ICC BPO Seminar for UAE banks

BPO / Supply Chain Finance seminarExtending your trade businessusing new ICC and SWIFT standards

André CastermanHead of Corporate and Supply Chain Markets, SWIFT

Member of the Banking Commission’s Executive Committee, ICC

Co-Chair Bank Payment Obligation Project, ICC

Dubai, JW Marriott Marquis, 17 February 2013

2

Objective

• To inform you about the new industry standards for Supply Chain Finance: BPO and ISO 20022 / TSU

• To share latest success stories from experienced BPO bankers

• To facilitate corporate on-boarding on the BPO and bank pairing on BPO/TSU

To help you growyour trade business

3

Speakers

• Lakshmanan SankaranHead of ICC UAE Banking Commission and Head of Operations & Trade Finance, Commercial Bank of Dubai

• Michael F QuinnManaging Director, JP Morgan Global Trade and Chair of the ICC BPO Education Group

• Bob BlowerGlobal Head of Payments, Cash Management & Trade Products, Standard Bank of South Africa

• Sanjoe MathewAssociate Director, Sales Financing Department, Huawei Dubai

• Sido BestaniHead of Middle East and North Africa, SWIFT

• André CastermanHead of Corporate and Supply Chain Markets, SWIFT and Member of the Banking Commission Executive Committee, ICC

4

Agenda

• Introduction• SWIFT’s innovations in multi-banking

standards for trade and supply chain• ICC’s new Bank Payment Obligation

trade instrument and benefits for corporates

• The first BPO case studies and Live BPO banks

• The corporate perspective on BPO – Questions for a corporate to bankers

• How to get started on the ICC UR BPO rules and ISO 20022 standards

• SWIFT in the MENA Corporate Market• Closing remarks

5

Agenda








6

“Merchandise trade volumes in 2025 hitting $48.5 trillion compared to

today’s $27.2 trillion”

Source: HSBC trade connections, Oct 2011

7

What is the challenge today?

SellerBuyer

LC Advising Bank

LC Issuing Bank

Docum

ents

Contract

Documents

Doc

umen

ts

Adv

ice

Application

Issuance

Payment

Letter of Credit

Bank risk / financing services based on paper document

processing

SellerBuyer

Seller’s Bank

Buyer’s Bank

Contract

Payment

Open Account

Documents

Bank services limited to payment processing.

If any risk, Credit Insurance or Payment Guarantee is added

Continuous shift

Year World Trade (WTO data)

Total Volume of LCs on SWIFT

Total Value of LCs on SWIFT

% world trade on LC (by value)

2000 USD 6 trillion 4.5 million USD 1.5 trillion 25.0

2010 USD 15 trillion 4.6 million USD 2.5 trillion 18.0

2020 (est) USD 33 trillion 4.7 million USD 3.5 trillion 11.0

Market share of the Letters of Credit

The L/C is there to stay but not the instrument for banks to grow their business

Relative drop

9

The opportunity for banks

SellerBuyer

Seller’s Bank

Buyer’s Bank

Contract

Payment

Open Account

Documents

Bank services limited to payment processing

SellerBuyer

Recipient Bank

Obligor Bank

Contract

Documents

Payment

Bank Payment

Obligation

Bank risk / financing services based on electronic trade data

Data

Dat

a

Dat

a

Bank-assisted open account

The BPO enables bank-assisted Open Account trade

10

Agenda








Trade flows have grown substantially over the decades …

Cross Border Trade has more than tripled since the 1980s ….

2010 trade levels (14.5% growth rate) rebounded to pre crisis levels

… the relative importance of Letter of Credit has diminished as trade transactions have migrated to Open Account (i.e. > 80% of transactions are on open account)

% of trade on L/CGlobal value of trade (USD billions)

0

20

40

60

80

100

1950s 1970s 1980s 1990s

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

2000s

Transaction flows via SWIFT have shown a year on year increase in payment volumes (albeit global macro economic conditions)

Trade volumes have remained low or flat over the years due to lack of new and innovative solutions that support the migration to electronic exchange of data and open account trade flows

