, financial firms will have to replace their costly, inflexible legacy infrastructure – which could cost billions and may require suspending dividends for one to three years, says Oliver Wyman, but it will allow them to develop new services.

Some new banks, like Fidor in Germany, provide services from outside providers, like Currency Cloud, through an API.

Oliver Wyman warns that in a modular architecture, no one firm owns the customer, although financial firms may no longer have much choice.

“Customer loyalty to financial institutions has been eroding since the 1990s, with the advent of monolines, direct banks, and direct insurance,” says the report, which neglected to mention one of the largest forces in the industry – online mutual fund providers that have taken hundreds of billions that might once have resided at banks. In addition to investments, and increasingly automated or hybrid automated/personal advice, firms like Charles Schwab, Fidelity, and Vanguard offer checking accounts.

A few fintech companies I have talked with in the last couple of weeks think banks have an advantage in terms of convenience and efficiency – customers would rather go to one place for a variety of financial services than use multiple providers. The Oliver Wyman report disputes this:

“The digital revolution has reinforced this trend by massively reducing search costs for customers. What once would have taken hours of phoning providers or visiting branches now takes a few moments in front of a computer or mobile phone looking at an aggregator platform or price comparison site.”

The report also looks at the importance of a large, stable deposit base, and notes that monoline credit card companies like Capital One and MBNA grew until the mid-2000s when their ability to fund lending through securitization hit a wall. Capital One acquired Hibernia National Band and North Fork Bank and MBNA was bought by Bank of America.

“Cards have thus gone full circle and are now part of integrated financial institutions.” The consultancy draws two lessons from this:

  • Modularization can be cyclical rather than secular; forces that encourage it may come and go (in this case, capital market liquidity).
  • Expertise is not all. The statistical marketing skill of the monolines was ultimately trumped by the greater advantage of having a large and stable source of funds from retail depositors.

The growth of online lending and uncertainty about where the Fed will take interest rates have led some observers of the online lenders to ask if they will survive a changing rate environment.

Looking ahead, Oliver Wyman expects event-based platforms that can broadly support something like buying a house from end to end; commerce platforms for both consumers and businesses with credit, cash advance, trade finance, and FX; and comprehensive personal financial management that can dynamically switch between savings and lending and keep insurance updated to cover any new purchases. The consultants also expect financial services aimed at particular business segments like property managers or importers, and expansion of affinity platforms, presumably moving beyond checks with your favorite football team.

“We believe it is realistic for new business models to capture $150-250 billion of existing revenues. Whether this accrues to new entrants will depend upon the willingness of existing providers to develop alternative models and challenger brands.”

Oliver Wyman’s managing partner for financial services, Ted Moynihan, added: “Even if we do not expect a completely modular financial services sector, the way customers buy financial services and how firms deliver them is going to be transformed.”

Combining online and in-person sales processes can lead to happier customers and higher profits. Learn more in Our Digital Planet: See It, Click It, Touch It, Buy It

Comments

Time For Banks To Fight Back

Laurence Leyden

Metamora, Illinois, USA --- USA, Illinois, Metamora, Close-up of man photographing checque --- Image by © Vstock LLC/Tetra Images/CorbisThe financial services industry has suffered consecutive blows in recent years. The global banking crisis, new regulations, empowered customers calling the shots, not to mention a new breed of digital disruptors out to steal market share, have wreaked havoc on business as usual.  Profits have been slashed, reputations have been damaged, and management has been blindsided.

The only way forward is change – a change of business model, a change of mindset, and a change of ecosystem.  It’s a major upheaval, and not to be taken lightly. Banks in particular have operated largely the same way for the past 300 years. Management is facing a once in a generation reassessment of 21st century banking.

Changes in customer behaviour, including 24×7 omnichannel service expectations, lack of loyalty by current customers willing to exchange privacy for easier access to information, generational expectations of future customers – “screenagers” and tech savvy Millennials – and technology advances in cloud, mobile, real-time data, and predictive analytics make yesterday’s business model redundant.

