Former Bank Disruptor, Turned Ally, Talks Innovation

A career that began with upending traditional banks has given Alexander Sion perspective on what they can do to accelerate growth and innovation.

Sion is the director and co-head of Citibank’s D10X, which is part of Citigroup’s global consumer bank. Prior to that, he oversaw mobile banking and mobile channel governance for the consumer and community banking group as general manager of mobile at JPMorgan Chase & Co.

But before he worked at banks, he attacked them.

Sion co-founded “neobank” Moven in 2011 to focus on the financial wellness of consumers. The mobile bank disruptor has since become a vendor; in March, the company announced it would close retail accounts and pivot completely to enterprise software.

Bank Director recently spoke with Sion about how banks can create new models that generate growth, even as they face disruption and challenges. Below is a transcript that has been edited for clarity and length.

BD: How should banks think about innovation as it relates to their products, services, culture and infrastructure?

AS: Citi Ventures focuses on growth within a dynamic environment of change. It’s very difficult to achieve, and it’s very different from core growth with existing customers. But all innovation, particularly at incumbent firms, has to stem from a desire to grow.

Banks that struggle with growth, or even getting excited about innovation, need to ask themselves two sets of questions. No. 1: Do you have a deep desire to grow? Do you have aggressive ambitions to grow? No. 2: Is that growth going to be coming from new spaces, or spaces that are being disrupted? Or are you considering growth from existing customers?

If a bank is focused on existing customers, retention and efficiencies, it’s going to be hard to get excited about innovation.

BD: What’s the difference for banks between investing in tech and merely consuming it?

AS: They’re very different. If your bank is focused on growing within its core business, then you would lean more towards consuming tech. You’re building off of something that already exists and trying to make it better. You’ve got existing customers on existing platforms and you’re looking for more efficient ways to serve them, retain them or grow share.

If you’re interested in new growth and exploration — new segments, new products, new distribution channels — you might be more inclined to partner in those spaces. You have less to build from, less to leverage, and you’re naturally trying to figure things out, versus trying to optimize things that already exist.

BD: What kind of a talent or skills does a bank need for these types of endeavors? Do people with these skills already work at the bank?

AS: Existing bank employees know the product, they know the customer. At Citi, what we do at D10X and Citi Ventures is to try to expose bank employees to a different way of thinking, expand their mindset to possibilities outside the constraints of what or where the core model leans towards and think from a customer-centric view versus a product-centric view of the world.

The dynamics of customer behaviors are changing so much. There’s so much redefinition of how customers think about money, payments and their financial lives. Creating a more customer-centric view in existing employees that already have the deep knowledge and expertise of not only the product, but how the bank’s customers have evolved — that’s a very powerful combination.

BD: Why should a bank think about new markets or new customers if they found great success with their core?

AS: If most banks in the United States were honest with themselves, I think many would admit that they’re struggling with growth. America is a very banked place. The banking environment hasn’t changed all that much, and most banks are established. Their focus has been on existing customers, efficiency of the model and maybe deepening within that customer base.

But now, fintechs coming in. These commerce, payments and technology players are doing two things. No. 1: They are legitimately opening up new markets of growth and segments that weren’t reachable, or the traditional model wasn’t really addressing. No. 2, and maybe more important, is they are widening and changing the perspective on customer behavior. I don’t think any bank is immune from those two trajectories; your bank can be defensive or offensive to those two angles, but you’ve got to be one or the other.

BD: What are some lessons you or Citi has learned from its testing, refining and launching new solutions?

AS: Venture incubation has to be about learning. There’s a saying that every startup is a product, service or idea in search of a business model. The challenge that every existing incumbent bank will have is that we have existing business models.

Banks need to be able to test ideas very rapidly. It’s easy to test an idea and rapidly iterate when you’re in search of a business model. It’s much more difficult to test new ideas in an already-operating business model. A typical idea is debated internally, watered down significantly and will go through the wringer before the first customer gets to click on anything. In this kind of world, that’s a difficult strategy to win on.

