2018 Technology Survey: Enhancing Board Know-How


tech-survey-8-27-18.pngTechnology and strategy are inextricably linked in today’s evolving digital economy. Unfortunately, bank boards—tasked with the oversight of the bank, including its long-term performance in a changing competitive environment—continue to struggle to wrap their hands around technological change and its implications. Seventy-nine percent of directors and executives say their board needs to enhance its level of technological expertise, according to the 2018 Technology Survey, sponsored by CDW.

Sixty-three percent indicate the board should better understand how to tie technology to bank strategy, and 60 percent say the board should better understand how the bank should invest in technology—a key concern, given rising budgets and an increasing number of technology vendors working with banks.

But the survey also indicates that directors have made strides in their focus on technology, both personally and as a board. Half say the board focuses on technology at every board meeting, up from 42 percent two years ago.

And the directors and executives participating in the survey indicate that they’re better users of their bank’s technology. More than three-quarters say they personally use their bank’s mobile and online channels, compared to 51 percent three years ago. With the onus on banks to enhance customers’ digital experience in the age of Amazon, a better understanding of digital through personal experience can only serve to improve these banks’ strategic direction.

The 2018 Technology Survey is comprised of the responses of 161 directors, chief executive officers, high-level technology executives and other senior executives at banks above $250 million in assets.

Additional Findings:

  • Sixty-five percent believe their bank has the products, services and delivery methods to meet the needs and demands of today’s customers.
  • Eighty-three percent say improving the user experience on digital channels is a goal for their bank over the next two years, followed by improving account onboarding (73 percent) and adding more features to the bank’s mobile app (71 percent).
  • Despite the buzz around Amazon’s Alexa, just 21 percent say integrating with that or a similar external platform is a near-term goal.
  • Forty-five percent say they plan to add more branches that will be smaller in size. Thirty-seven percent plan no changes to their bank’s branch footprint. More than half plan to update technology used in branches over the next two years, and 47 percent plan to add more technology in the branch. One-third plan to upgrade ATMs.
  • At least half of respondents indicate a need for significant improvement in their bank’s use of data analytics and business process automation.
  • Sixty percent indicate their bank has been increasing the number of staff focused on technology and innovation, and 55 percent have a high-level executive focused on innovation.
  • Sixty percent say their management team and board are open to working with newer technology startups. The typical bank, according to the survey, works with a median of seven technology vendors, including its core processor.
  • Sixty-one percent say their board has brought in relevant bank staff to better educate itself about technology. Twenty-nine percent have a board-level technology committee that regularly presents to the board.
  • Cybersecurity remains the top issue focused on by the board, at 93 percent.

To view the full results to the survey, click here.

How Switching to a Boutique Core Enhanced CNB’s Customer Experience


technology-8-15-18.pngThe bulk of the banking industry may work with the big three core providers—FIS, Fiserv or Jack Henry & Associates—but some banks are finding that smaller, boutique providers can be the better fit. That’s the case for $3 billion asset CNB Financial Corp., based in Clearfield, Pennsylvania, which made the switch from its big core provider a little more than two years ago to one that’s smaller, nimbler and more willing to collaborate with its client banks.

“We’re not a change agent by any means, but we’re constantly changing and evolving to what we believe the clients need and what our markets want, and when we talked with our prior provider, they didn’t have that same impetus,” says CNB CEO Joe Bower. “Customer experience wasn’t their focus.”

So the bank began a long and exhaustive search, spending 18 months exploring 11 different core providers, including the big three. COCC, a client-owned, cooperative core platform in Southington, Connecticut, won the contract.

The ability for CNB to be part-owners of COCC played a role in that decision: As owners, the provider’s clients have a larger voice, so advocating for a new feature is an easier process than CNB experienced with its former provider, which would demand money up front and put the request in a queue. Research and development on new features was charged by the hour. The process was slow and expensive. Enhancements to CNB’s mobile banking platform were expected to be a two-year project with the old core provider, for example.

Now, “action begins to take place almost immediately,” says Bower.

This isn’t because CNB is a bigger fish for COCC—Bower says the core provider is just as responsive to smaller client institutions with good ideas. And any new feature is then available to all COCC users, so everyone benefits.

And Bower says COCC’s proactive approach to innovation and the deployment of new technology played a role in its selection as CNB’s core. “We were looking for somebody [that] wasn’t stuck in their ways or too large to make major changes within their structure,” he says.