Cross Border Trade OverviewCross Border Trade Overview

SWIFT Traffic AnalysisSWIFT Traffic Analysis

5T H

E

P O

W E

R

O F

T

R A

D E

-

S

W I

F T

B

A S

E D

S

O L

U T

I O

N S

There are still some inherent challenges with both the traditional documentary credit flows as well as with open account flows; creating an opportunity for a solution that has the best of both flows

Corporates still face challenges in managing the financial supply chain

Challenges on ‘Letter of Credit’ Trade FlowsChallenges on ‘Letter of Credit’ Trade Flows

Process Inefficiencies – Document creation process is onerous for the exporter and often generates discrepancies which result in additional fees and delay in receipt of payment

Higher Credit Utilization – Increased credit utilization on behalf of the buyer and associated conflicts around prudent allocation of available credit

Need For Multi Bank Relationships – requires infrastructure and process (workflow) dealing with different banks

Increased Need For Working Capital – Receipt of documentation takes long; in some cases goods arrive prior to the documents required to clear the goods

Challenges on ‘Open Account’ Trade FlowsChallenges on ‘Open Account’ Trade Flows

Payment / Liquidity Risk – Exporter/Supplier lose access to a negotiable instrument that guarantees payment; potential concerns on credit and exposure concentration

Process Inefficiencies – Documentation receipt and accuracy risk for the Importer/Buyer; potential supply chain risk resulting from tightening credit and liquidity markets

Supply Chain Disruption – Operational risk management especially around discrepancy identification, tracking and resolution could end up being quite onerous for both parties and often lead to disruption of supply chain disruption

6T H

E

P O

W E

R

O F

T

R A

D E

-

S

W I

F T

B

A S

E D

S

O L

U T

I O

N S

Change Is Required In Trade Finance Servicing

The Trade technology environment has been slow to evolve. Recent developments have seen a sudden emergence of multiple initiatives. Which of these is here to stay?

During the technical boom experienced by the Trade Finance banks in the 1990’s, some third party companies found a gap and commenced with the development of bank-neutral platforms. This led to the rise of the innovative multi-bank offering to Corporates leveraging a web-based technology and facilitating the existing flows between Corporates and Banks

Corporate take up of the latter has until now been somewhat lacking, however: Corporates have various types of relationships with their banks. Managing these

relationships in a fast-paced, technology-driven environment becomes complex, especially without a solution based on uniform standards

7T H

E

P O

W E

R

O F

T

R A

D E

-

S

W I

F T

B

A S

E D

S

O L

U T

I O

N S

J.P. Morgan leading the way with SWIFT

Since its inception, J.P. Morgan has been deeply involved in the development of SWIFT Corporate Access. Companies are able to consolidate their banking connectivity and leverage standardized formats and features common to most banks

In 2005, J.P. Morgan was among the first 5 banks to invest with SWIFT in an open account matching solution (Trade Services Utility)

In 2008, SWIFT announced a move to further standardize trade messaging by introducing SWIFT Trade for Corporates, an initiative that delivers Corporate-To-Bank (C2B) and Bank-To-Corporate (B2C) message flows for a number of traditional trade products

In 2010, J.P. Morgan made the strategic decision that SWIFT Trade for Corporates and the Trade Services Utility will be the initiatives that look to revolutionize the multi-bank environment between Corporates and Banks

J.P. Morgan continues to work closely with SWIFT, participating in Global Trade forums and has accepted invitations from Corporates to aid in explaining these initiatives

8T H

E

P O

W E

R

O F

T

R A

D E

-

S

W I

F T

B

A S

E D

S

O L

U T

I O

N S

Industry standardsDeveloped by international standardisation bodies

Industry standards are industry-owned and technology-neutral. They offer a dependable legal and operational framework.