Radius Bank CEO Talks LendingClub Acquisition

Last week, a $1.4 billion asset community bank sent shockwaves through the financial industry when it agreed to be acquired by national fintech, LendingClub Corp.

What most people are talking about is what LendingClub will gain — access to a cheaper and more secure funding, freedom from loan sponsorship fees it pays to its current partner, Salt Lake City-based WebBank, and the ability to wade into other traditional banking activities. But what does the deal mean for the acquisition target, Boston-based Radius Bank? And what does it say about the future of banking?

I caught up with Mike Butler, president and CEO of Radius Bancorp, to find out. The following excerpts from our conversation are edited for brevity, clarity and flow.

BD: What does this deal mean for Radius Bank’s business model?
MB: We think we’re a fintech company with a bank charter. And LendingClub is obviously a fintech that’s thinking about banking. When you bring them together, it’s a nice combination of two companies looking to do the same thing.

Radius will have an opportunity to plug itself into the infrastructure of LendingClub and leverage a lot more of what we’ve built to provide both of our clients with better products and services. We will be operating out of our Boston location here in the Innovation District, not only driving our direct-to-consumer business, but also our commitment to fintechs on the strategic partnership side. As part of our early discussions with LendingClub,there was a lot of interest in our banking-as-a-service model, and we think that’s a great opportunity for us to expand further.

What a lot of people haven’t been paying as much attention to are our commercial lines of business and the opportunity for us to provide LendingClub with the diversification on the loan side that everybody’s looking for.

BD: You mentioned that Radius will be plugging into LendingClub’s infrastructure. What are your thoughts on how the companies will meld their teams?
MB: We’re going to help accelerate what is a fairly strong knowledge base inside LendingClub about regulatory and traditional banking. So we get a chance to leapfrog based on our work and our relationship with our regulator.

This is nothing like a traditional bank merger where cost saves are part of it. Things like overlapping technology and elimination of headquarters or branches are all distractions inside a traditional merger that keep you away from leveraging the beauty of a combination.We’ve got an acute focus on our objective of delivering superior products and services into the marketplace, and we won’t be distracted by those other issues, which will allow us to be more successful.

BD: I know Radius is run a lot like a tech company. Did that play a part in the relationship with LendingClub?
MB: It’s a big part of it. There is a cultural connection in any good merger. We’ve hired a lot of people from outside the banking industry and are teaching them banking. LendingClub has a whole group of technology people that they are teaching banking to as well. So, there’s a lot of cultural connections with what we’re trying to accomplish.

Beyond the cultural connection of people and mission, our national deposit gathering with industry-leading online banking and the awards we win for our product, make us a perfect match for a company like LendingClub, who also does business nationally.

As fintechs have evolved, they’ve done a great job in proving that they can take some banking products and produce them in a much more consumer-friendly way. But I think what we always thought is there would be a rebundling, in which companies would recognize that operating within a bank charter allows them more flexibility and profitability to deliver their products and services to clients. This deal reflects that; it’s the first step in the rebundling of financial services.

BD: How have regulators responded to the deal?
MB: LendingClub has been in the de novo application process for over a year, predominantly with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. And I think it’s safe to say that the regulators were positioned to issue a de novo charter to LendingClub, but LendingClub felt — and did feel all along — that an acquisition was a faster path. We were lucky enough to find each other over six months ago to start talking about this. And so a lot of work has been done behind the scenes.

In our discussions about the opportunity for a fintech to buy a bank, we’re extremely confident that the Federal Reserve and the OCC — and both of their offices of innovation — recognize the inevitability of this type of event and want to participate in helping the future and being a part of it, rather than not being part of it. So, we’re excited and optimistic about how the process will go.

