Upload
phunganh
View
221
Download
4
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
CGITransactionBankingSurvey2017
2
Table of ContentsForeword 3
ClientExperienceandSatisfaction 5
ClientOverallSatisfaction 6
ReviewingBankingRelationships 8
BankProductsUnderReview 9
ChangesinBankingRelationships 11
ClientOverallSatisfactionwithSpecificServices 12
BankSelection 13
CorporatePractitionerPerspective 14
BankActivity 15
NumberofBankingPartners 16
BankingChannels 19
PreferredBankAccess 23
TypesofAccesstoBankServices 25
AreasforImprovement 24
Challenges 29
ChallengesFacedwhenIntegratingwithaBankforCashManagementServices 30
Serviceproviders 32
ChallengersforBanks 33
BarrierstoGrowth 34
ReviewingRelationships 36
DriversforChange 37
RatingPerformance 40
ScopeofService 41
FutureGrowthStrategy 43
Models 44
Businessstrategy 46
MobileAppServices 48
CompetitiveDifferentiation 49
ValueAddedServices 51
Otherpartnerships 54
Transactionservices 55
Security 56
PSD:TheRevisedDirectiveonPaymentServices 58
AbouttheSurvey 60
Conclusion 62
3
For the fifth year running, CGI is a proud sponsor of the GTNews Transaction Banking survey, which offers critical insight into the corporate-to-bank relationship. While 2016 survey results showed a dramatic drop in corporate satisfaction, this year the decline is bottoming out. Corporate satisfaction
remains low, but there is a growing sense of opportunity and greater clarity for corporate and transaction banks in finding the pathway to increased corporate satisfaction and loyalty.
Corporatesatisfactionremainsconstant,with54%verysatisfiedandsatisfiedwiththeircurrentbankingrelationshipsforthesecondyearrunning.However,therehasbeenan83%year-over-yeardropintheuseofnon-banksfromlastyear,andbankrelationshipsappeartobecontracting,comparedtotheincreaseinmulti-bankingwehaveseenoverthelastfewyears.Banksalsoseemtobemoreoptimisticandresponsivetotheneedsofcorporates,with43%nowstatingtheyareoperatingaglobalbankingmodel,comparedto31%ayearago.Thiscorporatepreferencetoremainwithtraditionalbanksandthestabilizationofmulti-bankingexpansionsendsaclearoptimisticmessagetobanks—butlesssofornon-banks.
However,whilecorporatesmaybeturningfromnon-bankcompetitors,halfofcorporatesareactivelyreviewingtheirbankrelationships,especiallysmalltomediumenterprises(SMEs)andlargemulti-nationalsforcost,technology,securityandservicereasons.Corporatesareseekingtodrivedowntheircostofbankingandconsolidaterelationships.Theyareseekinggreaterintegrationofservicesandimprovedreal-timecapabilities.Theirbanks’securityandreputationalcapabilitiesalsoareunderscrutiny,andtheycontinuetoseekbetterdigitalservicing.
Intermsofthecostofbanking,leadingbanksareinvestinginefficiencyinitiatives,especiallyinvanillaservices,todrivedowncostsandpassonthesavingstotheircustomerstoaddresshigherpricecompetitioninthemarket.Costreasonsaredriving66%ofcorporatestoreviewtheirbankrelationships.
Whencomparingkeybankrelationshipfactorswithbankperformanceratings,webegintoseesomeclearmessagesaboutthepathwaytoimprovedcorporatesatisfactionandloyalty.Intermsofsecurity,technologyandservicefactors,
oneinthreecorporatesdonotconsidertheirbankstobeperformingexcellentlyorverywell.Currentprovisionoftechnologyservicesshowsthebiggestdisappointmentamongcorporates.Ofgreaterconcern,basedonthisyear’sresults,isthemismatchbetweenwhatcorporatesandbanksviewaspriorities.Consequently,thisyear’ssurveyprovidesvaluableinsightforbankswhowanttoreprioritizetoincreasecorporatesatisfaction.
