However, although consumers may be enjoying a more seamless banking experience, traditional banks are facing increased competition from disruptive new online and mobile offerings such as Atom Bank, Starling and Monzo and are being required to invest more in their IT infrastructure just to keep pace and maintain relevance.

Digital Transformation
In a bid to increase efficiency and improve their customer experience, financial services providers, in common with most other businesses, are currently undergoing a digital transformation. Such initiatives can be hindered, however, by inflexible legacy IT systems and fragmented infrastructure.

The development of cloud-based services offers organisations the advantage of eliminating the need to introduce new hardware. At the same time, though, it also introduces additional complexities with regards to integration. For their digital transformation to succeed, businesses must be able to integrate new services with existing applications without being left with a deluge of discarded data.

Traditional banks need a means of tapping into and integrating the capabilities of a modern cloud platform that will enable them to successfully migrate their functions to a digital space and, by doing so, fundamentally underpin the delivery of an improved customer experience while eliminating data redundancy.

Liquid Expectations
Whether they’re dealing with a bank, an energy provider, Apple or Amazon, consumers today expect a seamless, frictionless interaction with an organisation’s products and services. These ‘liquid expectations’ have only been amplified since the introduction of Open Banking, and customers of financial services providers now expect a wide range of channel engagement options. It’s no longer enough to receive a bank statement by mail, for example. Customers now want to be able to purchase new products, or activate or change services within minutes, rather than days or weeks, and will show little loyalty to any bank that doesn’t allow them to do so. Meeting these expectations will put demands on the internal processes and operations of traditional banks who, until now have been operating in a heavily regulated environment, with little or no competition.

Each of the third parties that, due to Open Banking, now has access to a customer’s account details will typically have its own touchpoints or individual business processes. These applications are unlikely to be integrated, however, and in the case of traditional banks, may be decades old with no public APIs. Integration is therefore key to satisfying customer demand and enabling banks to capitalise on the opportunity that Open Banking offers for an experience in which the customer comes first, across all available channels.

Ideal Solution
To meet today’s customer expectations, the ideal integration solution will pull together several essential modern applications and components. By presenting engagement channels such as Facebook, Twitter, web, email and phone, for example, a front-end component will allow customers to contact their financial services provider using the channel of their choice.

Providing a 360-degree view of the customer, that gives service agents all the information they need on that customer and their interactions with the bank, regardless of channel, will help ensure that both the bank and third-parties are able to deliver an engaging, personalised customer experience.

Furthermore, to drive efficiency and greater customer success, the solution should employ an integration and orchestration layer that will surface legacy system data and connect it with sales, service, and marketing information. This integration should also help those banks that have been essentially locked out of modern cloud platforms due to their inflexible IT infrastructure and legacy systems, to tap into and maximise the capabilities of the growing number of SaaS applications.

Finally, the single source of data that results from integrating many of the separate organisations used by banks and third-parties for customer care and the provision of new and existing products and services, will help create a consistent customer experience. Rather than feeling as if they’re dealing with three or four separate companies, customers will enjoy interacting with one single, integrated entity instead. In giving consumers greater control over their financial services, Open Banking has increased expectations for a seamless experience. To meet these expectations, financial services providers must shake off the shackles of legacy IT infrastructure, and embrace the agility, speed and flexibility afforded by cloud technology. Implementing a reliable integration platform is key to remaining competitive in today’s fast-moving, disruptive financial services landscape.

About DEREK THOMPSON

Derek Thompson is the Vice President, EMEA, Dell Boomi, an independent business unit of Dell that provides cloud integration and workflow automation software to build. Thompson is responsible for scaling the business by increasing investment in Western Europe including the UK, Ireland, Germany, Switzerland, France, Italy, Spain, Nordics and Benelux as well as plan for expansion in the Middle East. Alongside this, he will leverage channel partners to deliver on aggressive growth plans. Thompson has worked at Informatica and Kalido, and is the Founder/CEO at Technica UK. He brings more than two decades’ worth of entrepreneurial, leadership, sales and business expansion experience to Boomi.

The post Meeting the demands of Open Banking with integration technology appeared first on International Finance.

Last year, the company introduced its very own dorm-style housing called WeLive, which mostly thrives on a residential concept. WeLive’s business model is much like WeWork: where the company will extend its service to managing perplexities that come with finding and setting up a home. In fact, another interesting benefit for those who opt in is they can experience a ‘community of like-minded people’.

More so, the company recently launched a fitness center called Rise that costs membership worth $180 per month. The company even acquired the iconic Lord & Taylor building located on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan for $850 million. But this is not it. Next up: the most alluring addition to the WeWork portfolio is Rent the Runway: an online service that provides designer wear and accessory rental. Rent the Runway has collaborated with WeWork to add an element of convenience for users of the rental service.

In short, Rent the Runway will open a network of clothing drop-off boxes in the lobbies of 15 WeWork locations across the United States. The drop-off boxes will allow subscribers to return rented items and release a slot in their subscription for the next round of renting. Surprisingly, the drop-off boxes are open to both: the public and the members at WeWork. “This is really just the beginning,” Jennifer Hyman, chief executive officer of Rent the Runway, told Bloomberg.