Perhaps because of this, COCC is open to working with startup technology providers and is nimble enough to vet them quickly. COCC directly partners with startups, and along with COCC’s own capabilities, it helps CNB get new features to market more quickly. For a technology company that’s not one of COCC’s partners, but rather the bank’s vendor, the core still coordinates integration efforts. CNB has experienced at least two fairly large integrations with outside technology firms—a commercial underwriting platform and a new peer-to-peer (P2P) payments solution.

“When new ideas surface—whether it’s from us or a small fintech startup—they’re nimble enough to take a look at it, review it and within months, as opposed to years, if we all feel like it’s a direction we ought to take, it happens, it comes aboard,” says Bowers.

Converting to COCC from its older core was more challenging in today’s 24/7 economy. CNB started fresh, converting everything—including its online and mobile banking platform—and timing this to ensure minimal disruption to customers was difficult. The core conversion began on a Friday in May 2016, and the bank and COCC only had until the following Monday to work out any major bugs. While the initial conversion went off without a hitch, dealing with smaller issues impacting a small percentage of customers at a time—problems with money transfers, incorrect statement descriptions, misapplied fees—kept bank staff busy long after the initial implementation.

“I would estimate close to 12 full months where your eye comes off the ball a bit in regards to new client acquisition, continuing to grow your assets—some of that has to take a back seat for a while,” says Bower.

Despite the conversion headaches, all-in-all Bowers says it was worth the hassle. “We’re a much better company today than we were before the transition,” he says. “Because of our ability to offer more programs, have better say in what happens with our core processor, and what services and what our client actually sees is something we [now] have some control [over].”

And the improvements aren’t just due to working with a core provider more suited to CNB’s business and strategy. Providing a better customer experience was a key driver in its decision to move to COCC, but the bank did some soul searching and realized that like its former core provider, it wasn’t thinking through the customer journey, either. So, roughly four years ago, Bowers put an executive in charge of the customer experience, promoting Leanne Kassab, who has a background in marketing, to a new position as executive vice president of customer experience and marketing. It’s position more commonly referred to as a customer experience officer, or CXO. In her role, she maps out every experience a customer could have with the bank to identify where to improve each process. She also oversees internal and external communications, and is in charge of the bank’s marketing department and call center.

Kassab also established employee task force groups to focus on different areas of the customer experience—the bank’s branches, commercial banking, new customers and existing clients—as well as employee training. These groups have been so successful that the bank’s human resources head borrowed the idea to create groups focused on the employee experience.

The bank has also changed its training programs to focus more on the client, rather than solely on operations. “We want the employees to understand the first onus on us is customer satisfaction,” says Bowers.

Bowers admits that better communication could have improved the relationship with its former provider, and his team actively works to keep the communication lines open with COCC. The bank participates in a commercial-banking roundtable to weigh in on future projects and frequently participates in user group meetings. Bowers has biannual conversations with COCC executives.

But perhaps most importantly, CNB chose to focus a junior executive on fostering a direct relationship through weekly communication with COCC. She’s newer to banking, and Bower says this fresh perspective is a benefit. She runs the bank’s e-solutions, managing what the customer sees online. Because of this, Bowers believes her perspective on new products, services and ideas inherently includes what the customer reaction could be—and she can communicate that to COCC.

Putting more effort into communicating with its core provider has created a more fruitful relationship, says Bower. “They understand where we want to be, and they understand where we think they ought to be in the world of banking today.”

Why Management and Directors Need to Consider Blockchain in Overall Digital Strategy


blockchain-8-15-18.pngIf we think back to what we were doing in 1994, we would say we were using a gigantic cell phone, just hearing about the internet, addicted to the fax machine, and just starting to use email. Fast forward, and we are with blockchain where we were with the internet and email in 1994.

After the sale of Mechanics Bank in 2015 and subsequently leaving my role as CEO, I embarked upon a journey that has forever changed how I think; how I problem solve; how I view the boardroom; the secret society of the c-suite and most importantly, how I view technology, people and process.

There is a convergence of social media, digital retail, robotics, artificial intelligence, wearables, blockchain, Internet of Things, big data and advanced analytics. We must think about the big picture and how all of these pieces fit together in overall corporate and organizational digital strategy.

