Friday, April 5, 2013
Friday, September 30, 2011
In this context, the establishment of collective audit providers could help save time and productivity for each establishment.
This optimization of the audit activities outsourced more and more interested in the Inspection Branch of the big banks. And working groups were formed in a pooled between several banks in order to define the terms of planning, implementation and monitoring of audits of providers. The working group is considering the establishment of a governance structure, a plan of joint audit and risk mapping for the shared use of audits should be part of common control risks of each institution without failing to respect the privacy principles of each Bank.
However, to date, nothing has yet been clearly defined and different approaches are envisaged for the implementation of shared audits:
* Audits carried out by joint team delegations
* Audits shared between delegations (each delegating the responsibility of an audit)
* Audits by authorized third parties
what could be the conclusions of this working group?
The operational implementation of a system audit activities outsourced based on audits shared between the delegating or on a joint team delegations, would seem the most logical and easiest to implement. But that solution presents risks to lead to potential conflicts of interest on the conduct of audits, the findings and the implementation of action plans. Thus, differences between schools could undermine the legitimate operation of the audits. The conduct of audits by authorized third parties, outside each bank, would then appear as the preferred solution as long as you specify the responsibility of each institution's contractual terms.
But should we in this case provide auditing services of third parties mandated?
Indeed, in the case of annual monitoring of outsourced activities, external auditors could be considered as service providers intellectual Internal Control. The control activity is necessarily "essential" it therefore falls within the scope of activities to be audited!
Under these conditions, the task of the Working Group seems difficult to reach consensus on a pragmatic and operative in order not to deport the weight of outsourced activities on control functions.
The use of outsourcing is a growing phenomenon that is a strategic choice for enterprises, generally guided by the objective of streamlining production costs and improve profitability. Did not escape this trend, banks are also appeal to external structures in order to give them in exchange for remuneration of non-strategic or unprofitable. For example, check processing is an activity often outsourced by the banks because it creates a significant load input and low added value.
But beware; the outsourcing of an activity does not prevent its control.
Indeed, 2007 orders involve clarifying the controls to be installed on the outsourced activities "essential." These changes are intended to ensure the principle of "no transfer of responsibility" of the Bank's external service provider. In this context, banks should review their internal control systems with a view to measuring, monitoring and control of risks related to outsourced activities. The controls must include details of:
* A guarantee of quality for normal service.
* The establishment of a plan for continuity of service by the service (commitment of recovery time).
* The protection of confidential information.
De facto, the outsourcing should result in a written contract between the provider and establishing external client. The contract shall contain a clause giving the right to regular audits and a statement of the steps taken by the continuous monitoring and periodic monitoring of outsourced activities. In view of these regulations, what are the good practices observed in the square as part of outsourced providers to common? Given the fairly concentrated market providers, banks often resort to common providers. For example include BRINKS Evolution for transporting money or Experiance to check processing draining a very large market share on their respective activities.
Sunday, August 7, 2011
The TCI should be calculated and stored in the SI as the implementation of the operation to be exploited in the management tools of the trade act. This would also ensure consistency of refunds to the dashboard used by senior management. Of course, this also requires a vertical integration of all impacted reference: Product size / dimension structure / customer dimension. This target is difficult to achieve in the short term, however, according to their priorities and constraints, banks can already move to intermediate systems. For example, the establishment of an exchange system between the distribution and the calculation system (ALM) would ensure the inclusion of the real characteristics in the calculation of TCI. Although the TCI is not preserved, it can be recalculated to the same using the same parameters (market data, contract data), known at the time of the request. Thus, the joint calculations a priori / a posteriori would be consistent.
Other improvements could be made to the establishment of a TCI approach. For example, the business may wish to have a global vision allowing him to integrate the risk profile of the customer in managing the commercial act.
Propose systems to measure the performance of activity based on risk and include operating costs would also be an area for improvement.
The work of coherence and sophistication will make TCI a real management tool for profitability and not just a constraint for a single measurement.