“We have subscribers in many places throughout the U.S. and with WeWork’s massive footprint, there’s huge opportunity to grow this drop-box network.”

The creators of WeWork intend to “humanise” everything they bring to the market: from work to fitness to living spaces. However enticing it is, to watch WeWork disrupt the market and expand from its introductory business strategy: is the company losing its plot—of being a communal workspace? In fact, some investors and analysts want to probe deeper into its business model: as the Wall Street

Journal writes: “critics say it’s an overvalued real-estate play.” That’s a notable statement. For WeWork, this choice of business strategy might become a sort of distraction to its vision. Eight years ago, when the company opened its first co-working office in SoHo, it was not the first evolution of a communal workspace. Yet. It succeeded because there was a vision: to assemble a community of like-minded people under one roof. It reinforced interest in work: the benefactor of going to an effortless environment brilliantly furnished with indoor plants, soundproof walls, warm light, convenient work set-up and of the sort, was much exciting.

More important, working with cool minds became the catch. But now, its other ventures (or strategies) are somewhat diffusing the classic character of WeWork— by depicting qualities of a new-age realtor.

Nevertheless, its real might can only be noted in its metrics: The company generated $422 million in the second quarter, based on a financial presentation shared with Recode. According to Coworking Resources, WeWork is the second biggest co-working company in 2018—and it is nominated the sixth most valuable start-up in the world, observed VentureSource.

The company’s accelerated growth might indeed make a striking headline, however it is still losing money. Early this year, its net loss estimated $723 million on $764 million of revenue. In comparison to the same period last year, it lost $154 million on $362 million of revenue. So the loss is much counterproductive now. According to WeWork CFO Artie Minson, Recode notes: “the losses reflect the large capital expenditure it takes to open up new offices, which require time before they become profitable.” Since inception,

WeWork has been counting on its long-time business strategy, and now, there is a significant amount of pressure—in some ways, to justify its remarkable position as an expert in communal workspace. Still, there is a huge possibility for the company to assert this justification:

After all, the data WeWork has experimented with in past years is much more valuable than one can expect: how people work; the need to feel good; when they work best; and how jobs can get done—matters. And its faculty to capitalise on these meaningful insights might bring dynamism to its long-term business strategies in future.

The post We work—the most valuable startup in New York City? appeared first on International Finance.

This customer-obsessed approach means that every user enjoys a personalised interface, uniquely moulded around their likes, dislikes and ongoing behaviour. It is not just in the entertainment sector that this model can work however. There are lessons from Netflix’s and Spotify’s success that can be applied to many industries, and none more so than in the world of financial services.

As a part of its continued commitment to technological innovation, UBS has taken digital-led personalisation to the world of trading. In its early stages of development, the wealth management firm is applying recommendation algorithms to suggest trades to its asset management and hedge fund clients, an unprecedented move in the space.

This is a huge step in digitising the trading process and opens up a lot of questions for the future of the sector. It is also indicative of a wider shift in the way technology is being applied in the finance industry, and that this bold move from UBS can have a groundbreaking impact on investment banking as a whole.

For UBS, innovation and digitalisation are key strategic priorities, and the company appears to be investing heavily into those areas with innovation labs at L39 in London and across the globe. Dirk Klee, Chief Operating Officer at UBS Wealth Management has made only the threat from disruptors in its space but the importance of customer experience, claiming that “the client experience is being increasingly driven by what clients see in companies like Apple or Amazon.”

In the same way that we take recommendations for the latest movies and albums from friends or magazines, clients in the banking sector commonly take their trading recommendations from trained consultants and salespeople.

Through implementing Netflix-esque algorithms, UBS is taking huge leaps in automating the trading process. By analysing a client’s trading behaviour and preferences, they are able to provide bespoke recommendations tailored on an individual basis.

When it comes to the rest of the industry, despite the incredible technological advances in algorithmic trading and trading platforms, investment banks still service their largest clients through intensive “high touch” relationships. It is apparent to most investment banks that long-term this white glove treatment will lose to ease of use and higher returns.

Today’s way of doing business is simply too slow in a world of algorithmic trading, too expensive, and too dependent on the skills of individual employees. However, if clients take recommendations from an algorithm, UBS can ensure that they receive the highest quality advice faster and at lower cost. Building on the initial success hinges on finding the customers who will become long-term champions of this new way of doing business. Banks must then rigorously experiment with the way they are improving their experience and returns, and changing one of the most traditional cultures in finance. Why stop here? Traditional financial institutions are quickly learning that unless they embrace the new wave of experimental technology, their growth will suffer. Whilst risk will always be a factor inhibiting these moves, taking a test and learn approach in the same way UBS is will ultimately reap rewards. Should UBS succeed in this vision, the company has the opportunity to rewrite the rules of investment banking

About Hazjier Pourkhalkhali :

Hazjier Pourkhalkhali is the Global Head of Strategy, Optimizely—a US-based company that makes customer optimisation software. Pourkhalkhali, as global head of strategy, leads pricing and packaging for Optimizely’s key products, and works on new pricing metrics for optimal customer uptake.