Banking isn’t actually about banking anymore. It’s about enabling people’s lifestyles. That means you have to completely re-think how you engage with customers. The lessons are everywhere in parallel industries. Nokia, for example, thought it was about the phone, not the customer experience. Digitisation has both emboldened and empowered customers. Ignoring this fact is pointless. You need to cater to what consumers want. That means your back-end systems need to be integrated, consistent, contextualised and easy to deploy across any channel.

There’s also a whole new ecosystem required to support this new business model. Banks are facing disaggregation as they no longer own the end-to-end value chain, as well as disintermediation as new market entrants attack specific parts of the business (think Apple Pay). Smart banks are forging relationships with different and unexpected partners, such as mobile and retail organisations, even providing products from outside of the group where they are the best fit for a customer’s needs.  As I’ve said in one of my previous blogs, there’s a new mantra for modern banking: “Must play well with others.”

Old-fashioned banking is gone, and with it so have old style processes, business models and attitudes. Nobody wants to be the last dinosaur.  It’s time for the industry to dust itself off, and step up. Embracing change is easier – and far more profitable – than risking irrelevance in the widening digital divide.

I’ve briefly summarised only some of the key drivers of digital transformation, but you can find much more insight – including views from thought leaders in banks, insurance companies, fintech providers, challenger banks and aggregators – by downloading the eBook from the recent SAP Financial Services Forum: The digital evolution – As technology transforms financial services who will triumph.

It’s essential reading if you’re going to successfully fight back.

Comments

Laurence Leyden

About Laurence Leyden

Laurence is general manager of Financial Services, EMEA, at SAP and is primarily involved in helping banks in their transformation agenda. Prior to SAP he worked for numerous banks in Europe and Asia including Barclays, Lloyds Banking Group and HSBC. He regularly presents on industry trends and SAP’s banking strategy.

Why Banks Should Be Bullish On Integrating Finance And Risk Data

Mike Russo

Welcome to the regulatory world of banking, where finance and risk must join forces to banking executiveensure compliance and control. Today it’s no longer sufficient to manage your bank’s performance using finance-only metrics such as net income. What you need is a risk-adjusted view of performance that identifies how much revenue you earn relative to the amount of risk you take on. That requires metrics that combine finance and risk components, such as risk-adjusted return on capital, shareholder value added, or economic value added.

While the smart money is on a unified approach to finance and risk, most banking institutions have isolated each function in a discrete technology “silo” complete with its own data set, models, applications, and reporting components. What’s more, banks continually reuse and replicate their finance and risk-related data – resulting in the creation of additional data stores filled with redundant data that grows exponentially over time. Integrating all this data on a single platform that supports both finance and risk scenarios can provide the data integrity and insight needed to meet regulations. Such an initiative may involve some heavy lifting, but the advantages extend far beyond compliance.

Cashing in on bottom-line benefits

Consider the potential cost savings of taking a more holistic approach to data management. In our work with large global banks, we estimate that data management – including validation, reconciliation, and copying data from one data mart to another – accounts for 50% to 70% of total IT costs. Now factor in the benefits of reining in redundancy. One bank we’re currently working with is storing the same finance and risk-related data 20 times. This represents a huge opportunity to save costs by eliminating data redundancy and all the associated processes that unfold once you start replicating data across multiple sources.

With the convergence of finance and risk, we’re seeing more banks reviewing their data architecture, thinking about new models, and considering how to handle data in a smarter way. Thanks to modern methodologies, building a unified platform that aligns finance and risk no longer requires a rip-and-replace process that can disrupt operations. As with any enterprise initiative, it’s best to take a phased approach.

Best practices in creating a unified data platform

Start by identifying a chief data officer (CDO) who has strategic responsibility for the unified platform, including data governance, quality, architecture, and analytics. The CDO oversees the initiative, represents all constituencies, and ensures that the new data architecture serves the interests of all stakeholders.

