Wednesday, June 29, 2011
The importance of data quality in the operative management of counterparty risk.
Despite the efforts made by financial institutions to ensure compliance with the Basel 2, the internal audits and supervisory bodies highlight gaps in devices management customer risk.
Beyond the third scoring models in place to comply with regulations, financial institutions must continue efforts to ensure a sustainable level of quality control and so effectively and Reliable customer risk. If there are relatively simple and fast to improve data quality, only a comprehensive approach and equipped keeps this level over time and create a culture of quality in financial services, with the image of the industry.
The banking and financial regulation on the internal control of credit institutions and investment firms provides an outline of points to watch it should be integrated within the device management of counterparty risk.
To ensure compliance with regulations and ensure the proper level of control internally, branches wish to have the core quality indicators ensuring the validity of the information system risk management, validating the defined risk strategy and organization established to cover the risk client. The only way to dispose of is to use information systems to provide a quantitative analysis, but the relevance of these indicators is based on the quality of the IS.
System-level information, the presence of duplicates, unreliable links or combinations obsolescence of client identification are some examples of non-referential quality of the third most frequently cited. If they do not prevent the IF function, these problems can have a significant impact on end users and in particular the process of consolidating risks, commercial pilot, the fight against money laundering and grant decisions.