• Trade Finance instruments(E.g. UCP 600, URDG 758, ISP98, URC 522, URBPO)

• MT standards(for L/Cs, Demand Guarantees, Collections)

• ISO 20022 standards • ISO 9362 Business Identifier Code (BIC)• ISO Country codes, Currency codes, …

15

FIN MT 798

FIN MT 7xx

Buyer’s bank(s)

Seller

Seller’sbank(s)

Buyer

1 2 3

Industry standards for L/Cs and Guarantees

16

1

SWIFT's MT 7xx are industry owned and technology neutral standards in support of ICC's rules for L/Cs,

Standby L/Cs and Demand Guarantees

MT 798 Documents MT 798 Documents

UCP 600URDG 758

ISP98

FileAct

MT 7XX

17

Industry standards for Bank Payment Obligation2

Any channel / any format / any solution

Trade Matching

Application

Any channel / any format / any solution

SellerBuyer

1 2 3

Bank Payment

Obligation

Pu

blic

Do

ma

inC

om

me

rcia

l

• SWIFT's Trade Services Utility (TSU)

• Any other inter-bank trade matching application (TMA)

• Bank portal• SWIFT's SCORE• Paper

• Bank portal• SWIFT's SCORE• Paper

ISO 20022 mandatoryISO 20022 optional

18

The BPO is a new payment method

Seller Buyer

Buyers'Bank

Seller'sBank

Purchase OrdersTransport docsCertificatesInvoices

ICC SWIFT

Established B2B

practices

UR BPO rules govern an irrevocable and conditional electronic inter-bank

payment obligation

An industry-wide transaction matching platform that imple-

ments the BPO using ISO 20022

BPO is a new payment term in the ICC Int’l

Sales Model Contract

BPOLC

Pa

pe

r / D

ata

Da

ta

A legally binding rulebook owned by the ICC and based on

ISO 20022 standards

C2B contracts facilitating the

provision of risk & financing services

OA

19

Agenda








“Traditional” Trade Services – Terms of trade impact liquidity and payment risk within a financial supply chain

Globalization and vertical integration has increased the risk across the supply chain leading to challenges for exporter (seller) and importer (buyers) alike.

Increased risk for the buyer

Increased risk for the seller

Seller

BuyerSeller

BPO / TSUISO 20022

Alternate Financing Options - BPO

MT101SWIFT For Corporate (Corporate to Bank)

Trade Service Utility (Bank to Bank)

TSUISO20022

OpenAccount

AdvancePayment

CollectionsFileAct

Collections

L/CMT798

L/CGuarantees

L/CMT7xx

CollectionsMT4xx MT202

Terms of trade

SWIFT Messaging

Source: Trade and Supply Chain in 2011

New

New

13T H

E

P O

W E

R

O F

T

R A

D E

-

S

W I

F T

B

A S

E D

S

O L

U T

I O

N S

Bank Payment Obligation (BPO) – Combine the best features across letters of credit and open account trade flows

The BPO is a new component of the Trade Services Utility (TSU), a data matching and workflow engine based on ISO 20022 accredited XML messaging standards which helps buyer and seller communicate

more effectively in cross border trade via their banking partners.

Efficient exchange of trade related informationEfficient exchange of trade related information

What is it?

TSU was developed by SWIFT to provide efficient exchange of trade related information on an open account basis, through common messaging, industry standards and a utility supported by banks globally

BPO is an irrevocable (conditional) obligation of an obligor bank (typically the buyer’s bank) to pay a specified amount to a recipient bank (the seller’s bank) based on the successful matching of agreed datasets within the TSU

How it works?

Uses SWIFT standardized XML languages and sub sets of data (e.g. ISO 20022)

The data is extracted from existing electronic documentation which represent the basic documentary requirements under LCs – Commercial, Transport, Insurance, Certificate

Centralized data matching and workflow engine designed to handle open account business using SWIFT

Importer or Exporter does not need to be SWIFT or TSU enabled as the interaction is managed by banks

Evolution Of BPO In The MarketplaceEvolution Of BPO In The Marketplace

43 – Countries covered (including North America (USA, Canada), Western Europe, China, India, Brazil among others)

131 – Number of country locations including J.P. Morgan, HSBC, Bank of China, Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ, Citibank, Deutsche amongst others

Initial Industry Applicability – Oil & Gas, Mining, Pharmaceutical, Retail, Chemicals

Comparison of a BPO to a Letter of CreditComparison of a BPO to a Letter of Credit

A LC is an irrevocable payment undertaking between a bank and a corporate client, whereas a BPO is an irrevocable payment undertaking between the buyers bank and the sellers bank