Corporatesplaceabank’ssecurityrecordandfinancialcrimecapabilitiesatthetopoftheirlistforbothexistingandnewbankrelationships.Givenwellknownsecuritybreachesandfines,aswellasthemovetoopenbankingandnewregulations,89%ofcorporatesratebanksecuritycapabilitiesandtrackrecordsasthemostcriticalfactorintheirexistingbankrelationships;yetonly43%ofbanksviewsecurityasasourceofdifferentiation.Bothcorporatesandbanksviewsecurityasamutualresponsibility,andcorporatesarelookingforamuchmoreproactivesecurityapproachfrombankstoprotectthesystemasawhole.Aswemovetoreal-timepayments,corporatesbelievetheroleofbanksinensuringend-to-endsecurityissignificantlyincreasing,sothisisakeytimetodiscusssecuritywithcorporates.
Theprioritymismatchcontinueswhenwelookattechnologyfactorsimportanttocorporatesintheirbankrelationshipsandthebanks’perspective.Overthelasttwoyears,corporateshaveplacedgreatvalueontheharmonizationofstandardsamongbanks.Thisyearisnodifferent.Over50%ofcorporatesreportmajorchallengesinonboarding,fileformattingandprocessintegrationwithnewbanks.While62%ofbanksrecognizeeaseofintegrationasasourceofcompetitivedifferentiation,only29%viewconformancewithindustrystandardsassuch.Forty-fourpercentofbanksviewthestreamliningofonboardingandentitlementservicesasapriorityinvestmenttodrivenewrevenue.Whilebanksmayviewindustry-widestandardizationasenablinggreaterswitching,thevoiceofcorporatesisclear,andthetimetoactisnow.
Integrateddigitalservicingcontinuestofallshortofcorporateexpectations.Manybanksaremakingaseriousinvestmentinnewportals,and50%ofcorporatesreportthattheyareofferedmulti-servicesportals.Another37%percentbenefitfromportalsthatdeliverservicesacrossmultiplebanks.Onlineserviceuseandpreferencearenotfollowing.Ifwelookattheprovisionofmulti-servicesonline,weseethatmanyindividualservicesarenotcurrentlyintegratedintothisenvironment.Inwhichcasethetreasurer’sdesireforintegratedworkingcapitalmanagement,forexample,cannotbemet.Likewise,theprovisionoftradefinanceinamulti-serviceonlineenvironment
Foreword
4
isverylowat28%.Howcanthetreasurerconductintegratedsupplychainfinanceinthisinstance?Drivingaclient-centricapproachtoportals,withtheinclusionofrelatedservices,isnowcritical.
Bankproductsatisfactionthisyearispoor,especiallyintermsofSMEs,withonly25%consideringproductservicesasexcellentorverygood.Satisfactionwithreal-timepaymentsisbelow40%acrossallgeographies-aclearwarningsigntobanksthatvalue-addservicesareneededoverandabovetransactionalvanillaservices.Corporatesthathaveturnedawayfromnon-banksarenowlookingforalternativelendingandsupplychainplatformsfromtheirbanks.Multi-nationalsandSMEs,inparticular,arelookingforenhancedworkingcapitalmanagementservices.Banksappeartoberesponding,apartfromofferingnewlendingoptions.
Corporatesalsoarelookingforothervalueadd-services-anareawherebankscangeneratenewrevenuestreams.Thehighestratedvalue-addservicefromcorporatesisbanksupportinunderstandingupcomingregulationsandchanges.Thisservicealsosawthebiggestdelta;while62percentofcorporatesratedthisasapriorityvalue-addservice,only39percentofbankswerealigned.
Interestingly,thesecondlargestdiscrepancybetweencorporateandbankprioritieswassecurityadvisoryservices.Thirty-threepercentofcorporatesviewtheseasapriorityareaforinnovation,whileonly16%ofbanksagree.Thereisclearlyanopportunitytoaddmorevalue-addservicesandtobenefitfromtherevenuestreamsassociatedwiththem.Bankvalue-addserviceinnovationmustbehighontheagenda.
Thegoodnewsisthatbanksarealignedwiththeircustomerswhenitcomestotheimportanceofinnovation.Corporatesare
demonstratingarealinterestinreceivingsupportinleveragingnewtechnologiessuchasblockchain.Blockchainisthesecondtopratedvalue-addserviceamongcorporatesandthehighestratedinnovationareaamongbanksintermsofitspotentialforgeneratingnewrevenue.Moreover,banksarebeginningtosupporttheircustomersinthisarea,asthepercentageofbanksofferingopenAPIsmorethandoubledfrom15%to32%.