Next, define a unified set of terms that satisfies both your finance and risk constituencies while addressing regulatory requirements. This creates a common language across the enterprise so all stakeholders clearly understand what the data means. Make sure all stakeholders have an opportunity to weigh in and explain their perspective of the data early on because certain terms can mean different things to finance and risk folks.

In designing your platform, take advantage of new technologies that make previous IT models predicated on compute-intensive risk modeling a thing of the past. For example, in-memory computing now enables you to integrate all information and analytic processes in memory, so you can perform calculations on-the-fly and deliver results in real time. Advanced event stream processing lets you run analytics against transaction data as it’s posting, so you can analyze and act on events as they happen.

Such technologies bring integration, speed, flexibility, and access to finance and risk data. They eliminate the need to move data to data marts and reconcile data to meet user requirements. Now a single finance and risk data warehouse can be flexible and comprehensive enough to serve many masters.

Join our webinar with Risk.net on 7 October, 2015 to learn best practices and benefits of deploying an integrated finance and risk platform.

Comments

About Mike Russo

Mike Russo, Senior Industry Principal – Financial Services Mike has 30 years experience in the Financial Services/ Financial Software industries. His experience includes stints as Senior Auditor for the Irving Trust Co., NY; Manager of the International Department at Barclays Bank of New York; and 14 years as CFO for Nordea Bank’s, New York City branch –a full service retail/commercial bank. Mike also served on Nordea’s Credit, IT, and Risk Committees. Mike’s financial software experience includes roles as a Senior Banking Consultant with Sanchez Computer Associates and Manager of Global Business Solutions (focused on sale of financial/risk management solutions) with Thomson Financial. Prior to joining SAP, Mike was a regulator with the Federal Reserve Bank in Charlotte, where he was responsible for the supervision of large commercial banking organizations in the Southeast with a focus on market/credit/operational risk management. Joined SAP 8years ago.

How Much Will Digital Cannibalization Eat into Your Business?

Fawn Fitter

Former Cisco CEO John Chambers predicts that 40% of companies will crumble when they fail to complete a successful digital transformation.

These legacy companies may be trying to keep up with insurgent companies that are introducing disruptive technologies, but they’re being held back by the ease of doing business the way they always have – or by how vehemently their customers object to change.

Most organizations today know that they have to embrace innovation. The question is whether they can put a digital business model in place without damaging their existing business so badly that they don’t survive the transition. We gathered a panel of experts to discuss the fine line between disruption and destruction.

SAP_Disruption_QA_images2400x1600_3

qa_qIn 2011, when Netflix hiked prices and tried to split its streaming and DVD-bymail services, it lost 3.25% of its customer base and 75% of its market capitalization.²︐³ What can we learn from that?

Scott Anthony: That debacle shows that sometimes you can get ahead of your customers. The key is to manage things at the pace of the market, not at your internal speed. You need to know what your customers are looking for and what they’re willing to tolerate. Sometimes companies forget what their customers want and care about, and they try to push things on them before they’re ready.

R. “Ray” Wang: You need to be able to split your traditional business and your growth business so that you can focus on big shifts instead of moving the needle 2%. Netflix was responding to its customers – by deciding not to define its brand too narrowly.

qa_qDoes disruption always involve cannibalizing your own business?

Wang: You can’t design new experiences in existing systems. But you have to make sure you manage the revenue stream on the way down in the old business model while managing the growth of the new one.

Merijn Helle: Traditional brick-and-mortar stores are putting a lot of capital into digital initiatives that aren’t paying enough back yet in the form of online sales, and they’re cannibalizing their profits so they can deliver a single authentic experience. Customers don’t see channels, they see brands; and they want to interact with brands seamlessly in real time, regardless of channel or format.

Lars Bastian: In manufacturing, new technologies aren’t about disrupting your business model as much as they are about expanding it. Think about predictive maintenance, the ability to warn customers when the product they’ve purchased will need service. You’re not going to lose customers by introducing new processes. You have to add these digitized services to remain competitive.

qa_qIs cannibalizing your own business better or worse than losing market share to a more innovative competitor?