Forbes recently reported the top 20 largest businesses in the world, including top financial institutions, are all now exploring blockchain. These same companies are simultaneously evaluating and implementing the use of big data, predictive analytics, artificial intelligence and machine learning.

Since 90 percent of goods in global trade are transported through the shipping industry supply chain, let’s use the announced partnership of Maersk and IBM as our first example.

As you may know, Maersk is the largest shipping container company in the world, transporting 15 percent of the world GDP each year.

The shipping industry supply chain consists of:

  • Land transportation brokers
  • Customs brokers
  • Ports
  • Freight forwarders
  • Governments
  • Ocean carriers

Like many bank functions in the U.S., global trade functions are antiquated. The industry is still largely paper intensive with organizational silos and a heavy reliance on Excel. A typical transaction can take up to 30 people and more than 200 communications to complete. Maersk is not immune to these same challenges, but recently embarked on its own digital transformation through two partnerships:

  • Microsoft Enterprise Services to move five regional datacenters to the cloud, improve IT performance, bolster customer services, and reduce operational risk;
  • IBM to improve transparency and efficiency, with complete visibility of tracking millions of container shipments each year.

Each participant in a supply chain ecosystem can view the progress through the supply chain. They can also see the status of customs documents, view bills of lading and other data. This will all be done using blockchain technology and smart contracts.

So, what does all of this mean? Let’s take a look at how this all ties in to what I call “the digital innovation melting pot” and why we as bankers must pay attention:

In this video, the bank is partnered with the shipping, wearable device, driverless car, identity, virtual agent/chatbot, social media, social media influencers, predictive analytics, retailer, airline, and hotel industries. These 11 industries are working together to offer products, complete transactions and improve the customer experience with little in-person human interaction.

My view of blockchain, innovation and its place in the new digital world is from my role as a CEO who’s been accountable to shareholders, responsible for the bottom line. Though the top banks in the country have caught on to this trend, many banks are still in the dark ages, plagued by denial, lack of innovation knowledge and the right talent.
Many institutions still have bricked-up infrastructure, engrained in the mentality that “this is the way it’s always been done,” with a lot of outdated, dysfunctional and inefficient processes, policies and procedures.

The disregard of digital technology disruption and innovation is like a termite infestation that destroys the structure if you don’t pay attention to warnings and maintain the property.

Key Takeaways
Partnerships are the way of the future. A bank can no longer rely solely on its own infrastructure and core vendor relationships. The new digital world converges industries, so make sure you pick the right partners. To do so, understand existing infrastructure and look through the lens of generational age groups with a customer focus.

  • Does the customer want simple to use technology services and want it now?
  • Do they prefer more traditional services, and are they less trusting of new market entrants? Do they still value human advice?
  • Do they value high-quality service and view “trust as a must,” but are interested in innovation and want to be educated?
  • Is there forward-thinking leadership in the boardroom and C-suite?
  • How does the board get refreshed with new perspective?
  • Would board members be willing to give up their board seat to allow fresh perspective?
  • Has there been evaluation about current state and future growth?
  • Is there understanding about existing system capabilities, shortfalls, what works, what doesn’t?

Determine your game plan:

  • Does the front end need digitization?
  • Fix front end while gradually replacing legacy infrastructure and integrating middle and back office?
  • Go digital native – full overhaul?
  • Evaluate whether systems, processes, procedures and policies are still relevant?

Don’t forget impact on your people. Make sure new offerings do not cannibalize existing product offering and pricing. Remember that a digital expert is unnecessary in the boardroom. Instead find a digital technology translator; someone who understands the cause and effect of decisions made at the macro level. Lastly, and most importantly, figure out how to disrupt your business model before it becomes disrupted.

Risk & Innovation: Bridging The Gap



In today’s age of innovation, risk management can no longer be the office of ‘no.’ When risk managers are included in strategic discussions, they can help drive innovation and provide additional value to their organizations. In this video, Crowe’s John Epperson explains how successful banks bridge the gap between risk and innovation to truly bring value to their institutions.

  • Why Banks Should Transform Risk Management
  • Creating a Competitive Advantage Through Risk and Compliance

Realign Your Bank’s Operating Model Before It’s Too Late


core-6-19-18.pngThe banking industry and its underlying operating model is facing pressure from multiple angles. The advent of new technologies including blockchain and artificial intelligence have started and will continue to impact the business models of banks.