He also leads global initiatives on customer retention strategies and methods. He has worked as a management consultant at McKinsey and was the COO/cofounder of Cloud Games, a frontunner in development, distribution and monetisation of HTML5 games. He has earned a degree from UC Berkeley, California.

The post Decoding the Netflix approach to investing appeared first on International Finance.

AUDI

• Foundation year: 1909
• Number of UK models: 65
• Number of employees: 90,705
• Sales in 2017: 174,982
• Market share in 2017: 6.89%

Audi became part of the Volkswagen Group back in 1965. This was when Audi acquired the Auto Union GmbH from Daimler-Benz. For the first time since the end of the Second World War, Audi vehicles were produced thanks to this subsidiary. With more than 100 markets across the globe, Audi now stands as one of the leading premium car brands. This is, in part, down to Audi’s revolutionary technology. From piloted driving to an AI setup, the German manufacturer is leading the way to the future of driving technology.

BENTLEY

• Foundation year: 1919
• Number of UK models: 18
• Number of employees: 4,332
• Sales in 2017: 1,753
• Market share in 2017: 0.07%

Volkswagen and Bentley’s ties date back to 1998, though the partnership is quite complex. The story starts in 1997, when the then-owner of Bentley put Rolls-Royce Motors up for sale. Unsurprisingly, BMW made an offer of £340 million, as they supplied Bentley and Rolls-Royce with components and engines anyway. Plus, Vickers and BMW shared common ground in their experience in aerospace manufacturing.

But BMW weren’t the only bidders; Volkswagen made an offer of £430 million, outbidding BMW. But the deal didn’t give Volkswagen ownership of everything. Their bid secured the administrative and production facilities, vehicle designs, model nameplates, the iconic Spirit of Ecstasy, and the Rolls-Royce grille shape trademark. But Rolls-Royce Holdings retained the Rolls-Royce name and logo.

A year later in 1998, BMW supplied Bentley and Rolls Royce with new components for their cars and paid £40 million to licence the Rolls-Royce name and logo. After extensive negotiations from all parties, they reached an agreement that allowed BMW to continue with the deal to supply components and engines. Volkswagen attained the rights for the logos and names at this time. Then, in 2003, Volkswagen became the sole providers of Bentley cars, and BMW attained Rolls-Royce.

BUGATTI

• Foundation year: 1909
• Number of UK models: 1
• Number of employees: 302
• Sales in 2017: N/A
• Market share in 2017: N/A

Art and technology were the forefront of car manufacturer Bugatti’s aims. In the last 100 years or more, Bugatti has unveiled some of the motor industry’s most interesting car designs.

In 1998, Volkswagen purchased the rights to manufacture Bugatti-named cars. Two years later, Bugatti was officially inducted into the Volkswagen Group. Plus, the guest house that was previously owned by Ettore Bugatti himself was purchased by Volkswagen Group. The house was turned into the company’s headquarters.

LAMBORGHINI

• Foundation year: 1963
• Number of UK models: 8
• Number of employees: 1,606
• Sales in 2017: N/A
• Market share in 2017: N/A

Not only did Volkswagen acquire Bentley and Bugatti in 1998, but they also brought Lamborghini into the family. The super sports car icon that stunned the world with gorgeous designs and exceptional power used to be owned by MegaTech. MegaTech in turn were owned by SEDRCO pty, an Indonesian corporation.

But a financial crisis sparked in Asia in 1998, which meant Lamborghini needed to change its owner. An estimated $110 million offer saw the super sports car manufacturer purchased by Volkswagen. In the following months, a restructuring took place to make the holding company Lamborghini Holding S.p.A.

PORSCHE

• Foundation year: 1931
• Number of UK models: 37
• Number of employees: 27,352
• Sales in 2017: 14,051
• Market share in 2017: 0.55%

It took three years for Volkswagen to fully bring Porsche into the Group.

Starting in 2009, the Volkswagen Group purchased a stake in Porsche AG, taking the first of many steps towards an ‘integrated automotive group’ with Porsche. Two years later, the two companies were meant to merge. But this was halted by legal risks, and the merger was deemed impossible.

As another year passed, however, Volkswagen announced they were currently in the process of purchasing the rest of the shares in Porsche for €4.46 billion. Porsche was finally brought into the Volkswagen Group in its entirety in August 2012.

SEAT

• Foundation year: 1950
• Number of UK models: 24
• Number of employees: 14,716
• Sales in 2017: 56,130
• Market share in 2017: 2.21%

Volkswagen first set their sights beyond Germany with its co-operation agreement with Spanish company SEAT. Signed in 1982, the two companies quickly went to work, with 1986 seeing Volkswagen gaining a 51% controlling stake in SEAT. With this, SEAT became the first non-German subsidiary in the Volkswagen group. The stake was increased from 51% to 75% in December 1986.

Then, in 1990, Volkswagen Group purchased SEAT in its entirety.

