Community

Yes @Bill,

As the "Product", money, is not owned by the Bank but by the customer, the Bank "Products" are "Offerings" (may be services) on how to best manage customers assets. And THAT make quite a difference among other industries' "Products".

Ok, Ketharaman,
these are "Strategic Business Units" or "Line-of-Business", but NOT "Products" as defined by @Bill in his article.

THIS definition is very important for my underlying Architecture.

What's your definition on that?

Thanks again!

@Ketharaman,

By chance, these, would not be "lines of business" instead of "products"?

What do you think @Bill?

Great article to clarify what is a "Product" and what is a "Project"!

As I'm developing an Architecture for Infrastructure "Enterprise Information Governance" for banks, it caught my attention.

Although it is very clear what "Product" means, a question mark appeared in my head.

I explain and would like @Bill and @Ketharaman give us feedback about the subject:

A shoe manufacturer has the shoes as its "Products". He can innovate their "Products" creating new kinds of footwear, improving ergonomics, etc.

The same applies to a car manufacturer, where its "Products" are cars.

This also applies to services and utilities providers, where its "Products" are Water, Energy, Communications, etc.

How about the Banks?

The "Product" of banks is the money?
But the money is NOT owned by the Bank! Money is the property of the clients who trust the Bank to take care of their money!

How "Products" behave in the Bank's arena?

Antecipated thanks for your comments.

In my opinion, the point is not between those two choices.

The point that must be looked at is: When the old "Core Systems" will be definitely banned, replaced by a lighter, cheaper and quicker Architecture?

Let's face it!

As mentioned in Fernando Lanzer’s book Take Off your glasses:

 "The simple stuff that needs to be done is often scary stuff, which we would rather not face. Hence complication is a form of avoiding the simple essence. Complication is a form of using rationality as a shield to defend ourselves from the emotional consequences of acting."

joao.bohner@gmail.com

Decisively and definitely BANK!

The problem today is that banks are spending 'tubes' trying to maintain a very old architecture (if any), making their IT areas larger than many IT companies!

I'm an 'architect in processes' expert.

I'm working on a project which proposal is precisely to reduce the gargantuan costs of the IT of Banks at least 10 times!

This project shakes a lot the current 'Core Systems' by reshaping the way transactions are processed at back office.

And, yes, this is feasible!

Applause for the article!

I'm an architect in processes expert.

I'm working on a project which proposal is precisely to reduce the gargantuan costs of the IT​s of Banks at least 10 times!

This project shakes a lot the current 'Core Systems' by reshaping the way transactions are processed at back office.

And, yes, this is feasible!

Why?

Because of the high 'inefficiency' of current systems - extremely high entropy.

The costs, only for maintenance of the systems are stratospheric compared to other industries.

It is necessary to modify the architecture of processes - and consequently the systems.

The processes must be performed 'corporately' instead of 'by-line-of-business' where redundancies take place, among other inefficiencies.

joao.bohner@gmail.com

KYC should stand for 'Know Your Company'. The customer will adopt the the best company in its personal judgement. The bandwagon is on the wrong trail!

That's it! Spoke up and said!