To ensure proper use and membership of teams, schools must conduct a deep reflection on their process of diffusion of ICT and develop their information and their organization to ensure consistency of refunds. The objective is to obtain a homogeneous and TCI shared by all players.
Efforts should be worn on the establishment of committees (awards committee or other governing body) that would go all the advantages / disadvantages of a product and this on all axes. Indeed it is important to highlight the difficulty or ease of marketing a product: product carrier, product not meeting customer expectations, discontinued product, but also the financial aspects: produces little or very profitable ...
This information will then be shared by all to define a more accurate pricing. The bonus / penalty that can be set up in response to market developments with a view to remain competitive in the standards of the place must be clear communication activities to facilitate their adoption. The aim is to involve all stakeholders in the pricing and impose the CIT, not as a constraint but as a guarantee of profitability indicators like credit risk.
These elements will allow policy makers to reorient trade policy or financial institution on the basis of cyclical and structural analysis while ensuring compliance with the policy set.
Course to ensure the homogeneity of the refunds should be defined processes to close the dashboard rather than in their broadcasts, but in their preparation. To do the bridges between the different functions must be implemented, supported by clear governance principles.
In practice, agencies often complain of excessive levels. They face the price war generated a better distribution of offers on the market and often use the waiver system to maintain or expand their portfolios client. Salespeople do not see a sign in the TCI arguing that the competitiveness of a TCI unit operation does not enhance the profitability of the customer relationship as a whole.
The profit margin is very important to implement the development strategy of the Bank. Yet the results are often heterogeneous because of the multiplicity of stakeholders and the synchronism of the calculations. Thus during the formation of the commercial offer, the account manager is based on a grid giving along different axes (rate type, maturity, options ...) the rate of the product. This grid does not know the actual margin generated by the operation. This is calculated a posteriori (stock) with the exact characteristics of the operation. This discrepancy explains in part the discrepancies in the results presented by the commercial world versus the financial sphere.
Senior management must have coherent and unique dashboards. This coherence can only come from a good articulation of the calculations a priori / a posteriori. It is therefore necessary to develop processes and tools that do not just needed for each function (ALM, Controlling, development) but that cover, in aggregate, all the needs.
Saturday, August 6, 2011
Today the majority of banks have developed an approach by internal transfer rates. The approach differs depending on the size, the activity of institutions and the role of the ALM (Asset Liability Management or ALM).
However, she always intended to measure the contribution of the financial and commercial sphere to the MNI (and GNP).
The TCI is the center of trade between these two spheres, it is the price at which business units, respectively, puts or refinancing their resources and jobs to the ALM.
The TCI is usually built for a loan from the backing of the rate of "flux flow" of the operation, taking into account the refinancing costs, plus the cost of contract options (caps, floors ...) or customer (option prepayment ...). Thus, the performance of transactions by trading is not affected by changes in the market because the risk is transferred to ALM.
CFOs have responded to the problems of development of ICT and the processes that are derived are now under control. However, refunds are made which are not always effective to control the performance of the Bank.
To do this, banks must transform TCI management tool of the act by providing a commercial return consistent at all levels (commercial, financial, decision-maker).
Ideally ICT must be used at the proposal stage to project the commercial profitability of the customer. Indeed to drive the business effectively, we must take into account all the elements that run with the client's portfolio. But if the TCI enables sales to act on the elements they control (as the financial risks are carried by the ALM), it does not enhance the overall customer or business. Similarly, agency officials must be able to make the same tests at their level.
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
The cross-selling as a catalyst for customer loyalty: state of the art of good practices. Faced with increased competition, banks and insurance companies must continually strengthen relationships with their customers. While 1 / 3 of the people have accounts in several banks (IREQ 2006), the challenge is to become the main bank or insurance client.
One way to be the leader is to increase the rate of multi-ownership: the interest is to provide diversified products to the customer to capture it while ensuring sufficient profitability during its life cycle. That is to increase revenue per customer (cheaper than acquiring new customers) by increasing the products held by clients and services sold.