Overthepastfiveyears,theresultsofthiscriticalmarketsurveyofcorporate-to-bankrelationshipshasprovidedimportantinsightonhowthemarketischanging,actionsthatbanksshouldtakeinresponse,andthemountingfrustrationfromcorporateswhenitcomestothedelayedchangeinthebankingsystemthatservesthem.Inthisyear’sresults,weseemuchmoreclearlythatcorporateexpectationsarematuring.Overthenextthreeyears,corporateandtransactionbankswill,onaverage,increasenewtechnologyinvestmentby24%totransformtheirbusinesstobecomecustomercentric.Nowisthetimetoensurethatthisinvestmentinafullytechnology-enabledbusinesscoverstheareasessentialfordrivingcorporatesatisfactionandloyalty.
CGIisaworldleaderinconsulting,systemsintegration,outsourcingandsoftwaretowholesalebanksaroundtheworld.Wehopeyoufindthisreportofvalueinhelpingyoutoprioritizeinitiativesthatpromotesuccess.Ifyouwouldliketodiscussthisresearchandhowwecansupportyou,[email protected]
Jerry NortonSenior Vice President, Global Financial ServicesCGI
Foreward
55
ClientExperienceandSatisfaction
6ClientExperienceandSatisfaction
Client Overall Satisfaction
Intoday’sincreasinglychallengingregulatoryenvironment,andwithaplethoraofnewdigitalproductsenteringthemarket,itiscrucialforcorporatetreasurerstomaintainastrongrelationshipwiththeirbankingpartners.Thischallengingclimateequallymeansthattreasurersneedtodemandmorefromthosebankingpartners,namelymoreadvancedsolutionsalongsidethetraditionalservicestheyreceivefromtheirbanks.
Althoughwesawalargefallincorporates’satisfactionwiththeirmainbankingfrom2015to2016,andtherehasbeennoregainingofgroundinthisarea,itdoesappearthattheincreaseindisapprovalhasbeenarrested.
Overall Satisfaction with Service Provided by Main Banking Partners(Percentage Distribution of Corporate Practitioners Rating Service ‘4’ or ‘5’ on a 5-point scale)
Overall,satisfactionfortheserviceprovidedbymainbankingpartnersamongcorporatepractitionersisalmostthesameaslastyear,withjustoverhalf(54%)ofcorporatepractitionersratingtheservicetheyreceive‘4’or‘5’ona5-pointscale(where‘1’wasnotatallsatisfiedand‘5’wasverysatisfied).Lastyearthefigurewas55%.Althoughthismarksanotherdecreaseinoverallsatisfactionwithbankingpartners’service,thisdecreaseisfarsmallerthanwhatwasrecordedbetween2015and2016,whenoverallsatisfactionfell13percentagepointsfrom68%to55%.
Highly satisfied (service rated '4' or '5')
54%46%
Less than highly satisfied (service rated '1', '2' or '3')
7ClientExperienceandSatisfaction
Overall Satisfaction with Service Provided by Main Banking Partners(Percentage Distribution of Corporate Practitioners Rating Service)
Corporateswithannualrevenuesofmorethan$5bnaremorethantwiceaslikelyasbothsmallerandmid-sizedfirmstoratetheirsatisfactionwithbankingpartners’servicesasa‘5’.Where17%oftheselargerbusinessesratedtheirsatisfactionwithbankingpartnersasa‘5’,just7%ofsmallercorporates(thosewithannualrevenuesoflessthan$500mayear)and4%ofmid-sizedcorporatetreasurers(thosewithanincomeofbetween$500mand$4.9bnayear)didso.
Mid-earningcompaniesaretheleastlikelygroupbyearningstoratetheservicetheyreceiveasverysatisfactory,thisisthelowestofanydemographicsurveyedalongsidepubliclyheldcompanies.
Publicorganisationsandmediumincomecompaniesarealsomorelikelytoratetheirsatisfactionthelowestofall,with8%and7%respectivelyratingtheirbankingpartners’servicea‘1’.