Michael Liebhold: You have to create that digital business and mandate it to grow. If you cannibalize the existing business, that’s just the price you have to pay.

Wang: Companies that cannibalize their own businesses are the ones that survive. If you don’t do it, someone else will. What we’re really talking about is “Why do you exist? Why does anyone want to buy from you?”

Anthony: I’m not sure that’s the right question. The fundamental question is what you’re using disruption to do. How do you use it to strengthen what you’re doing today, and what new things does it enable? I think you can get so consumed with all the changes that reconfigure what you’re doing today that you do only that. And if you do only that, your business becomes smaller, less significant, and less interesting.

qa_qSo how should companies think about smart disruption?

Anthony: Leaders have to reconfigure today and imagine tomorrow at the same time. It’s not either/or. Every disruptive threat has an equal, if not greater, opportunity. When disruption strikes, it’s a mistake only to feel the threat to your legacy business. It’s an opportunity to expand into a different marke.

SAP_Disruption_QA_images2400x1600_4Liebhold: It starts at the top. You can’t ask a CEO for an eight-figure budget to upgrade a cloud analytics system if the C-suite doesn’t understand the power of integrating data from across all the legacy systems. So the first task is to educate the senior team so it can approve the budgets.

Scott Underwood: Some of the most interesting questions are internal organizational questions, keeping people from feeling that their livelihoods are in danger or introducing ways to keep them engaged.

Leon Segal: Absolutely. If you want to enter a new market or introduce a new product, there’s a whole chain of stakeholders – including your own employees and the distribution chain. Their experiences are also new. Once you start looking for things that affect their experience, you can’t help doing it. You walk around the office and say, “That doesn’t look right, they don’t look happy. Maybe we should change that around.”

Fawn Fitter is a freelance writer specializing in business and technology. 

To learn more about how to disrupt your business without destroying it, read the in-depth report Digital Disruption: When to Cook the Golden Goose.

Download the PDF (1.2MB)

Comments

Tags:

What Gen Z’s Arrival In The Workforce Means For Recruiters

Meghan M. Biro

Generation Z’s arrival in the workforce means some changes are on the horizon for recruiters. This cohort, born roughly from the mid-90s to approximately 2010, will be entering the workforce in four Hiring Generation Z words in 3d letters on an organization chart to illustrate finding young employees for your company or businessshort years, and you can bet recruiters and employers are already paying close attention to them.

This past fall, the first group of Gen Z youth began entering university. As Boomers continue to work well past traditional retirement age, four or five years from now, we’ll have an American workplace comprised of five generations.

Marketers and researchers have been obsessed with Millennials for over a decade; they are the most studied generation in history, and at 80 million strong they are an economic force to be reckoned with. HR pros have also been focused on all things related to attracting, motivating, mentoring, and retaining Millennials and now, once Gen Z is part of the workforce, recruiters will have to shift gears and also learn to work with this new, lesser-known generation. What are the important points they’ll need to know?

Northeastern University led the way with an extensive survey on Gen Z in late 2014 that included 16- through 19-year-olds and shed some light on key traits. Here are a few points from that study that recruiters should pay special attention to:

  • In general, the Generation Z cohort tends to be comprised of self-starters who have a strong desire to be autonomous. 63% of them report that they want colleges to teach them about being an entrepreneur.
  • 42% expect to be self-employed later in life, and this percentage was higher among minorities.
  • Despite the high cost of higher education, 81% of Generation Z members surveyed believe going to college is extremely important.
  • Generation Z has a lot of anxiety around debt, not only student loan debt, and they report they are very interested in being well-educated about finances.
  • Interpersonal interaction is highly important to Gen Z; just as Millennials before them, communicating via technology, including social media, is far less valuable to them than face-to-face communication.