ŠKODA

•  Foundation year: 1895
• Number of UK models: 27
• Number of employees: 32,985
• Sales in 2017: 79,758
• Market share in 2017: 3.14%

The 1990s were a big year for acquisitions for Volkswagen, as the Group brought in Bentley, Bugatti, Lamborghini, and ŠKODA.

In 1991, Volkswagen and ŠKODA made a partnership agreement that resulted in Volkswagen gaining a 30% stake in ŠKODA. This later increased to 60.3% in December 1994, and then again to 70% in 1995.

By 2000, ŠKODA became wholly owned by the Volkswagen Group. The partnership was certainly beneficial to both parties, as the Czech car manufacturer saw deliveries increase sevenfold thanks to their partnership with Volkswagen.

THE VOLKSWAGEN GROUP

• Collective years of experience: 731 years
• Number of UK models: 213
• Number of employees: 372,264
• Sales in 2017: 535,136
• Market share in 2017: 21.0 7%

• Volkswagen themselves were founded in 1937, with 33 models available in the UK and employing 200,266 people of their own. In 2017, Volkswagen enjoyed 208,462 sales and an 8.21% share in the market. The data and figures in this article were correct as of August 2nd 2018.

This piece was curated by Vindis

The post Unravelling the Volkswagen Success Story – Who Do they Own? appeared first on International Finance.

There are some fundamental issues facing women at board level and as business founders. Access to capital is one of these fundamental issues, with only 2.9% of women founders successfully accessing equity investment for their business, according to research carried out by Beauhurst—the UK’s start-up and scale-up database. Compared with their male counterparts—who are 86% more likely to secure equity investment—it is easy to see why only nine percent of total investment funding goes to women.

When women founders are seeking investment at the early stages of their growth journey, it is business angels that they would normally turn to, able to offer them that first injection of capital as well as bringing them access to their own business experience as well as keyconnections to customers. Yet currently only 14% of business angel investors here in the UK are women.

At UKBAA, we were keen to understand why with women seeking to be further empowered in their business careers and many clearly achieving considerable levels of success and wealth in business and as entrepreneurs across the UK, so few women had recognized the opportunity to back the next generation of up and coming entrepreneurs, especially businesses with women founders in the team.

However, we also learned that this is not just a challenge for women in the UK, it’s also a challenge for my counterparts across Europe, so UKBAA led research among women across France, Spain, Italy, some support from the EC to try to understand the underlying barriers and what were the drivers for women about angel investing

Over 640 women completed our online survey, of which 200 were from the UK nearly half of whom were already investors and just over half non investors, but all were self-declared as either High Net worth or “Sophisticated” i.e. professionally experienced in finance and business.

Our interactions with women across Europe, showed that the problems were similar across all these countries. The women respondents, both investors and non-investors, were all highly experienced in business with between 10 and 25 years’ experience or more and 54% having successfully founded at least one business.

Although, many women had portfolio careers and were generally not making large investments in any one company, and many had made less than 10 investments so far. Furthermore, close to 20% of female angel investors have invested in three to 10 women founders, compared with only a relatively few leading male angels investing in a significant number of women founders. The data revealed a concerning statistic that 86% of women surveyed said that they had not been informed by advisory sources about angel investing in small businesses as an asset class, or about relevant tax breaks to mitigate risks backing early stage businesses.

A significant majority of the women who were not angel investing expressed their concern that they thought they needed to be uber-wealthy, with extensive levels of disposable income. The stereotype of the female TV Dragon of a steely iron maiden seated on a leather chair with a briefcase full of money to her side prevailed in the thinking of many women when thinking about angel investing.

At the UK Business Angel Association Awards, held in Liverpool in June, we ensured that we were promoting women within innovation. We will continue to strive to ensure that female entrepreneurs have a group of angel investors that they can look up to for inspiration, mentoring, and experience, particularly in the innovation and technology sectors. An example of this was Kim Nilsson at Pivigo, who won the Best Investment in a High Growth Female Founder. Kim is addressing the important need to build a pipeline of data scientists to meet the growing demand for skilled talent to take advantage of the opportunity to exploit big data, offering training and a marketplace and has accessed Angel and VC funding to tackle a market where there are not enough women.

This year’s UK Business Angel Association Awards featured the Best Female-Led Investment award, in which we had joint winners. Doppel, led by Dr Fotini Markopoulou, have developed a wristband that has been shown to address the global challenge of workplace stress, focusing on personalised rhythms. Over the past four years, the team have trialled and built the concept which has achieved traction in the US and China. The lead female investor is Rosalind Singleton. She has drawn on her over 30 years’ experience in telecoms and IT, as MD of UK Broadband and Chair of the new UK5G to help the team to review their technical developments and develop robust manufacturing processes.

The other winner of the joint-Best Female-Led Investment was World Wide Generation. Led by Maryula, World Wide Generation have created a blockchain platform as amonitoring and marketplace for the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, offering a private distributed ledger and cloud-based web application to enable organisations to maximise their achievements. The lead female investor is Claire Bartholomew. Claire has put a considerable sum of investment into the business and drawing on her experience in IT and Financial recruitment, as well as in social enterprise to support the growth and expansion of the business.