BD: Do you think your model might be a clearer path to getting fintechs involved in traditional banking activities?
MB: I obviously do; we’re a fintech company with a bank charter. I always said, “Why wouldn’t a fintech company want to acquire a bank that had forward-looking people and technology as a path to create what we see as the future of the industry?”

You’ve got to be careful about the number of banks that may be out there that are really prepared to help accelerate a fintech to get to the next level. That will be the challenge with  people pursuing this avenue, and that’s why we’re excited to be the first one. But I do think the combination of fintechs and banks will become more and more prevalent.

BD: Is this the start of a new trend?
MB: I think it is, and I think you’ll see a couple of things happen. I can’t tell the future, but I think there will be several more banks that have considered developing more digital technology accept and move forward on doing that. And I think you will see more fintechs taking a look at banks as a way to rebundle and provide themselves with a path to profitability.

I do think there will be many that wait to see how the approval process takes place. I don’t think there’ll be a rush to it. Matter of fact, we like our competitive advantage. Another year with a competitive advantage would be good for us. So that’s OK by us.

BD: What does this deal say about the future of banking?
MB: It signals that technology has to become the number one component and driver to acquiring and servicing clients at the level that today’s consumer demands.

If banks haven’t been believing that technology is going to be a big player, then they need to start developing something quicker, rather than later, as it relates to their own business — to think about how they will participate in the future.

What I tell bankers is that transforming a bank into a digital platform is not an insurmountable task. I hope that I’ve proven to people that it can be done, and it can be done very successfully.

Three Tech Questions Every Community Bank Needs to Ask

Community banks know they need to innovate, and that financial technology companies want to help. They also know that not all fintechs are the partners they claim to be.

Digitization and consolidation have reshaped the banking landscape. Smaller banks need to innovate: Over 70% of banking interactions are now digital, people of all ages are banking on their mobile devices and newer innovations like P2P payments are becoming commonplace. But not all innovations and technologies are perceived as valuable to a customer, and not all fintechs are great partners.

Community banks must be selective when investing their limited resources, distinguishing between truly transformative technologies and buzzy fads

As the executive vice president of digital and banking solutions for a company that’s been working closely with community banks for more than 50 years, I always implore bankers to start by asking three fundamental questions when it comes to investing in new innovations.

Does the innovation solve problems?
True innovation — innovation that changes people’s financial lives — happens when tech companies and banks work together to solve pain points experienced by banks and their customers every single day. It happens in places like the FIS Fintech Accelerator, where we put founders at the beginning of their startup’s journey in a room with community bank CTOs, so they can explain what they’re trying to solve and how they plan to do it.

Community banks don’t have the luxury of investing in innovations that aren’t proven and don’t address legitimate customer pain points. These institutions need partners who can road test new technologies to ensure that they’ll be easy to integrate and actually solve the problems they set out to address. These banks need partners who have made the investments to help them “fail fast” and allow them to introduce new ideas and paradigms in a safe, tested environment that negates risk.

Does the innovation help your bank differentiate itself in a crowded market?
In order to succeed, not every community or regional bank needs to be JPMorgan Chase & Co. or Bank of America Co. in order to succeed. But they need to identify and leverage ideas that bolster their value to their unique customer base. A bank with less than $1 billion in assets that primarily serves small, local businesses in a rural area doesn’t need the same technologies that one with $50 billion in assets and a consumer base in urban suburbs does. Community banks need to determine which innovations and technologies will differentiate their offerings and strengthen the value proposition to their key audiences.

For example, if a community bank has strong ties with local small to midsize business clients, it could look for differentiating innovations that make operations easier for small and medium businesses (SMBs), adding significant value for customers.

Banks shouldn’t think about innovation as a shiny new object and don’t need to invest in every new “disruption” brought to market. Instead, they should be hyper-focused on the services or products that will be meaningful for their customer base and prioritize only the tools that their customers want.