Meanwhile, new market entrants with disruptive business models including fintech startups and large tech companies have put pressure on incumbent banks and their strategies. A loss of trust from customers has also left traditional banks vulnerable, creating an environment focused on the retention and acquisition of new clients.

In response to looming industry challenges, banks have begun to review and adapt their business models. Many banks have already adjusted to the influence of technology, or are in the process of doing so. Unfortunately, corresponding changes to the underlying operating models often lag behind technology changes, creating a strong need to re-align this part of the bank’s core functions.

So what does “re-align” mean from an IT architecture point of view?

Impact on System
In order to keep up with the fast-paced digital innovation, investments have largely focused on end-user applications. This helped banks to be seen as innovative and more digital friendly. However, in many cases these actions led to operational inefficiencies and there are several reasons why we see this.

One is a lack of integration between applications, resulting in siloed data flow. More often, though, the reason is the legacy core, which does not allow seamless integration of tools from front to back of an organization. Further, M&A activity has led many banks to have several core legacy systems, and often these systems don’t integrate well or exist with multiple back-end systems that cater to a specific set of products. This complicates the creation of a holistic view of information for both the client and financial advisor.

There are two ways of addressing the above-mentioned challenges to remain successful in the long-run:

  1. Microservice driven architecture
  2. Core Banking System modernization

Microservice-driven architecture
Establishing an ecosystem of software partners is important to be able to excel amid rapid innovation. Banks can’t do all the application development in house as in the past. Therefore, a microservice-driven architecture or a set of independent, yet cohesive applications that perform singular business functions for the bank.

The innovation cycles of core banking systems are less frequent than innovation cycles for client- and advisor-facing applications. To guarantee seamless integration of the two, build up your architecture so it fully supports APIs, or application programming interfaces. The API concept is nothing new; however, to fully support APIs, the use of standardized interfaces will enable seamless integration and save both time and money. This can be done through a layer that accommodates new solutions and complies with recent market directives such as PSD2 in Europe.

core-banking-graphic.png

Core Banking System Modernization
Banks are spending a significant amount of their IT budget on running the existing IT systems, and this allows only specific parts go into modernization.

A simple upgrade of your core banking system version most likely won’t have the desired impact in truly digitizing processes from front to back. Thus, banks should consider replacing their legacy core banking system(s) to build the base layer of future innovation. This can offer new opportunities to consolidate multiple legacy systems, which can reduce operational expenditures while mitigating operational risks. In addition, a core banking replacement allows for the business to scale much easier as it grows.

A modern core banking system is designed and built in a modular way, allowing flexiblity to decide whether a specific module will be part of the existing core or if external solutions will be interfaced instead, resulting in a hybrid model with best-of-breed applications in an all-in-one core banking system.

Investing In Your Core Can Save You
Core banking system modernization and adoption of the microservice-driven architecture are major investments in re-aligning a bank’s operating model. However, given the rapid technological innovation cycles, investments will pay off in improved operational efficiency and lower costs.

Most importantly, re-aligning the operating model will increase the innovation capabilities, ultimately resulting in a positive influence on the top line through better client experiences.

Powering Payments For Your Business Customers



Business payments are evolving rapidly, with capabilities advanced by technology and rising expectations from business users for simple and seamless payments. In this video, Bill Wardwell of Bottomline Technologies explains:

  • The Business Payments Landscape
  • What Business Customers Want in a Solution
  • Exceeding Customer Expectations

CBW and Yantra Bring ‘Common Sense’ to Fintech Space


CBW-5-23-18.pngIt’s not common to see global fintech firms and healthcare companies eagerly partner with a small bank in Weir, Kansas, but dozens of companies from an array of industries have done just that.

But the chief technology officer who’s led the way with a unique approach to blending technology and banking describes what he’s done over the last nine years as nothing more than “common sense.”

“The wheel was revolutionary for about a minute before everybody else realized they could do it too,” said Suresh Ramamurthi, the CTO of CBW Bank and CEO of Yantra Financial Technologies, the tech firm he established to bring efficiencies to banks and other companies who want to process payments or manage risk.

The state-chartered bank with just $33 million in assets, located in small town Weir, Kansas, is about as far from a major financial hub as any place in America, but the bank helped put the town back on the map. The town first rose to prominence as the place where the flyswatter was created. CBW remains one of the only things still remaining in the town’s center. Less than 1,000 people live there, and it’s the only branch the bank operates.