There is a clear indication that women absolutely have the means and the resources to invest into businesses, but without accurate representation and the presence of prominent women lead angels, financial momentum—albeit possible —will not occur. With a lack of role models consistently quoted by women investors as one of the key barriers to entry, encouraging those women who are successfully investing to come forward and share their stories is a key priority for all of us in the industry. We hope that programmes such as the UK Business Angel Association Awards promote this cause further, until women are on an equal platform to men with relevant and inspiring angel role models.

The post Why Supporting Women-led Ventures is Good Business Ethos appeared first on International Finance.

Taking into consideration that 22% of manufacturing SMEs said domestic orders were down, it’s never been more integral for manufacturers in the UK to develop and implement an export strategy to not only ensure growth but also access to global markets post Brexit.

Furthermore, with recent changes in legislation such as the implementation of the sugar tax, and changing consumer behaviour towards non-renewable materials, manufacturers in the UK are being forced to shift their processes and operations to comply with the new guidelines. Ultimately, this means they need to look further afield and target the 99% to maximise the value of their assets.

In a globalised world that is increasingly connected, manufacturers are able to reach previously untouched niche markets and audiences globally. As a result, assets which have reached its end of useful life in the UK can now find homes with international markets.

Staying connected
The key to making most of the opportunities offered by gaining access to international markets is implementing an asset management strategy at the core of business operations which acts as a platform for facilitating relationships between buyers and sellers.

Whilst assets are often unloaded at times of cash flow need, this is rarely the best way to get best value. Ingraining asset management in day to day operations can maximise the return and delivery of business objectives.

We believe that selling assets through business to business International online asset management systems/methods will enable manufacturers in particular to react quicker to the changing market conditions and identify opportunities that already exist for their machinery. In the UK alone, the B2B auctioneering market is worth around £480 million but we estimate that only a quarter of businesses in the country use B2B auctions as part of their asset management strategy. This means UK’s manufacturers could be leaving around £1.7 billion worth of assets lying dormant and losing value, which could be used towards funding change projects within their businesses.

Looking ahead
At Troostwijk Asset Management, we have over 90 years’ experience of connecting sellers to niche markets across 127 nations with 18 operational facilities around Europe. Our team believes everything has value, and we guide businesses in making smart, long-term investment decisions for their assets and spotting the right value and the right markets worldwide to ensure swift completion.

Our data shows that around 70% of all assets sold through our unique platform are exported internationally, so the opportunities for UK manufacturers to benefit from accessing the 99% are significant. Recently we matched one of our clients, a UK-based bakery who was looking to offload a crumpet assembly line, with both a domestic and international buyer. As part of the asset management service, our team of consultants carefully analysed which market the crumpets could appeal to most. In this case, we successfully sold the asset to customers in the UK and sent two more to New Zealand.

As a result, our client was able to access an international market that was previously out of their reach, meaning they increased the value of their end of life assets.

Completing the Puzzle
Whilst UK manufacturers have continued to prosper even during periods of significant economic uncertainty, it is key that they find new opportunities, particularly in a post-Brexit Britain, by accessing the remaining 99% of markets available worldwide.

There is no doubt that in the next year or so, from a practical and legislative perspective there will be even more challenges thrown at UK SMEs. Laws and regulations will be updated to cater to the new wave of trading rules as a result of leaving the EU.

Whilst the government has recognised the importance of negotiating and securing a strong trade deal, there remains significant doubt regarding how such deal will work in practice with numerous conflicts arising from leaving the Customs Union.

By enlisting an asset management specialist to guide them in making smart and long-term decisions, manufacturers can take the first step to reach international markets and maximise their value of their end of life assets.

About ALAN BELL

Alan Bell is the UK MD of Troostwijk Asset Management and advises SMEs on the opportunities offered by engraining asset management strategy at the core of their operations and utilising zombie assets from other companies. With over 90 years’ experience, Troostwijk is an asset management specialist and the biggest industrial online auctioneer in Europe.
For more information visit www.troostwijkauctions.com

The post Completing the international trade puzzle appeared first on International Finance.

Looking at gender diversity alone, research from the Financial Conduct Authority has found that if we continue on the current path, the global financial services industry will finally reach the figure of 50 per cent female representation on executive committees by 2107: some two hundred long years after the first female suffrage march on Parliament. However, BAME professionals, those from lower socio-economic groups and disabled individuals are also significantly underrepresented across the sector. But why is this? And how can we switch the dial to boost inclusion?

The reasons behind under-representation of specific groups within financial services are deep and complex. Earlier this year, the Treasury Committee found that a culture of long hours and ‘presenteeism’, along with a stigma around flexible working as “female” and somehow less desirable, are among a number greater gender diversity in the Square Mile. However, the tendency for decision makers to offer opportunities to those in their immediate network—or at the very least, ‘hire in their own image’—also has a part to play in hampering wider inclusion. Add to this the fact that job specifications have, historically, focused heavily on past experience and academic achievement, and it’s no wonder that many organisations are failing to tap into a huge chunk of available talent —to their detriment.