Does it complement your existing processes, people and practices?
When a bank evaluates a new type of technology, it needs to consider the larger framework that it will fit into. For example, if an institution’s main value proposition is delivering great customer service, a new highly automated process that depersonalizes the experience won’t be a fit.

That’s not to say that automation should be discarded and ignored by a large swath of banks that differentiate themselves by knowing their customers on a personal level; community banks just need to make sure the technology fits into their framework. Improving voice recognition technology so customers don’t have to repeat their account number or other personal information before connecting with a banker may be just the right solution for the bank’s culture and customers, compared to complete automation overhaul.

Choosing the right kinds of innovation investment starts with an outside-in perspective. Community banks already have the advantage of personal customer relationships — a critical element in choosing the right innovation investment. Ask customers what the bank could offer or adjust to make life easier. Take note of the questions customers frequently ask and consider the implications behind the top concerns or complaints your bank staff hear.

Can your bank apply its own brand of innovation to solve them? Community banks don’t need to reinvent the wheel to remain competitive, and can use innovation to their advantage. Think like your customers and give them what no one else will. And just as importantly, lean on a proven partner who understands the demands your bank faces and prioritizes your bank’s best interests.

Six Reasons to Have a Fintech Strategy


fintech-7-23-19.pngFinancial technology, or fintech, is rapidly and dramatically changing the financial services landscape, forcing banks to respond.

Banks are taking different approaches to capitalize on the opportunities presented by fintech, mitigating the risks and remaining competitive. Some of these approaches include partnering with fintech companies, investing in them, investing in internal innovation and development or creating or participating in fintech incubators and labs. Some banks focus on a single strategy, while some mix and match. But many have no plan at all.

The board of directors oversees the bank’s strategic direction and provides senior management with risk parameters to exercise their business discretion. Fintech must be part of that strategic direction. A thoughtful and deliberate fintech strategy is not only a best practice, it is a necessity. Here are six reasons why.

1. Fintech is Here to Stay. Bankers who have seen many trends come and go could be forgiven for initially writing off fintech as a fad. However, fintech is wholly reshaping the financial services industry through digital transformation, big data, cybersecurity and artificial intelligence. Fintech now goes far beyond core systems, enhancing capabilities throughout the bank.

2. Customers Expect It. Demographics are changing. Customers under 40 expect their banking services to be delivered by the same channels and at the same speed as their other retail and consumer services like online shopping and ride-hailing applications. Banks that cannot meet those expectations will force their younger customers to look elsewhere.

3. Competition and Differentiation. Community banks may not be able to compete with the largest banks on their technology spend, but they should be competitive with their peers. Developing and executing a thoughtful fintech strategy will enhance a bank’s identity and give them a competitive advantage in the marketplace.

4. Core Systems Management. Banks must have a strategy for their core banking systems. Replacing a legacy system can take years and requires extensive planning. Banks must weigh the maintenance expense, security vulnerability and reduced commercial flexibility of legacy systems against the cost, potential opportunities and long-term efficiencies of the next generation platforms.

5. Fiduciary Duty Demands It. A board’s fiduciary duty includes having a fintech strategy. The board is accountable to the bank’s shareholders and must create sustainable, long-term value. Director are bound by the fiduciary duty of care to act in the best interest of the bank. Given fintech’s rapid expansion, heightened customer expectations and the need to remain competitive, it is prudent and in the long-term best interest of the bank to have a fintech strategy.

6. Regulatory expectations. Boards are also accountable to bank regulators. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued a bulletin in 2017 to address the need for directors to understand the impact of new fintech activities because of the rapid pace of development. The OCC is not the only regulator emphasizing that insufficient strategic planning in product and service innovation can lead to inadequate board oversight and control. A deliberate fintech strategy from the board can direct a bank’s fintech activities and develop a risk management process that meets regulatory expectations.

The best fintech strategy for a bank is one that considers an institution’s assets, capabilities, and overall business strategy and allows it to stay competitive and relevant. Not having a fintech strategy is not an option.