Ramamurthi and his wife, Suchitra Padmanabhan, acquired the bank in 2009, mostly with personal savings. He came from a career in the tech sector which included a brief stop at Google, while Padmanabhan had a career at Lehman Brothers. CBW had a rough balance sheet, and the two had to spend some time getting the bank back on a solid footing. Ramamurthi and Padmanabhan have been featured in The New York Times and Fortune, and have earned national awards and praise for their innovative approach to banking and technology. The praise is not because they give away cookies and cider in the branch as the Times reported, or that it still is one of the primary lenders to local farmers and home buyers, but because of what they’re doing with fintech.

Ramamurthi, leaning on his experience with Google and tech background, also started Yantra Financial Technologies, a fintech firm that initially focused on speeding up the payments process, which at that time could take days or even weeks if, for example, transfers were being made around the globe. From that beginning has evolved the Y-Labs Marketplace, which enables companies, regardless of sector, to explore banking and payments, specifically, within that marketplace.

CBW and Yantra are the winners of Bank Director’s FinXTech Innovative Solution of the Year, one of three annual awards that recognizes successful collaboration between banks and fintech companies. The awards were announced at Bank Director’s FinXTech Annual Summit, held this May in Scottsdale, Arizona.

CBW and Yantra have published about 500 application programing interfaces, or APIs, which allow third-party developers to build apps and connect them to the bank’s core data systems, while maintaining compliance, which in itself could be a huge financial and legal burden. It’s how banks can keep pace with the rapidly evolving digital marketplace without developing the apps themselves, and allows banks and other firms to come to market at a 21st century pace.

That, Ramamurthi says, is where the common sense lies.

“In banking, your core competence should be in the (area) that (is) the most expensive area for banking, which is compliance,” he says. “If you can digitize all aspects of compliance, then you have an advantage.”

The Y-Labs Marketplace, which Ramamurthi runs as the CEO, has grown its client list to more than 100 that includes mostly other fintech firms like Moven and Simple—known well in the banking industry—in addition to insurance companies, a claims processor, healthcare companies and hospitals, which have used the marketplace to improve their payments systems, while also automating their compliance verifications and other tasks that are often costly and time consuming.

The bank itself remains quite small, though it continues to grow steadily and supports the local community. Ramamurthi has been widely recognized as an innovator and is upending the industry by establishing what he describes as a foundation that will eventually lead to advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning for the banking industry.

And there’s no indication that CBW or Yantra plan on slowing the effort to innovate.

Later this year, he said they plan to launch a “very special” mobile app, which he described as “a common-sense approach to how mobile apps should be for banking.”

Although Ramamurthi declined to discuss details, the app will “rethink” the relationship between customers and the bank, which has traditionally started with common retail accounts and then developed into loans and other more complicated arrangements, he said.

When It Comes to Fintech Partnerships, Look Before You Leap


fintech-5-12-18.pngAt the risk of oversimplification, there are essentially three categories of innovation in banking. There is a small but growing number of banks that have positioned themselves as early adopters of new technology. There are also fast followers, which are not the first banks to try a new technology but don’t lag far behind. Then there are the late adopters.

The digital economy is moving so fast that no bank today can afford to be in the final category. Being an early adopter is probably too risky for many institutions, but at the very least they need to be fast followers or risk getting left behind as the pace of the industry’s digitalization begins to accelerate.

How and when to successfully engage with a fintech company was a recurrent theme at Bank Director’s 2018 FinXTech Annual Summit, held May 10-11 at The Phoenician resort in Scottsdale, Arizona. Deciding to work with a fintech company on the development of a new consumer banking app or the automation of an internal process like small business lending is more than just another vendor relationship. Typically, these are highly collaborative partnerships where the fintech will be given at least some access to the bank’s systems and operations—and could be a risk to the bank if all does not go well.

The first piece of advice for any bank contemplating this kind of engagement is to perform a thorough due diligence of your intended partner. As highly regulated entities, banks need to make sure that any third-party service or product provider they work with have security and compliance processes in place that will satisfy the bank’s regulators. And the younger the fintech company, the less likely they have a compliance environment that most banks would (or should) be comfortable with.