Diversity and financial performance are indisputably linked. Previous research from Alexander Mann Solutions, for example, has found that women outperform men in financial trading thanks to their more risk-adverse and measured approach. However, our study of 350 individuals over a four week period seems to accurately mirror the wider business environment: the most recent research from McKinsey has found that that companies in the top 25% for gender diversity were 21% more likely to see higher than average performance than those in the bottom quartile—the figure for ethnic diversity was even higher.

With this in mind, business leaders are increasingly questioning how they can remove barriers to attracting and developing diverse talent so that they too can become more balanced, well-rounded and profitable. The answer lies in harnessing technology effectively.

From the earliest stages of the recruitment process, hiring decisions can be clouded by—often unconscious—bias. You only need to look at previous research by Harvard Business School, which found that black and Asian job applicants who masked their race on their CVs received nearly double the amount of requests for interview, to see that stripping away unnecessary detail results in more objective decisions. By automating recruitment processes to anonymise applications – removing information such as the jobseeker’s name, gender, the school they attended and extra-curricular activity that may suggest social status -businesses are forced to make truly objective decisions.

Once unsuitable applicants have been seeded out of the process—based on their ability to do the job alone—technology can be then be deployed during assessment. This ensures that all candidates are not only measured against the same rigid criteria, but also that the results of any tests can be stored and analysed against other applicants and existing high-performing employees. Of course, there will always be a place for human hiring managers when it comes to making the final call on a job offer. However, by investing in creating ‘blind’ recruitment processes where decision makers are not unintentionally swayed by preconceived ideas around gender, age and ethnicity, businesses can help level the playing field and boost inclusion. Diversity and technology are arguably the two hottest topics in talent management circles today. By harnessing one to influence the other, business leaders can help to ensure that teams profit from the benefits that greater diversity brings: reduced groupthink, more open discussions and better financial performance. 

About VANESSA BYRNES

Vanessa Byrnes is the sector managing director of retail banking & insurance, Alexander Mann Solutions. where she is globally responsible for the integrated growth and service delivery of talent acquisition & management solutions to all Alexander Mann Solutions clients within the Financial, Insurance & Retail services sector. Over the last 19 years, Vanessa has held a number of roles within Alexander Mann Solutions including, Global Director of Client Services, Global Account Director, Practice Director for Telecommunications & Enterprise and the Director of People Capital. She currently sits on the Alexander Mann Solutions Global Operations Board

The post Building a diverse workforce Through Technlogy appeared first on International Finance.

From a data perspective, the goal of the cloud is data globalisation, where users are given access to a golden copy of data regardless of where they are located. However, in reality, due to the obstacles being imposed by many countries, data localisation is occurring instead.

Such developments have caused uncertainty around the quality and accuracy of the data. This in turn reduces its credibility and raises questions over the cloud’s ability to thrive in a sector which continues to become ever more regulated.

Importance of personal data
By default, data protection and privacy regulations are supposed to create tight controls on flows of personal data outside their respective countries through requirements such as data centres, which need to be located inside each country.

However, this fails to recognise that the physical location of the data has no inherent impact on privacy or security. For example, if a bank is subject to European laws such as GDPR, then the privacy risks of storing Europeans’ data inside the EU are no less than those of storing it outside. The bank would still have to treat the data according to the rules of GDPR. This creates inefficiencies in technology infrastructure.

The role of AI
Regulations which lead to data localisation will come at a significant cost in terms of stifled innovation and productivity for global banks that are actively pursuing machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities to boost productivity. This is because for machine learning and AI to be successful, organisations need access to vast amounts of data. Regulations that overly control the use of data, in effect, shackle AI. The core economic value of AI lies in its ability to automate complex processes, de-risk data environments, and increase the quality of the data output. The act of localising data will make it much harder for the banks to reap the benefits promised by AI.

A look ahead
Although cloud computing has been around for over a decade, public cloud onboarding has really only just begun in the financial services industry. The original implementation strategies and intended use of the cloud has already changed from the very early days and it should be anticipated that there will be significant changes to the environment in the foreseeable future. Increases to security requirements are inevitable, as is the ability to access the data in more sophisticated ways. Additionally, as regulations become more mature, there will be even more changes to how data use is monitored and measured. There is no doubt that the use of cloud computing in financial services will continue to grow at an exponential rate. New cloud-based architectures will create efficiencies and innovations and allow firms to grow despite the influx of regulations. However, none of these efficiencies and innovations will happen unless such regulations start to align with the technology and allow for data globalisation.

The post Cloud Computing —Surviving in the Era of Regulation appeared first on International Finance.

Blockchain is a decentralised shared ledger that can store various forms of information (e.g. records of transactions, computer code, archive entries, digital content). Because the ledger is entirely decentralised, i.e., no central `authority’ vouches for its authenticity, it is not only essential that everyone has the same version of the ledger, but also that no one can tamper with it. This is where the power of blockchain resides. It makes adding new entries to the ledger significantly costly—by means of complex computational problems that need to be solved—so that tampering with the ledger would effectively be infinitely costly. As a result, no central authority is needed to maintain and update the ledger.