“The Best Strategic Thinker in Financial Services”


strategy-7-19-19.pngThe country’s most advanced bank is run by the industry’s smartest CEO.

Co-founder Richard Fairbank is a relentless strategist who has guided Capital One Financial Corp. on an amazing, 25-year journey that began as a novel approach to designing and marketing credit cards.

Today, Capital One—the 8th largest U.S. commercial bank with $373.2 billion in assets—has transformed itself into a highly advanced fintech company with national aspirations.

The driving force behind this protean evolution has been the 68-year-old Fairbank, an intensely private man who rarely gives interviews to the press. One investor who has known him for years—Tom Brown, CEO of the hedge fund Second Curve Capital—says that Fairbank “has become reclusive, even with me.”

Brown has invested in Capital One on and off over the years, including now. He has tremendous respect for Fairbank’s acumen and considers him to be “by far, the best strategic thinker in financial services.”

I interviewed Fairbank once, in 2006, for Bank Director magazine. It was clear even then that he approaches strategy like Sun Tzu approaches war. “A strategy must begin by identifying where the market is going,” Fairbank said. “What’s the endgame and how is the company going to win?”

Fairbank said most companies are too timid in their strategic planning, and think that “it’s a bold move to change 10 percent from where they are.” Instead, he said companies should focus on how their markets are changing, how fast they’re changing, and when that transformation will be complete.

The goal is to anticipate disruptive change, rather than chase it.

“It creates a much greater sense of urgency and allows the company to make bold moves from a position of strength,” he said.

This aggressive approach to strategy can be seen throughout the company’s history, beginning in 1988 when Fairbank and a former colleague, Nigel Morris, convinced Richmond, Virginia-based Signet Financial Corp. to start a credit card division using a new, data-driven methodology. The unit grew so big so fast that it dwarfed Signet itself and was spun off in 1994 as Capital One.

The company’s evolution since then has been driven by a series of strategic acquisitions, beginning in 2005 when it bought Hibernia Corp., a regional bank headquartered in New Orleans. Back then, Capital One relied on Wall Street for its funding, and Fairbank worried that a major economic event could abruptly turn off the spigot. He sought the safety of insured deposits, which led not only to the Hibernia deal but additional regional bank acquisitions in 2006 and 2008.

Brown says those strategic moves probably insured the company’s survival when the capital markets froze up during the financial crisis. “If they hadn’t bought those banks, there are some people like myself who don’t think Capital One would be around today,” he says.

As Capital One’s credit card business continued to grow, Fairbank wanted to apply its successful data-driven strategy to other consumer loan products that were beginning to consolidate nationally. Over the last 20 years, it has become one of the largest auto lenders in the country. It has also developed a significant commercial lending business with specialties like multifamily real estate and health care.

Capital One is in the midst of another transformation, to a national digital consumer bank. The company acquired the digital banking platform ING Direct in 2011 for $9 billion and rebranded it Capital One 360. Office locations have fallen from 1,000 in 2010 to around 500, according to Sandler O’Neill, as the company refocuses its consumer banking strategy on digital.

When Fairbank assembled his regional banking franchise in the early 2000s, the U.S. deposit market was highly fragmented. In recent years, the deposit market has begun to consolidate and Capital One is well positioned to take advantage of that with its digital platform.

Today, technology is the big driver behind Capital One’s transformation. The company has moved much of its data and software development to the cloud and rebuilt its core technology platform. Indeed, it could be described as a technology company that offers financial services, including insured deposit products.

“We’ve seen enormous change in our culture and our society, but the change that took place at Capital One’s first 25 years will pale in comparison to the quarter-century that’s about to unfold,” Fairbank wrote in his 2018 shareholders letter. “And we are well positioned to thrive as technology changes everything.”

At Capital One, driving change is Fairbank’s primary job.