Mark P. Jacobsen, president and chief executive officer at Arlington, Virginia-based Promontory Interfinancial Network, cautioned during a presentation that banks should not consider working with an early-stage fintech unless they have “an extremely experienced CIO, a very robust risk management system and access to very experienced legal talent.” It also makes sense for banks, to check a fintech’s references before finalizing its selection. “There are so many new things out there that it’s important to get that outside validation,” said Adom Greenland, senior vice president and chief operating officer at ChoiceOne Financial Services, a $622 million asset bank headquartered in Sparta, Michigan.

Cultural difference was also a recurrent theme at the Summit. Banks with a culture of innovation are more likely to be early adopters or, at the very least, fast followers. “Culture is a huge barrier to innovation,” said Bill McNulty, operating partner at Capital One Growth Ventures, a unit of Capital One Financial Corp., during a presentation on some of the common obstacles to innovation. “And culture always starts with people.”

McNulty said while he senses the urgency around innovation in banking is beginning to change, he knows of large fintech players that originally wanted to partner with banks, but have grown frustrated with the conservative culture at many institutions. “They decided it is too hard and takes too long and they would do it themselves,” he said. “If we don’t address culture, the best fintechs will do it themselves. Some of these companies will build [their own] banks.”

Bank Director announced the winners for its 2018 Annual Best of FinXTech Awards on May 10, choosing from among 10 finalists across three award categories, and while big banks were represented among the finalists—including U.S. Bancorp, Citizens Financial Corp., Pinnacle Financial Partners and USAA—two of the winners were community banks. And that fact underlines an important point when talking about innovation in banking. Small banks can play this game just as well and maybe even better than their larger peers.

Considering Fintech Partnerships? Don’t Forget the Fundamentals


fintech-4-30-18.pngAs the benefits of partnerships between banks and financial technology (fintech) organizations have become more evident, bankers’ fears of being displaced by the wave of fintech startups have cooled.

Increasingly, bankers see that taking on a fintech partner can enable them to offer new products and services, develop new delivery models, and enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of back-office functions.

And yet, despite the growing awareness of the value of these partnerships, dispositional mismatches between banks and fintech companies have caused banks to struggle to make these partnerships work.

One of the most common sources of discord is in the area of risk management. Bank risk and compliance professionals are wired to mitigate risk rather than to manage it. The urge to shelter banks from risk through traditional risk and compliance practices, however, can dampen the innovation that is at the core of fintech’s appeal.

Banks aiming to get more out of these partnerships should review and hone their operations, aligning business goals and risk management goals across strategy, culture and information sharing.

Strategy Trumps Granular Problem-solving
Fintech companies and banks entering into partnership agreements often fail to effectively think through and communicate about their individual corporate strategies and how the partnership fits in.

Banks might approach a partnership with a problem they would like the fintech company to solve, without clearly defining how the partnership fits into their overall business strategy.

An important first step for banks is to think of a fintech engagement as a true partnership, rather than a vendor relationship.

The two organizations should sit down together to collectively identify the objectives and goals of each organization and how the partnership can advance those goals.

Going further, both organizations should establish boundaries around what they are willing to do to achieve their objectives, what resources will be made available to deal with challenges, and what will trigger the escalation of an issue to executives’ attention.

Ultimately, the purpose of the partnership must be clearly tied to the broader strategy of each organization, and at the outset, the partners should establish a process to ensure that purpose and strategy will remain aligned.

Meet at Cultural Crossroads
Fintech companies and banks often experience a culture clash at the outset of a partnership. The more traditional culture of a bank can seem starkly different from that of an innovative and fast-moving fintech company, particularly in the area of risk tolerance. While banks often view any loss adversely, fintech companies are much more comfortable with the idea of taking a small loss in the spirit of innovation and learning.

This question of culture fit rarely is considered in the traditional vendor management process. But finding a way to align the two, often disparate, cultures is critical in forging a successful partnership.

Both parties should evaluate prospective partners’ values at the outset. Once a partnership is formed, the parties should establish a set of principles that define practices and policies that are deemed acceptable on both sides. This set of principles should be viewed not as rules per se, but as broad guidelines.

Another important aspect of culture is how both organizations treat failure. Rather than taking a punitive approach to all failures, banks should be open to the idea that some failures can be positive if they advance innovation.