Under a LC, an obligation to pay is created based on the presentation of compliant documents; under BPO an obligation to pay is created based on the presentation of compliant data

Under an LC, document checking is manually undertaken and the bank takes the documentary risk; in the case of a BPO the checking of data is automated within the TSU at SWIFT’s risk

Letters of Credit are governed under Uniform Custom and Practice (UCP600), whereas the BPO is governed by the SWIFT TSU Rule Book

15T H

E

P O

W E

R

O F

T

R A

D E

-

S

W I

F T

B

A S

E D

S

O L

U T

I O

N S

22

The Bank Payment Obligation (BPO)A new alternative instrument for trade settlement

A BPO is an irrevocable undertaking given by one bank to another bank that payment will be made on a specified date after a successful electronic matching of data according to an industry-wide set of rules.

New ICC Uniformed Rules for BPO Target adoption: April 2013

Designed to complement and not to replace existing solutions

ICC Uniform Rules for

Bank Payment Obligations

Letters of Credit BPO Open account

Guaranteed exchange of goods for payment based on physical

presentation of compliant documentation

Guaranteed exchange of goods for payment based on electronic

presentation of compliant data

Exchange of goods for payment based on trust

Long established instrument with basic functionality in use for

hundreds of yearsHigh degree of security for

buyers and sellersVery low default rates for banks;

short-term, self-liquidating

Fully automated processing with low transaction costs

Industry standard data formatsHigh degree of security for the

seller to receive payment

Flexible arrangement requiring no specific infrastructure, processes or

standardsOwing to buyers ability to dictate

terms of trade, risk can be pushed to the seller

Significant amount of manual processing / paperwork

70% rejected on first presentation owing to

discrepanciesHigh costs involved for banks and

corporates

Some risk to the buyer as payment is triggered by the matching of the

invoice data

Offers no protection to the seller against risk of non-paymentDifferent payment terms and methods used across different

countries involving numerous payment processes

High Cost

Low Risk

Des

crip

tio

nP

ros

Co

ns

Low Cost

High RiskLow Cost

Low Risk

The BPO is particularly suited for “trusted” relationships looking for certainty and efficiency

Use of ISO 20022 standards is only mandated between banks

24

COLLABORATIVE

CO

MP

ET

ITIV

EC

OM

PE

TIT

IVE

COLLABORATIVEThere is collaboration between buyer & seller in the selection of the BPO as the agreed payment terms.

There is competition between banks in terms of the level of service they can offer to the corporate in respect of risk mitigation, financing, payment assurance, process efficiency, price etc. In this competitive space, there are no rules or

mandatory standards. Banks & corporates are free to negotiate their own terms by way of bilateral forms of agreement.

There is collaboration between banks in terms of the establishment of a BPO subject to the matching of specified data elements. In this collaborative space, the adoption of the rules (URBPO) and ISO

20022 TSMT messaging standards is mandatory.

Corporate Corporate

Bank Bank

25

Contracts

Seller’s bank

Buyer’s bank

Buyer Seller

Purchase order:

BPO is one option of payment conditions

BPO-based services terms and

conditions

Rulebook in the

TSU Service Description

TSU

Correspondent banking contract

BPO-based services terms and

conditions

See SWIFT’s TSU Service

Description for C2B

contractual guidelines

The BPO transaction lifecycle

Initial Baseline Submissions

Dataset submission and reports

Mismatch acceptance or rejection

BPO establishment

Data SetMatching

Baseline Match report

Pu

rch

ase

ord

er d

ata

Tran

spo

rt

and

Invo

ice

dat

a

Pay

men

t Payment

Cash reportingPayment due

BPO irrevocable & conditional subject to matching of specified data

Bank Payment Obligation due (at sight or deferred)

ISO

20

02

2 T

SM

T r

eq

uir

ed

to

s

up

po

rt B

PO

tra

ns

ac

tio

ns

Ou

tsid

e s

co

pe

o

f B

PO

Ru

les

Baseline amendments

The baseline gathers the matching conditions using data extracted from trade documents