A Former Regulator Shares His Advice for Boards


regulator-6-13-19.pngDeveloping a positive relationship with regulators is important for any bank. How can banks foster this?

There’s no one better to answer this question than a former regulator.

Charles Yi served as general counsel of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. from 2015 to 2019, where he focused on policy initiatives and legislation, as well as the implementation of related rulemaking. He also served on the FDIC’s fintech steering committee.

In this interview, Yi talks about today’s deregulatory environment and shares his advice for banks looking to improve this critical relationship. He also explains the importance of a strong compliance culture and what boards should know about key technology-related risks.

Yi, now a partner at the law firm Arnold & Porter, in Washington, D.C., spoke to these issues at Bank Director’s Bank Audit & Risk Committees Conference. You can access event materials here.

BD: You worked at the FDIC during a time of significant change, given a new administration and the passage of regulatory relief for the industry. In your view, what do bank boards need to know about the changes underway in today’s regulatory environment?
CY: While it is true that we are in a deregulatory environment in the short term, bank boards should focus on prudent risk management, and safe and sound banking practices for the long term. Good fundamentals are good fundamentals, whether the environment is deregulatory or otherwise.

BD: What hasn’t changed?
CY: What has not changed is the cyclical nature of both the economy and the regulatory environment. Just as housing prices will not always go up, [a] deregulatory environment will not last forever.

BD: From your perspective, what issues are top of mind for bank examiners today?
CY: It seems likely that we are at, or near, the peak of the current economic cycle. The banking industry as a whole has been setting new records recently in terms of profitability, as reported by the FDIC in its quarterly banking profiles. If I [were] a bank examiner, I would be thinking through and examining for how the next phase of the economic cycle would impact a bank’s operations going forward.

BD: Do you have any advice for boards that seek to improve their bank’s relationship with their examiners?
CY: [The] same thing I would say to an examiner, which is to put yourself in the shoes of the other person. Try to understand that person’s incentives, pressures—both internal and external—and objectives. Always be cordial, and keep discussions civil, even if there is disagreement.

BD: What are some of the biggest mistakes you see banks make when it comes to their relationship with their examiner?
CY: Even if there is disagreement with an examiner, it should never become personal. The examiner is simply there to do a job, which is to review a bank’s policies and practices with the goal of promoting safety and soundness as well as consumer protection. If you disagree with an examiner, simply make your case in a cordial manner, and document the disagreement if it cannot be resolved.

BD: In your presentation at the Bank Audit & Risk Committees Conference, you talked about the importance of projecting a culture of compliance. How should boards ensure their bank is building this type of culture?
CY: Culture of compliance must be a focus of the board and the management, and that focus has to be communicated to the employees throughout the organization. The incentive structure also has to be aligned with this type of culture.

Strong compliance culture starts at the top. The board has to set the tone for the management, and the management has to be the example for all employees to follow. Everyone in the organization has to understand and buy into the principle that we do not sacrifice long-term fundamentals for short-term gain—which in some cases could end up being [a] long-term loss.

(Editor’s note: You can learn more about building a strong culture through Bank Director’s Online Training Series, Unit 16: Building a Strong Compliance Culture.)

BD: You served on the FDIC’s fintech steering committee, which—in a broad sense—examined technology trends and risks, and evaluated the potential impact to the banking system. Banks are working more frequently with technology partners to enhance their products, services and capabilities. What’s important for boards to know about the opportunities and risks here?
CY: Fintech is the next frontier for banking, and banks are rightly focused on incorporating technology into their mix of products and services. One thing to keep in mind as banks increasingly partner with technology service providers is that the regulators will hold the bank responsible for what the technology service provider does or fails to do with regard to banking functions that have been outsourced.