On a scale of 1 to 5, how satisfied are you with the service your organization receives from its main banking partners?
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
5(verysatisfied) 7% 7% 4% 17% 4% 8% 10% 8% 9%
4 48% 37% 63% 44% 50% 47% 50% 48% 45%
3 39% 43% 33% 39% 33% 37% 36% 40% 40%
2 3% 7% 0% 0% 4% 3% 0% 2% 2%
1(notatallsatisfied) 4% 7% 0% 0% 8% 5% 4% 2% 4%
8ClientExperienceandSatisfaction
Reviewing Banking Relationships
Review of Strategic Relationship with Main Banking Partner(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners)
Yes
50%50%
No
Overall,in2017exactlyhalfofcorporatesarereviewingtheirorganization’sstrategywiththeirmainbankingpartners,andhalfarenot.Farmorecorporatesarechoosingnottoreviewtheirstrategythisyear,markinga12-pointincreaseon2016’sfigure.
Review of Strategic Relationship with Main Banking Partner(Percentage Distribution of Corporate Practitioners)
Overwhelminglyso,higherincomeorganizations(thosewithannualincomeofmorethan$5bnayear)aremostlikelytobereviewingtheirstrategicrelationshipwiththeirmainbankingpartner–nearlythree-fourths(72%).Aslargerorganizationsare,aswefoundintheprevioussection,generallymoresatisfiedwiththeservicetheyreceivefromtheirbankingpartners,itcouldbeinferredthatregularstrategicreviewwithmainbankingpartnersleadstogreatersatisfactionwiththeservicetheyprovide.
BusinessesbasedinNorthAmericaandpubliclyheldorganizationsarealsomorelikelythantheaveragetobereviewingtheirstrategicrelationshipwiththeirmainbankingpartners,with60%and58%oftheserespondentsselecting‘yes’respectively.
Are you reviewing your organization’s strategy with your main banking partners?
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Yes 50% 53% 44% 72% 58% 50% 54% 60% 53%
No 50% 47% 56% 28% 42% 50% 46% 40% 47%
9ClientExperienceandSatisfaction
Bank Products Under Review
Bank Product Areas Under Review(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners Planning to Assess Current Relationships with their Main Banking Partners)
Aswasthecaselastyear,cash management servicesisthebankproductareamostlikelytobeunderreview,with70%ofcorporateshighlightingthis.However,thisisaten-pointreductiononlastyear’sfigures.Nearlytwo-thirds(65%)ofrespondentsselectedpayments,anewoptionforthisyear’ssurvey,asthebankproductareasecondmostlikelytobeunderreview.
Theremainingoptionstrackreasonablycloselywiththeirpositionslastyear,withtheexceptionofpayables.Thenumberofcorporatesselectingthisfellathird,from42%in2016to28%thisyear.
Inaddition,theproportionofcorporatesselectingcredit/lendingforreviewalmosthalved,from39%lastyearto20%thisyear.Andinanotherdramaticfinding,Investment banking/capital marketsclimbedfromtheleastcitedbankproductlastyear,selectedby17%ofcorporates,to24%thisyear.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Other
Forecasting
Depository services
Open account (supply chain financing)
Credit / lending
Investment banking / capital markets
Payables
Receivables
Trade finance (letters of credit, collections)
Reporting
FX (including hedging)
Liquidity solutions (including pooling / netting)
Payments
Cash Management Services 70%
65%
48%
45%
33%
30%
29%
28%
24%
20%
19%
18%
18%
3%
10ClientExperienceandSatisfaction
Bank Product Areas Under Review(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners Planning to Assess Current Relationships with their Main Banking Partners)
Nearlyalllargercompanies(thosewithanannualincomeinexcessof$5bn)arereviewingtheircash management services,with89%ofrespondentscitingthis.Ontheothersideofthespectrum,57%ofsmallerbusinesses(thosemakinglessthan$500mayear)arereviewingthisbankproduct.
Largerorganizationsarealsomorelikelytobereviewingtheirliquidity solutions, FX and investment banking/capital marketsthanotherorganizations.
What bank product areas are you reviewing?