27

Baseline

Commercial data set

Transport data set

Insurance data set

Certificates data set

Purchase order

Insurancedocument

CertificatedocumentInvoice

Air Waybill (AWB), bill of lading (BOL),…

Matching conditions

Optional

MandatoryAllows payment risk

syndication by multiple obligor banks

Ordering Production Delivery Invoicing Payment & cash mgmt

Invoice Issuance

Purchase Order (PO)

TransportDocuments

Invoice ApprovalCertificates Payment

Goods Acceptance

Payment risk mitigationPre-shipment finance

Post-shipment finance

Earlypayment

Payment Processing

Transforming open account payments into SCF opportunities

The BPO will allow banks to extend risk mitigation and pre/post-shipment financing services on open account trade transactions

The BPO builds upon electronic data matching

Matching of contract data

Transfer of funds

Matching of data

Buyer Seller

1) Sign contract / raise PO

2) Enter PO data

3) Enter PO data

4) Match PO data & confirm

6) Match requested datasets & confirm

5) Enter invoice/transport data

8) Transfer funds

7) Debit buyer 9) Pay sellerFIN

TSU

Bank A Bank B

Buyer Seller

Bank A Bank B

TSU

Buyer Seller

Bank A Bank B

BPO is established

BPO is due

Transaction is settled

BPO flows for pre-shipment financeRecipient Bank finances Seller based on BPO

Seller Buyer

BPO Obligor

Bank

BPO Recipient

Bank

Carriers

1 Purchase order

3

Agree BPO based on PO data 2

Request BPO based on PO data

Trade Services

Utility (TSU)

BPO established

5Pre-shipment financing

Confirmed PO

4

BPO flows for post-shipment financeRecipient Bank finances Seller based on BPO

Seller Buyer

BPO Obligor

Bank

BPO Recipient

Bank

CarriersDelivery of goods

Transport & invoice data

56

Data match report

6 Data match report

10 Transfer funds at maturity

1 Purchase order

3

Agree BPO based on PO data

2 Request BPO based on PO data

4 Shipment

Invoice and shipping documents9

Trade Services

Utility (TSU)

Established BPO

BPO is due

8 Post-shipmentfinancing

Confirmed invoice

7

32

Agenda








33

Live BPO banksBanks with live transactions + 1 corporate case study

Live Banks Region Intra / Inter-bank transations

Locations of live corporate supply chains

Corporate case study

Bank of China APAC Intra in ChinaInter

CN Ito Yokado’s Chinese suppliers

Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ

APAC IntraInter

JP, HK, CN, TW Ito Yokado

Korea Exchange Bank

APAC Inter KR Automotive industry (in development)

Standard Chartered Bank

EMEA Intra BE, OM BP ChemicalsOctal

Siam Commercial Bank

APAC Inter TH PTT Polymer Marketing Co (in development)

34

Banks ready for live use of BPOBanks ready to go live but with no live BPO transactions yet

• Bank al Etihad (Jordan)• Barclays• Byblos Bank (Lebanon)• Commercial Bank of Dubai• Commerzbank• Deutsche Bank • Hua Nan Bank (Taiwan)• J.P. Morgan• Kasikornbank (Thailand)• Siam Commercial Bank (Thailand)• Standard Bank of South Africa• Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation (SMBC)

35

49 banks adopting BPO (update as at 3 January 2013)

Including 15 from the top20 Trade banks

BP Chemicals case SCB offers BPO to replace confirmed L/Cs

36

Challenges• About 50% of exposure on secured terms • Competitive commodities market requires a

secure and cheaper alternative to L/Cs• High processing and confirming costs (0.8%

of transaction value) • LCs process limits commercial possibilities

and weakens compliance under certain conditions.

Company profile• 2010 Revenues of USD 14 billion • Revenue created for approx. 50% in Asia• Trade account receivables of EUR 1.4

billion (consolidated receivables only)• More than 600 clients worldwide

Key benefits• Get paid on time and avoid judicial proceedings • Reduce complexity – removal of paper trail• Limit to relevant trade information only • Reduce cost by removing vetting activities and

presentation assistance• Improve customer offer by allowing for flexible

options• Improve speed of handling discrepancies • Reduce the risk of discrepancies• Reduce need for confirmation cost by being able

to tap larger pools. Free up banking lines.• Easy to exercise tool for liquidity• Easier access to banks to secure transactions • Possibility to spread the risk with multiple obligors• Avoid unnecessary paper flows.