BD: On a final note: In your view, what are the top risks facing the industry today?
CY: I mentioned already the risks facing the industry as we contemplate the downhill side of the current economic cycle. One other issue that I know the regulators are and have been spending quite a lot of time thinking about is cybersecurity. What is often said is that a cyber event is not a question of if, but when. We can devote volumes of literature [to] talking about this issue, but suffice for now to say that it is and will continue to be a focus of the regulators.

Arnold & Porter was a sponsor of Bank Director’s Bank Audit & Risk Committees Conference.

What Does Digital Transformation Mean Today?


transformation-4-17-19.pngFaced with macro-economic pressures, technology adoption decisions and quickly shifting customer expectations, banks are challenged in how to respond. Or if a response is even necessary.

But why?

For hundreds of years banks have existed to facilitate commerce, serving as a gateway to exchange and store value. Customers historically have chosen their bank for a combination of two factors: trust and convenience.

Financial institutions thrived by putting themselves at the heart of communities and centers of commerce. Branch networks expanded to be close to their customers, serving communities with products tailored to their customer footprint.

Then came the internet in the 1990s, and banks began launching online banking. By 2006, 80 percent of banks offered internet banking. Many banks believed they could begin to close bank branches, transitioning from fixed-cost distribution centers to low-cost digital channels.

But when it came to financial advice and large transactions, consumers still prefer branch locations. Instead of replacing costly branches with low-cost digital channels, banks are now faced with the upkeep of ever-changing customer expectations across multiple channels.

Pressure From Fintechs
The problem right now is traditional revenue from interest rate spreads are being strained by specialist digital providers. Instead of offering a breadth of services to customers, fintechs develop one product and continuously refine the single product to the user’s needs.

But how can a bank compete and offer the services customers want with the specialization fintechs can deliver across multiple channels?

The answer is open banking—a collaborative model in which banking data is shared with third-party services across an ecosystem of trusted providers.

As commentator and consultant Chris Skinner states in his book, “Digital Human,” “A bank that is truly into their digital journey would never build anything, but would curate everything.”

A digital transformation begins with extending bank capabilities through APIs (application programming interfaces), which open up an opportunity for banks and their customers to partner with fintechs.

But customers don’t want to vet hundreds of fintech startups. Instead, they’re looking for trust and convenience in their bank, which is the bank’s biggest advantage. While not immediately visible to customers, an important aspect of trust is the bank’s continuing role in ensuring third-party solutions handle their data securely and are in compliance with regulations.

Financial data is the currency of the next generation of banks, and the value of that currency is unlocked when segments are broken down and replaced with a platform. Only at a platform level can you extract the intelligence to deliver actionable, contextualized experiences for your customer.

In many ways, banks are already platforms, with multiple product lines around deposits, lending and insurance. APIs allow these platforms to interconnect, combining data to provide a complete financial picture of their customer. Even with the rise of technology, consumer surveys have shown they trust their banks more than Google and Amazon combined.

Customers want their bank to be at the center of their financial decisions.

The late Walter Wriston, former chairman and CEO of Citicorp said in the 1970s, “Information about money is as valuable as the money itself.”

Measuring Long-Term Success
Long-term success will be measured by the ability to refocus away from transactions in favor of becoming a trusted advisor. Banks that invest in gaining a deeper understanding of their customers’ financial lifestyle through rich data analytics can begin providing personalized, contextual advice to their customers—a valuable service customers will pay for.

Banks don’t have to embark on this journey alone. Institutions should look to technology partners equipped to allow them to think bigger by offering a customizable solution.

The bank of the future looks very similar to the bank of today—focused on core values of trust and convenience.

The Future of Banking: Crypto, Blockchain and Fintech


banking-4-17-19.pngInscribed in the first block of the first blockchain ever created are the words: “The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks,” referring to the London newspaper’s lead story of the day.

This edition of the newspaper is now one of the most valuable crypto collectibles to date. It’s hard to deny the symbolism in the covert message encoded into the genesis block of the bitcoin blockchain.