The transformation of the sector as the penetration of bank assurance, the Assurfinance, and banking-real estate agency promotes more cross-selling. Through tailor-made pricing, offers and services can be complementary and beneficial to customers who already own one or more products and thus meet all their needs (offer a discount on the purchase of a coupled auto and home insurance or credit coupled with car insurance, etc ...)
The additional sales are based on an understanding of the client, and updated as and when relationships are maintained. They depend on the life of the client's potential risk (credit risk) and value ("life time value"). The option to develop the relationship with customers most willing to deepen and extend this relationship is vital.
To stimulate the use and income of customers, relationship marketing must move towards a proactive logic by exploiting business opportunities with specific offers that will be triggered through key moments in the client's life: a real estate purchase, a change of vehicle a termination, etc .... These can be transmitted to the client, on the one hand, in "push" or direct marketing (eg on the web, it displays the customer area of the loan amount for which he is eligible, without having make any loan application), and second, in "pull" or sales rebound as enjoy a call from the client to provide a product or service selected by the system depending on its characteristics.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Boursorama is a convincing example of this model. Since its merger with Societe Generale, Boursorama is no longer confined to the business broker but has become a real bank. However, if the online bank has no place as an independent financial organization, recent operations have shown that banking online is now essential to any actor with a network. Newcomers in the banking landscape have understood. Insurers having embarked on the adventure of assurfinance began by acquiring or developing a range of online banking in addition to the existing branch network.
The acquisition of online banks by banks should not be seen as a way to computerize the customer relationship. Indeed, banks are now looking to boost their network by opening branches. The agency is the best way to attract customers, offering Internet users the opportunity to simplify the management of current operations.
Nevertheless, some players have managed to build a profitable model around online banking service. This model is based on tactical development articulated in two phases:
(I) a startup focused on specialized and profitable activities. For example, the tactic is to capture customer deposits and generate commissions on high value added activities (securities, life insurance ...) for which the customer is willing to pay.
(Ii) extension to activities of daily bank (current accounts, credit card) which are less profitable, because requiring investment in major infrastructure, earn little and are subject to very strong competition.
In their early days, online banks were intended to attract a large clientele by proposing a new model of bank: Account Management possible at any time and from any computer connected to the Internet, with an offer "discount". Using the Internet as the only interface between the bank and the customer had in fact enable substantial savings, both in terms of personnel but also capital assets. Thus, online banks offer rates were very aggressive on a range of services equivalent to that of a traditional bank. However, they failed to offer prices low enough to stand out, to forget the absence of physical relationship between the customer and the banker, and succeed in capturing some of the customers used to a classical model.
Weakened by the explosion of the Internet bubble in 2000, online banks could not withstand the intensity of competition in the banking sector, especially as traditional banks, although lagging behind the banks line, developed or acquired equivalent services. The interest of a pure player in online banking has therefore been questioned since it was possible to combine customer relationship in a network, and maximum flexibility via the Internet. The only entities that have managed to sustain their existence are those that are backed by a bank, maintaining an independent identity. This allowed them to diversify their services, taking advantage of operational know-how and organizational parent companies and thus offer very attractive prices.
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
To understand the current financial crisis, it is good to keep in mind the following concepts:
- The real business of a bank is to make the transformation: to transform short-term resources into long-term jobs. By definition, a bank is illiquid. The maturity of its assets is always longer than its liabilities, that resources are deposits of customers or funds borrowed from the market. Transform the asset into a negotiable instrument in any market changes nothing; it merely shifts the problem.
A bank and the banking system generally work only on trust: if the bank cannot find resources on the market, or if depositors fearing for their money, liquidity risk materialize. You can create all the regulations, regulations, national supervisory bodies and international as you want, it makes no difference.
And on this point, the structure of bank capital is of little influence.
On 29 September, Dexia and Natixis lost over 25% in stock. DEXIA is owned by Belgian public authorities and the CDC, NATIXIS is not owned banks, mutual insurance group, and Caisses d'Epargne, in the bosom of the CDC still. These are no short-term shareholders or speculators eager to immediate profits.