Of course Gen Z is still very young, and their opinions as they relate to future employment may well change. For example, reality is that only 6.6% of the American workforce is self-employed, making it likely that only a small percentage of those expecting to be self-employed will be as well. The future in that respect is uncertain, and this group has a lot of learning to do and experiences yet ahead of them. However, when it comes to recruiting them, here are some things that might be helpful.

Generation Z is constantly connected

Like Millennials, Gen Z is a cohort of digital natives; they have had technology and the many forms of communication that affords since birth. They are used to instant access to information and, like their older Gen Y counterparts, they are continually processing information. Like Millennials, they prefer to solve their own problems, and will turn to YouTube or other video platforms for tutorials and to troubleshoot before asking for help. They also place great value on the reviews of their peers.

For recruiters, that means being ready to communicate on a wide variety of platforms on a continual basis. In order to recruit the top talent, you will have to be as connected as they are. You’ll need to keep up with their preferred networks, which will likely always be changing, and you’ll need to be transparent about what you want, as this generation is just as skeptical of marketing as the previous one.

Flexible schedules will continue to grow in importance

With the growth of part-time and contract workers, Gen Z will more than likely assume the same attitude their Millennial predecessors did when it comes to career expectations; they will not expect to remain with the same company for more than a few years. Flexible schedules will be a big part of their world as they move farther away from the traditional 9-to-5 job structure as work becomes more about life and less about work, and they’ll likely take on a variety of part time roles.

This preference for flexible work schedules means that business will happen outside of traditional work hours, and recruiters’ own work hours will, therefore, have to be just as flexible as their Gen Z targets’ schedule are. Companies will also have to examine what are in many cases decades old policies on acceptable work hours and business norms as they seek to not only attract, but to hire and retain this workforce with wholly different preferences than the ones that came before them. In many instances this is already happening, but I believe we will see this continue to evolve in the coming years.

Echoing the silent generation

Unlike Millennials, Gen Z came of age during difficult economic times; older Millennials were raised in the boom years. As Alex Williams points out in his recent New York Times piece, there’s an argument to be made that Generation Z is similar in attitude to the Silent Generation, growing up in a time of recession means they are more pragmatic and skeptical than their slightly older peers.

So how will this impact their behavior and desires as job candidates? Most of them are the product of Gen X parents, and stability will likely be very important to them. They may be both hard-working and fiscally savvy.

Sparks & Honey, in their much quoted slideshare on Gen Z, puts the number of high-schooler students who felt pressured by their parents to get jobs at 55 percent. Income and earning your keep are likely to be a big motivation for GenZ. Due to the recession, they also share the experience of living in multi-generational households, which may help considerably as they navigate a workplace comprised of several generations.

We don’t have all the answers

With its youngest members not yet in double digits, Gen Z is still maturing. There is obviously still a lot that we don’t know. This generation may have the opposite experience from the Millennials before them, where the older members experienced the booming economy, with some even getting a career foothold, before the collapse in 2008. Gen Z’s younger members may get to see a resurgent economy as they make their way out of college. Those younger members are still forming their personalities and views of the world; we would be presumptuous to think we have all of the answers already.

Generational analysis is part research, but also part theory testing. What we do know is that this second generation of digital natives, with its adaption of technology and comfort with the fast-paced changing world, will leave its mark on the American workforce as it makes its way in. As a result, everything about HR will change, in a big way. I wrote a post for my Forbes column recently where I said, “To recruit in this environment is like being part wizard, part astronaut, part diplomat, part guidance counselor,” and that’s very true.

As someone who loves change, I believe there has never been a more exciting time to be immersed in both the HR and the technology space. How do you feel about what’s on the horizon as it relates to the future of work and the impending arrival of Generation Z? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Social tools are playing an increasingly important role in the workplace, especially for younger workers. Learn more: Adopting Social Software For Workforce Collaboration [Video].

The post What Gen Z’s Arrival In The Workforce Means For Recruiters appeared first on TalentCulture.

Image: Bigstock

Comments