Coming from nowhere, with no support aside from its users, the incredible development of Bitcoin, and its rapid growth in popularity as well as in value (e.g. from USD 2,000 to USD 17,900 between June and December 2017) has led to the wildest fantasies. In the context of booming Fintechs and across-the-board ‘uberisation’, companies have been seeking to make sense of upcoming disruptions caused by the blockchain technology. Use-cases have been identified in finance, supply chains, insurance, pharmaceuticals, government, military, etc.

Yet, such sudden infatuation tends to happen, with every new technology. Technology basically blinds us to the point that we forget that it is nothing without usage. Emerging technologies (think laser, 3D printing, and even PCs) often remain for decades ‘solutions without a problem’, as none of usages initially envisaged end up making sense. It is when the right usages finally emerge (optical disks, for instance), that they become suddenly disruptive. Instead of speaking of ‘disruptive technologies’, we should really be speaking of ‘disruptive usage’.

So what does this mean in relation to blockchain?
The many envisioned usages—exchange of financial assets, micro-lending, food and shipment tracking, digital identity, smart contracts, e-government, drug authenticity checks, etc.—are all very interesting, but none of them effectively require blockchain—a well-functioning, secured platform would work just as well. For all these use cases, it is easy to find existing, similar activities that do not involve blockchain to any extent. In fact, it could be argued that blockchain is sometimes so poorly understood that it has become a new synonym for ‘digitisation’.

If all could be done without blockchain, what would be the advantage of doing things with a blockchain?
Blockchain is secure, but so are the many banking, financial, and public services we use every day. The (only) real advantage of blockchain is that it is completely decentralised and does not require pre-existing trust. But there is a catch. First, there are limits to the ‘trustlessness’ of the system; only what is happening on the blockchain is guaranteed. For anything else (swapping Bitcoin for $, tracking physical goods, etc.), you have to trust that the other side of the deal will indeed happen. Secondly, the ‘trustless’ environment comes at a significant cost: for it to be fully decentralised, secured, and not require trust, blockchain requires a ‘proof of work’ to make it impossible for anyone to tamper with the ledger. This means thousands and thousands of ‘miners’ carrying out simultaneously highly intensive computer calculations so that one of them wins the right to add a new entry in the ledger. All the rest is basically wasted. Many studies have pointed out that Bitcoin is exceedingly wasteful: a single Bitcoin transaction leads to a consumption of several hundred kWh of energy, enough to power a house for a couple of weeks or run a fridge for a whole year. Clearly, a well-designed ‘traditional’ platform would be much more efficient (and just as secure). While attempts have been made to overcome this issue, removing the ‘proof of work’ creates problems of its own. Indeed, for the system to remain secure, it has to remain infinitely costly to tamper with it. The only way to decrease this cost is to establish (or assume that there is) some form of trust in the system and/or decrease its degree of decentralisation.

Bearing this cost in mind, what are the key usages of blockchain?
Only two really stand out: when one does not want to use a middleman or when one would like to use a (trusted) middleman, but one cannot be found. While the first usage is clearly fringe, the second is the source of the actual blockchain disruption.

While predicting the future is always difficult (especially in the case of emerging technologies), considering the current and foreseeable state of the technology, it is unlikely that any sizeable company will find blockchain of significant interest for its core business (though they might rebrand existing services as ‘blockchain’ anyway). Likewise, any small or emerging structure that may have no choice but to use blockchain (for lack of a trusted intermediary or authority) will most likely eventually, as they grow, find it more fitting to use a more centralised platform.

However, the critical point is that blockchain does not need to be used for it to be disruptive. The simple threat that it might be used might be sufficient to disrupt existing markets and undermine established businesses.

In fact, blockchain might even be the last piece of the ‘digital disruption puzzle’. Indeed, digital disruptions, whether related to content, services, and, tomorrow, manufacturing, all require a trusted, central intermediary/platform (e.g. Facebook, Airbnb, eBay) to develop on a significantly large scale. Until such a trusted intermediary emerges, disruption has to wait. Blockchain helps kick-start things much more rapidly and on a much smaller scale—any niche, regardless of how insignificant it may appear, can be explored. While blockchain is unlikely to be used to compete head-on with established businesses, it will do so sideways, exploring new usages, new ways to do things, with new actors and stakeholders. Incidentally, disruption might not be visible for a long while, until it appears that the activities of established businesses have themselves become a niche in a much wider market they no longer control, just like it happened with the music industry,still pursuing high-quality audio with DVD-A and SACD, when all people wanted was low-fi MP3 to take on the go), or the hotel and taxi industries with people renting couches or sitting in a stranger’s car.

To sum up, change is coming, but not in the way we envisage it. In this brave new world it has unleashed, blockchain might not even play a significant role—who uses peer-to-peer networks now that Netflix and Spotify exist? Meanwhile, it is time to take a good pair of sunglasses to finally see blockchain for what it actually is: a niche technology whose very existence might nonetheless disrupt even the most established players, by facilitating market entry.

But the fact that anyone can enter a market does not mean that they will. It is for established players to radically change their business models to ensure that they remain tomorrow the central players of a much wider ecosystem.