Information Sharing
Fintech companies sometimes are hesitant to share their data, either because they consider it proprietary or because they simply do not know what data banks want. On the other hand, banks, particularly in light of privacy regulations, might be hesitant to share information that does not directly affect the partner relationship.

Both parties should work to overcome barriers to information sharing, as the degree of transparency in a partnership is directly related to its success. With more data, partners can better assess performance and identify unforeseen compliance risks that emerge.

As in the case of strategy and culture considerations, expectations defining the process and extent of data sharing should be set up front. Banks should consider what information they can provide to fintech partners that might not be directly related to the product – but which might help grow the strategy or solution.

Competitive Advantage Through Thoughtful Partnerships
By establishing some basic principles around strategy, culture, and information sharing, bank executives can make better decisions as they enter into partnerships with fintech companies. Poor execution on fundamentals should not be allowed to hamper the successful execution and growth of these partnerships.

Why It’s Never Been Easier to Adopt a Fintech Solution


innovation-4-9-18.pngFor many banks and financial services firms (incumbents), emerging financial technology firms (fintechs) were once viewed in two camps: flash-in-the pan, one-hit wonders or serious threats institutions should avoid. Perhaps the media was partially to blame for this “us vs. them” mentality with its prolific use of words like “disruption” or its positioning of fintechs as the only companies who embraced change or were capable of innovation. Beneath the exuberant headlines espousing the promise of these new technologies and the industries they would revolutionize, there was more than a hint of negativity, a healthy dose of fear mongering, and a pretty clear message, “Dear banks, you are not invited to the party. In fact, we are coming to crash yours.”

Although those of us who worked in banking and wealth management bristled at the tone and approach of these young companies, none of us could disagree with much of what they were saying: things were broken and radical change was afoot. Yet, there was something about the disruptor’s manifesto that seemed a little naïve, a bit misguided and certainly incomplete.

There was the assumption that financial institutions were resistant to change or opposed to innovation; neither of which, I would argue, were entirely true. For a myriad of reasons companies wanted change. The unspoken matter was how could they realize it in a cost effective and compliant way without disrupting any core processing or custodial technologies. Would these technologies integrate cleanly?

Fast forward to 2018
Much has changed. Many of the disruptive fintechs with their go-it-alone, direct-to-consumer business models have pivoted to business-to-business service models and now service the very companies and industries they set out to upend. Similarly, banks who either ignored the boisterous fintechs or chose to build internally are rethinking their strategies and engaging with start-ups.

What has changed?
The quick answer is everything. The disruptors have not only proven their technologies, but the market has begun demanding their services. Furthermore, the speed of innovation, adoption and deployment has quickened at such a rate that what was once deemed new or disruptive is suddenly table stakes.

Having experienced how difficult it is to create brand identity and how expensive it is to acquire clients, many fintechs have turned their focus to servicing institutional clients. Fintechs have a deeper understanding of the complex business activities and regulatory and compliance processes with which financial services must adhere and are designing their technologies accordingly. The technology is often preconfigured, ready to integrate into existing back-end processes, and deployable at a large scale.

Us vs. Them Becomes We
Fintechs are easier to partner with and their solutions have become easier to adopt. No longer is innovation limited to the banks or organizations with large IT budgets and staffs. FinTechs have made innovation available to all financial firms, with prices and engagement models that meet most budgets.

The nimble nature of fintechs has allowed them to adapt to changes and fine-tune their technology at a much quicker rate, bringing the most scalable solutions to the market. With an emphasis on engagement and a seamless experience for both clients and institutions, fintechs are no longer serious threats but rather trusted partners bringing a necessary business function to institutions.

Lastly, and equally important, the value proposition for incumbents to adopt digital solutions is clearer and far more comprehensive than previously articulated or understood. Fintechs make it easier for institutions to launch new business services such as wealth management or lending solutions to diversify product offerings, deepen client engagement, enhance client acquisition and strengthen loyalty. This not only helps grow the overall business, but many incumbents have realized significant cost savings through the automated processing solutions these new technologies offer and the elimination of manual back-end processes. As a result, businesses are seeing improved efficiency ratios and in some cases, higher valuations.

To conclude, a new breed of fintechs has emerged, many with the same face, most with a new sophistication and a deeper understanding of integration but all with the mission to empower. Transformation through collaboration is an impressive phenomenon, one that every firm should take advantage of and fintechs provide that opportunity.