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Payments 65% 60% 63% 67% 46% 68% 66% 60% 68%
Tradefinance(letterofcredit,collections
30% 27% 26% 44% 29% 32% 38% 33% 30%
Openaccount 19% 13% 19% 28% 13% 21% 22% 21% 19%
CashManagementServices 70% 57% 78% 89% 71% 68% 68% 81% 77%
Reporting 33% 33% 44% 33% 38% 40% 36% 40% 36%
Payables 28% 23% 33% 28% 25% 29% 36% 35% 28%
Receivables 29% 23% 41% 28% 21% 32% 38% 35% 28%
LiquiditySolutions(includingpooling/netting)
48% 50% 33% 72% 50% 47% 52% 54% 53%
Depositryservices 18% 17% 26% 17% 13% 24% 20% 17% 21%
Investmentbanking/capitalmarkets
24% 20% 22% 33% 13% 26% 16% 25% 13%
Credit/lending 20% 20% 22% 28% 13% 29% 24% 21% 23%
FX(includinghedging) 45% 37% 52% 78% 50% 45% 58% 54% 57%
Forecasting 18% 13% 26% 22% 4% 24% 18% 27% 19%
Other(pleasespecify) 3% 3% 4% 0% 0% 5% 0% 2% 2%
Noneoftheabove 10% 13% 7% 0% 13% 11% 8% 4% 4%
11ClientExperienceandSatisfaction
Changes in Banking Relationships
Overall,corporatesaremorelikelytohaveincreasedthenumberofbankingrelationshipstheyhaveovertheprevious12monthstoJune2017thantheywereinthesameperiodtoJune2016.Therewasaten-percentagepointincreasehere.Thepercentageofcorporatesthatdecreasedthenumberoftheirbankingrelationshipsfellmodestlycomparedwithlastyear,from19%to15%.Intotal,halfofallcorporatetreasurerssurveyedsawnochangetothenumberofbankingrelationshipstheyhadoverthelastyear.
Changes in Bank Relationships in the Past 12 Months(Percentage Distribution of Corporate Practitioners)
Privatebusinessesaremorelikelytohaveincreasedthenumberofbankingrelationshipstheyhavethantheirpubliccounterparts.Acrossincomebands,smallercompanies(thosewithanannualincomeoflessthan$500m)aretheleastlikelytohavedecreasedtheirnumberofbankingrelationships,withjust7%sayingthisisthecasecomparedto22%ofbothmid-sizedandlargerorganizations.
Largercorporates(thosewithannualincomesofmorethan$5bn),aswellascorporateswhosetreasuriesoperateinNorthAmericaandWesternEurope,arefarmorelikelytohaveincreasedtheirnumberofbankingrelationshipsoverthelast12monthsthantheywereoverthesameperiodlastyear.Where14%oflargercorporatesincreasedthenumberofbankingrelationshipstheyhadinthe12monthsfromJune2015-16,morethantwicetheproportiondidinthe12monthsfromJune2016-17,at33%.
InNorthAmerica,theproportionoforganizationsthathadincreasedthenumberofbankingrelationshipstheyhaveoverthelast12monthsmorethandoubledfrom21%to44%,andinWesternEuropethepercentagerosefrom21%to34%.
How has the number of bank relationships in your organization changed
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Increased 35% 33% 37% 33% 25% 32% 38% 44% 34%
Decreased 15% 7% 22% 22% 25% 11% 18% 17% 19%
Unchanged 50% 60% 41% 44% 50% 58% 44% 40% 47%
12ClientExperienceandSatisfaction
Client Overall Satisfaction with Specific Services
Overall,thelevelofsatisfactionwithbankingpartnersforarangeofdifferentserviceshasnotchangedsignificantlyfromlastyear.Thechartbelowillustratestheproportionoffinancialprofessionalsthatratedtheirpartners‘excellent’or‘good’ineacharea.