About Thierry Rayna

Prof. THIERRY RAYNA, PhD, is a professor of Innovation Management at École Polytechnique, within the Department of Innovation Management and Entrepreneurship, and a researcher at the CNRS i3-CRG (Management Research Centre, Innovation Interdisciplinary Institute).

The post Assessing the Impact of Blockchain on Business Models appeared first on International Finance.

For many industry players, there is a lot riding on maintaining the same level of internal cooperation they have enjoyed previously—whether London remains Europe’s primary financial hub or not. Many banks and other financial enterprises are already moving to protect themselves with London’s once unassailable position as the bridge between the EU and other regions such as Asia and North America under threat. With a no-deal Brexit a genuine possibility, they are now choosing to hedge their bets and not wait to see if the UK walks away from negotiations with the EU with a bespoke arrangement.

A large number of banking and finance businesses are looking into —or are already are—moving some operations to mainland Europe to minimise any potential disruption from Brexit. German broadcaster Deutsche Welle has reported that some 50 London-based banks have approached eurozone banking regulators about relocating key services from London to rival EU centres. The Japanese bank Nomura, which currently employs over 2,000 people in London, has already announced it will use Frankfurt as its trading hub once the UK leaves the EU—with German officials claiming another 20 banks have already committed to launching new operations there.

Clearly, Brexit is making it increasingly likely that banking and financial service organisations will relocate employees, and one of the immediate effects is that more teams will be scattered across multiple time zones and locations with more employees likely to be working from different locations—including their homes. As a result, it is crucial that the right tools are in place before this change takes place to ensure teams can communicate effectively and implement a standardised and coordinated way of working so that employees are not juggling multiple applications and communication platforms to collaborate on projects, monitor progress, manage resourcing, and stay on top of deadlines. Fortunately, there are tools that can be employed to transcend borders and time zones and so ensure teams at different locations keep on the same page—in real-time.

COLLABORATING ACROSS BORDERS

Teams working across multiple locations—whether in offices in different geographies, travelling to conferences or to see clients, or working from home—is not new. In fact, workplace flexibility has increasingly become part of the package many businesses offer. However, despite its surge in popularity, there are still challenges that businesses struggle to overcome in order to maximise efficiency. These include limited access to the most up-to-date files, difficulties in communicating with colleagues, knowing which tasks to prioritise, and even struggling to feel part of the team.

Banks and financial services companies need to ensure that these issues are addressed before Brexit takes place. Otherwise, they will have to deal with the negative impact having teams working from multiple locations can have on effective collaboration, productivity and business agility. Relocating operations is just one area of business that the industry will need to navigate as the UK moves to withdraw from the EU. Other areas such as internal company restructuring, product and services analysis and engagement planning will also need to be considered—which is why it is so crucial that teams have tools that support a coordinated work environment during this period of change. What can help achieve this is a cloud-based platform that enables real-time collaboration across locations and empowers teams to coordinate workflow, track progress, align goals, allocate budget and meet deadlines from any device and location.

OVERCOMING COMMUNICATION OVERLOAD
When it comes to improving collaboration among teams, it is tempting for businesses to select an array of popular applications focused on improving communication. Many businesses have fallen into the trap of choosing social media apps to facilitate easy and frequent employee discussion—such as WhatsApp and Facebook—in the belief they would streamline communications between workers and minimise long email chains that result key information being missed, causing delays and confusion. Others have turned to communication apps. A global Clarizen survey showed that, in the past year, companies deployed one or more of the following apps to improve productivity: Skype (39%), Microsoft Teams (14%), Google Hangouts (8%) and Slack (7%).

What many organisations have found, however, is that such applications can in fact hinder productivity by encouraging non-work chit chat and oversharing of irrelevant professional information that doesn’t bring employees any closer to meeting business objectives. Even those more focussed purely on communication tend to overload people with numerous notifications and interruptions and can become yet another conduit for office banter, all of which negatively impacts productivity.

Having layers if communication via various apps and platforms is symptomatic of a modern workplace malady: ‘communication overload’. It leads to workers struggling to stay on top of an endless stream of unfocused messages, meeting requests and unnecessary interruptions. Clarizen’s research indicates that, in the end, apps that fail to directly link communication to business activities, aims and status updates actually prevent fruitful collaboration, effectiveness and efficiency: 81% of respondents said that, despite taking steps to improve communication among employees, they still lack a way to keep projects on track and provide management oversight. Only 16% of the companies surveyed said productivity levels were ‘excellent’—while a nearly quarter said they we ‘just OK’ or ‘we need help’.

TO BREXIT AND BEYOND The Brexit-related communication and collaboration challenges banking and finance players face could put revenues and profits at risk. However, organisations should look at the change needed to overcome the challenges as an opportunity to nurture a more productive and collaborative environment that can boost business agility. Even though it’s not clear what Brexit the UK will get, banking and finance organizations can minimise any potential disruption and even gain a competitive advantage by providing their employees with the methodology and tools they need to succeed—a common approach and single shared platform that keeps each team connected and able to stay on top of their objectives.

The post Overcoming the Brexit communication challenge appeared first on International Finance.