Community

A very interesting article, but it is not clear when it was written, as it seemed to have been published very recently, yet in the article refers to a much earlier date ("last Friday (the 20th of November)") of an unknown year.

Nevertheless, much of what is said is still very valid.

A very interesting comment. Of course flexibility is important, as each bank will tell you they are not exactly like the others and you need to be able to accomodate each bank's particular requirements, processes etc.

But you also need to be able to limit the effect of scope creep by delivering a system which is as close as possible to the requirements of the target bank. This requires a vendor to have had considerable experience, preferably across multiple institutions in multiple geographies.

But as for delaying decisions, that comes back to how a project is run and the involvement of the bank's own management team in making decisions or empowering and then pushing users to make decisions.

It also needs experienced staff, preferably who know the product and not "just hired" juniors or temps from a consultancy firm, who can not only advise the users but also oush back when it looks as if scope creep is getting beyond the boundaries of what would be reasonable given the project, the budget and the desired timelines.

Private Banking is primarily about clients, and I think that the response to the issue raised also depends very much on the client profile. The elderly sheikh is not going to sit down with a PC or an iPad to look at his accounts and portfolio. He will summon the Private Banker to his palace. The entrepreneur on the other hand will want extensive digital access through multiple channels. The client who lives in certain countries of the world may not have internet access available of sufficient quality, or be afraid that using it he will be traced. He will want to physically review the portfolio with his Private Banker in a location which does not alert the suspicions of certain people or governments. The core system, and the channels which the bank make available (everything from meetings to digitally-based channels) need to be of sufficient variety to meet the different requirements of the different clilents (and keep up with them as those requirements change over time).

Alan,

How right you are! But not only at the very large, very public project level.

It really does seem that so often banks have people choosing IT projects, and indeed then running them, who have no idea of what is happening in the market.

Even if the bank employees don't have a view of what has happened and the large number of failed projects which are public knowledge, they could at least get some decent advise/advisors to help them.

All good iniatives, but why didn't SWIFT tell us the vendors of the initiative regarding give aways in a clearer fashion? As with so much else at SIBOS this yet the previously exceptionally slick logistical organisation seems to be getting sloppy round the edges!

The actions of SWIFT are great, and I'm sure show the way forward. But it's a pity that several of the promises made at the 2007 SIBOS have not come to pass (e.g. being able to buy a laptop in Europe or UK and have a matching one sent to needy children). The volumes of machines disztributed don't match the earlier promises either.

In addition, why did they not try to sell machines at SIBOS itself? There are a lot of people with plenty of credit cards at SIBOS! Many could surely have been persuaded to buy a laptop (smaller than some give aways in terms of luggage space going hime) and in turn donate money or another laptop to a worthwhile cause.