Gains expected greater than $1m per year worldwidebut most of the upside lies in more marginal income

The Bank Payment Obligation

Live

Kabushiki-gaisha Itō Yōkadō ( 株式会社イトーヨーカ堂 ) BPO to replace L/C and D/P

37

Challenges• Sales decrease of 2.5% in 2011 due to lower consumer

spending: offset by cost reduction• Leverage group strengths to raise competitiveness • Direct overseas procurement for apparel • Import garments from suppliers in Hong-Kong and China

requires 2 weeks until fund settlement: goods are already sold

• Delay in reconciliation of Account Payables.

Company profile• Subsidiary of Seven & I Holdings operating convenience

stores, superstores, food supermarkets, department stores, food services, financial services, and IT/services

• One of the 5 hypermarkets (Superstore) in Japan, part of Seven & I Holdings Co

• 170+ stores in Japan, 10+ stores in China• Food (48.7%), Apparel (18.9%), Household goods

(14%), Tenants (17.3%)• 167 million USD revenue & 40,000 employees

Key benefitsBank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ• Branch network on TSU• Reduce costs of document handling • B/L from exporter to importer directly (70-80% of L/Cs)• Agreement template for local regulations

Importer: • Early payment to the exporter –financial support • Ability to negotiate better trade terms with exporter • Improve the reconciliation of the Account Payables by

using shipping data from TSU• Optimize working capital thanks to earlier settlement • Streamline operations• Flexible order of goods: increase business opportunities

Exporter: • Easier operation and earlier funds collection and FX risk

elimination: from 10 days to 3 days in average • No need to secure professional resources • Cut discrepancy fees • Improve visibility and traceability

Reduce process from 2 weeks to 3 days: pay suppliers in advance, reduce discrepancy and outsourcing costs, improve working capital management

Live

38

Agenda


standards for trade and supply chain• ICC’s new Bbank Payment Obligation






39

Questions on BPO to bankers

• What’s in it for buyers?

• What’s in it for sellers?

• Are banks ready?

• Which changes are required on the customer contracts?

• How should a corporate start? Is any technology required for corporate clients?

Value Proposition for Corporates

TSU – BPO initiative can radically reduce operational costs, mitigate risk and optimize working capital requirements along the supply chain.

Exporter (Seller) BenefitsExporter (Seller) Benefits

Mitigate payment risk associated with a move to Open Account (OA)

Improve Days Sales Outstanding (DSO) by driving better accuracy of data matching

Ability to collect receivables (lower DSO) by participating in payables discounting, receivables financing

Ability to receive cost effective funding from banking partners (pre-shipment, post-shipment, supply chain finance etc.)

Reducing liquidity risk by getting faster confirmation of payments from importer

Improved management of third party providers / intermediaries, performance against SLAs

Increased visibility to transaction flows

Importer ( Buyer) BenefitsImporter ( Buyer) Benefits

Enable the exporter to receive alternate sources of financing (pre-shipment, post shipment etc.)

Enable my trading partners to move to open account terms

Provide operational and technology infrastructure to facilitate data matching and compliance

Reduce cycle time to receive documentation compared to traditional documentary trade process

Reduce total cost of operation across Open Account and LC transactions

Better integration with existing technology and facilitation of electronic processes (higher STP)

Optimized credit utilization via selective usage of risk mitigation tools

19T H

E

P O

W E

R

O F

T

R A

D E

-

S

W I

F T

B

A S

E D

S

O L

U T

I O

N S

41

Agenda








42

Not yet a TSU member?

43

Readiness dashboard for banks adopting the BPO

Commercial readiness

•Business case•Market research•Data mining•New product definition•Legal•Accounting•Collateral•Sales training•Promote

Operational readiness

•“Proof of concept”•Training•Test plan•Operational procedures•Automation

Technical readiness

•Register to TSU•Set up test environment incl. TSU Interface•Define impact on front / middle / back office•Develop integration project

Business Operations Infrastructure

44

BPO training and testing

• Customized BPO business and operational training (onsite or webinar)

• SWIFT as test partner: a service provided by SWIFT HQ in Belgium.