That message signals problems in our modern fiat financial system while introducing a novel system that replaces centralized institutional trust with a system relying on decentralized cryptographic trust.

Today, bitcoin has celebrated its 10th birthday, despite critics predicting its doom since its inception. With bitcoin came another suite of technologies collectively known as blockchain.

Despite the actual word “blockchain” not appearing in the original white paper published under the pseudonym Satoshi Nakamoto in October 2008, it has undoubtedly become one of the most talked about buzzwords in technology and banking, as well as the larger world of finance.

Blockchain is generally considered to be a subcategory of distributed ledger technology (DLT), referring to its distributed architecture in which there is no central point of attack, making it less vulnerable to hacks, fraud and manipulation.

A quick online search of the word “blockchain” will yield a wide array of differing definitions, because there is currently no universally recognized definition—something the International Standards Association is working toward. One way to define blockchain is as a shared ledger designed to produce immutable records through cryptographic techniques that facilitate the processing of transactions and tracking of assets.

Part of what makes blockchain so attractive is that it’s considered a general purpose technology, according to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, with many potential applications across industry verticals.

The primary application for the technology thus far has been within financial services—specifically, payments.

Banking on Blockchain
A study performed by Accenture found nine out of 10 banking executives saying their bank is exploring the use of blockchain in payments, the most prevalent use being cross-border transfers.

But reaping the promised benefits of blockchain will require “fostering an uncommon coordination among banks,” according to Accenture’s study. The value is in the network—in collaboration. Examples of these interoperable networks between banks and corporations globally are using private enterprise blockchains, or DLT, like R3’s Corda platform and Hyperledger fabric.

Major benefits from blockchain include lower administrative costs and shorter settlement times. One bank that has sought to offer these benefits to its clients by leveraging blockchain technology is Signature Bank. The New York-based commercial bank launched its own blockchain-based platform for real-time, 24/7 payments on Jan. 1, 2019.

Signature’s platform is interesting, considering some alternatives can take several days to clear and can be unavailable on weekends, for instance.

While many of the largest banks in the U.S. may be exploring blockchain and distributed ledger technologies, and filing a litany of patents, cryptocurrency is listed as both a risk and competitive threat in some of their annual reports. Meanwhile, forward-looking community banks have embraced cryptocurrencies and seen their balance sheets improve with it, such as San Diego, California-based Silvergate Bank.

“The Times They Are A-Changin”
Cryptocurrency is only one of many risks cited in the annual reports of major banks.
The rise in the number and nature of fintech firms has brought an explosion of innovation and competition.

Since the financial crisis, younger generations are growing up without the same relationship with banks that their parents and grandparents had, which has helped propel the growth of fintech companies focused on convenience and customized digital experiences.

This has paved the way for many fintech startups to excel in the financial services market. These companies are disrupting the status quo by providing a user experience that quickly adapts to the needs and desires of their customers.

With the genesis of bitcoin and blockchain, and the explosion in fintech, one thing is certain. In the words of Bob Dylan, the times they are a-changin’. And they’re changing in financial services on an unprecedented scale.

Bridging The Gap Between Retail & Business Banking



Speed, ease of use and convenience define the customer experience today for both retail and commercial clients. In this video, First Data’s Christian Ofner and Eric Smith explain what retail and commercial customers expect from banks today—and you might be surprised to find they have similar needs. They also share how banks should enhance the experience.

  • Strengthening the Retail Experience
  • Enhancing Commercial Clients’ Experience
  • Technologies Banks Should Consider
  • Evaluating Your Bank’s Digital Strategy

Strengthening Customer Engagement



Fintech companies are laser-focused on improving consumer engagement—but there is room for traditional banks to gain ground, according to Craig McLaughlin, president and CEO of Extractable. In this video, he shares three ways banks can strategically approach improving the customer experience at their own institutions.

  • The One Trait That Sets Fintechs Apart
  • Improving the Customer Experience
  • Understanding Digital Strategy