Overall Satisfaction Provided by Main Banking Partners for Each Service(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners Rating Service as “excellent” or “good”)
Whenitcametoratingtheirsatisfactionwithspecificservices,mostcorporates(52%)ratedpaymentseither‘excellent’or‘good’.Closebehindwascash managementservicesandliquidity services,eachwith49%ofcorporatesratingthem‘excellent’or‘good’.Corporatepractitionerswereleastsatisfiedwithforecastingservicesofthe14optionspresented,asjustaquarterratedthis‘excellent’or‘good’.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Forecasting
Open account services (supply chain financing)
Depository services
Investment banking / capital markets capabilities
Receivables
Real-time payments
Payables
Reporting
Trade finance (letters of credit, collections)
FX (including hedging)
Credit / lending
Liquidity services (including pooling / netting)
Cash Management Services
Payments 52%
49%
49%
48%
43%
41%
41%
40%
38%
38%
33%
32%
29%
25%
1313
BankSelection
14BankSelection
Corporate Practitioner Perspective
Thechartbelowillustratestheproportionofcorporatesthatratedthelevelofvalueforeachfactor‘veryimportant’or‘quiteimportant’.
Thepictureherelooksalittledifferentfromlastyear.In2016securitywasthefactorconsideredmostimportanttocorporatepractitionerswhenestablishinganewbankingrelationship(87%),thisyearthatoption’scounterpartsecurity and financial crime policies and capabilitieswasthethirdmostconsideredfactor,with81%selectingit,representingafallofsixpercentagepoints.
Factors Considered When Organizations Establish a Banking Relationship(Percentage of Organizations Rating the Level of Value ‘very important’ or ‘quite important’)
Themostselectedfactorthisyearwasselecting the best-in-class providers of products or services,whichwascitedby89%ofcorporates.Highly efficient and integrated technology systems and processeswasonceagainconsideredthesecondmostimportantfactortoorganizationsestablishingabankingrelationship,with87%ofcorporatesselectingthis.
Notably,theproportionofbusinessesconsideringselecting a provider that best supports the organization from a strategic standpointa‘veryimportant’or‘quiteimportant’factorwhenestablishinganewbankingrelationshipfell10percentagepoints,from85%in2016to75%thisyear.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
BankCorporate
Other
Access to third party non-bank services
Allocating bank services in proportionto credit facilities
Expected digital customer experience
Selecting the lowest cost providersof products or services
Historical relationship between thebank and the organization
Credit facilities offered in additionto transaction services
Geographic footprint of the bank
Selecting a provider that offers strategic financial and market advice
Security and financial crime policies and capabilities
Highly efficient, real-time and integratedtechnology systems and processes
Selecting the best-in-class providersof products or services
89%88%
87%82%
81%84%
75%80%
67%61%
65%77%
57%61%
52%42%
51%75%
50%57%
28%38%
43%50%
1515
BankActivity
16BankActivity
1
34%
24%
8%
21%
13%
2-5
6-10
11-20
21+
Number of Banking Partners
Thenumberofbanksatreasurerworkswithwilldependonmanyfactors,includingavailabilityofcredit,geography,andtheservicesoffered.Treasurersmustadditionallyconsidercounterpartyrisk,whichcanbemitigatedbydiversifyingbankaccountrelationships,andalsosecurity.
Althoughmorecorporatepractitionershaveincreasedthenumberofbankstheyworkwithonaregularbasis,thenumberofbankingpartnerstreasurershavetodayislargelythesameasitwaslastyear.Morethanonethird(37%)ofcorporateshavebetweensixand20bankingrelationships,exactlythesamepercentageaslastyear,while34%areworkingwithtwotofivebanks,comparedwith36%lastyear.
Number of Banks Organizations Work With on a Regular Basis(Percentage Distribution of Corporate Practitioners)
Justone-fifth(21%)ofrespondentsworkswith21ormorebanks.Half(50%)ofthecorporatepractitionerswithmorethan$5bnannualincomemaintain21ormorebankingrelationships.
17BankActivity
Number of Banks Organizations Work With on a Regular Basis(Percentage Distribution of Corporate Practitioners)
Unsurprisingly,aswasthecaselastyear,largercorporates,orthosethathaveagreaterannualrevenue,tendtohavemorebankingrelationships.Privatelyheldbusinessesalsohavemorebankingrelationshipsthantheirpubliclytradedcounterparts.
How many banks does your organization work with on a regular basis?