• For TSU banks that do not have a counterparty test bank yet.

• 3 pre-defined scenarios with XML files

45

BPO starter pack

•Business training: BPO benefits and BPO-based services,…•Delivery: on-site or private webex•1 man-day

TSU Business Training/Workshop

•Operational training: messages (ISO20022), flows, matching,…•Delivery: on-site or private webex•2 man-days

TSU Operational Training/Workshop

•A full description of all BPO rules + examples•Delivery: on-site or private webex•2 man-days

TSU BPO rules Workshop

•SWIFT will provide test cases and will act as counterparty bank•2 man-days (to be adapted if bank specific scenario's)

BPO Testing via SWIFT’s Test Partner Service

•Direct access to a BPO/TSU expert •Time & material

Business & Technical Support

46

“à la carte” selection from a list of modules

•Organization, scheduling, and maintenance for your TSU implementation project

•Min. 10 man-days

Project management

•Analysis of current flows•Recommendations on new opportunities•Min 10 man-days

Building your business case for adopting BPO

•Project plan to adopt BPO: can include market research, data mining, new product definition, legal, accounting, etc•Min 10 man-days

Develop your BPO adoption plan

•TSU ordering•1 man-day

TSU Implementation Ordering

•Configuration of Alliance WebStation or Web Platform•Installation of TSU-Interface•2 man-days

TSU Implementation TSU-Interface Installation

47

“à la carte” selection from a list of modules

•How to use the ISO 20022 standards and the various fields. How to map existing formats to ISO 20022 standards. How to use the matching rules.•Min. 5 man-days

Ad-hoc implementation of ISO 20022 TSMT

messages with correspondent banks

•Business content and information flows on existing ISO 20022 TSMT messages, covering the possible communication between corporations and financial institutions•Min. 2 man-days

Ad-hoc implementation of ISO 20022 TSMT

messages with corporate clients

•Integration Services related to your SWIFT infrastructure through experienced SWIFT consultants•Functional Analysis to deliver an Integrator service proposal •Time & material

Implementation of Alliance Integrator in support of back-office integration

•To evaluate the benefits of using BPO in terms of process efficiency gains and payment delay risk mitigation in a multi-bank environment.•Min. 20 man-days per corporate

Ad-hoc corporate on-boarding on BPO

48

Agenda








49

Corporates in MENA: 34SAUDI Year

Saudi Aramco 2005

Arab Petrolem Investments 2010

King Abdullah Petroleum Studies 2009

Gpt Special Projects Mangt. Ltd 2010

National Biscuits & Onfectionery 2010

Sahara Petrochemicals Company 2010

United Carton Industries Co 2011

Aramco Trading 2011

Saudi Chevron 2012

Saudi Ceramics 2012

National Food Industry 2012

SABIC 2012

SADARA 2012

SIPCHEM 2012

QATAR YearQatar Telecom 2006Qatar Foundation 2008Tasweeq 2009Qatar Gas 2010Rasgas 2010Qatar Petroleum 2012

KUWAIT YearKuwait Petroleum Corporation 2008Arab Fund For Economic And Social 2009Kuwait Airways 2010Independent Petroleum 2012Others: AE, BH, LB, LY, MA YearEastnets 2010Zain Bahrain B.S.C Closed 2009Mabruk Oil 2009Louis Dreyfus 2011Katota 2011General National Maritime 2011Ocp 2011Middle East Airlines 2012Octal Petrochemicals FZC 2012Al Jaber Group 2013

50

Agenda








51

Why shall banks consider BPO?

To benefit from new sources of transaction banking revenue

To provide trade services in a cost effective wayand benefit from a higher margin

To stay in the game andrespond to market demand and trends

To be more competitive and innovative

As trade will grow by 2020 and beyond, banks need to get ready to mitigate payment risks and offer flexible financing in

a modern way

52

Thank youJoin our "Supply Chain on SWIFT" group on

Email us at [email protected] to register to our frequent information mailings

Join our frequent Webinars

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.linkedin.com/updates?view=my&goback=.nmp_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1