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
1 8% 20% 0% 0% 8% 13% 8% 4% 4%
2-5 34% 47% 33% 5% 17% 40% 20% 21% 26%
6-10 24% 17% 44% 28% 29% 29% 32% 40% 30%
11-20 13% 7% 7% 17% 13% 8% 12% 8% 13%
21+ 21% 10% 15% 50% 33% 11% 28% 27% 28%
18BankActivity
Centralized Treasury Functions
Fortreasurers,thedecisionofwhethertocentralizeordecentralizecertainfunctionshingesonwhatmodeloffersthemostefficiencyforthem.Somefunctionsmaybenefitfromhighlyspecialized,localknowledge,allowingcorporatestomakequickerdecisionsasconditionschange.Functionssuchasthesewouldbenefitfromdecentralization.
However,centralizedfunctionsallowforeconomiesofscale,ensuringeffortisnotduplicatedacrosstreasuryoperations.Thepriceofthesegainsinefficiency?Greatertechnologicalcapabilities.
In2016thethreemostcommonlycentralizedtreasuryfunctionsamongcorporatepractitionerswereFX(77%oforganizationswerecentralizingthistreasuryfunction),risk management(74%)andcash pooling/netting(71%).ThisyearFXfellintofourthpositionofthe12optionsavailable,with70%ofcorporatepractitionerscentralizingthefunction.
Takingitsplaceasthemostcommonlycentralizedtreasuryfunctionwasinvestment services,citedby74%oforganizations,up12pointsfromlastyear.
Centralization and Decentralization of Treasury Functions(Percentage of Corporate Practioners)
Thetreasuryfunctionsthataremostlikelytobedecentralizedarepaymentreconciliation,citedby49%ofcorporates,andaccountsreceivablealsocitedby49%oforganizations.Thiswasalsothecaselastyear(54%and51%respectively).
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Not applicable / Do not use Decentralized / regionalized Centralized
Supply chain finance
Trade finance
Accounts receivable
Payment reconciliation
Credit services
Accounts payable
Regulatory reporting
Forecasting
FX
Risk management
Cash pooling / netting
Investment services 74%
73%
72%
70%
66%
61%
52%
49%
45%
41%
40%
29%
8%
11%
19%
14%
30%
32%
41%
24%
49%
49%
22%
20%
18%
16%
9%
16%
4%
7%
8%
28%
7%
10%
38%
51%
1919
BankingChannels
20BankingChannels
Banking Channels
Corporatesmayuseavarietyofdifferentchannelstoaccesstheirbankingpartners’services,whichcanbechallenginginitself,astheymustaccessmultiplebanksviaseparatechannels,ormultipleproductsfromasinglebank(orlikelyboth).Eachofthesechannelswillrequestdifferentcredentialsfromtheuser,introducinginefficiencieswheretheneedtocompleteatime-sensitivetransactioniscritical.
Aswasthecaselastyear,corporatesmostcommonlyuseasingle integrated bank portal providing access to multiple services from a single bank providertoconnectwithoraccesstheirbank.Morethanhalf(54%)corporatesusethismethod,eightpercentagepointsthanlastyear.
Channel Used When Connecting/Accessing Banks(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners)
Overtakinghost to host connections, via SWIFT solutionandtreasury workstationasamainchannelforaccessingbanksthisyearismultiple portals. 58%morecorporatesareusingmultiple portalstoconnecttotheirbanksthisyearthantheywerelastyear(38%vs24%).
Meanwhile,aboutathirdoftreasurersareusingSWIFTsolutions,hosttohostconnectionsandtreasuryworkstationstoaccesstheirbanks.TheproportionoftreasurersusingSWIFTsolutions(whichoffercorporatestheabilitytoexchangefinancialmessageswithwhicheverbankstheyplease)hasn’tmovedsincelastyear,buttheproportionofthoseusingthelattertwohasincreased,from24%to33%forhosttohost,andfrom24%to32%fortreasuryworkstation.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Third-party aggregator
Paper based / fax
Service bureau
Mobile apps
Single integrated bank portal providing access to services from multiple bank providers
Treasury workstation
Host to host connections
Via SWIFT solution
Multiple portals (separate channels for specific services at the same bank)
Single integrated bank portal providing access to multiple services from a single bank provider 54%
65%
38%
33%
33%
32%
19%
24%14%
14%
13%
7%
21BankingChannels
Channel Used When Connecting/Accessing Banks(Percentage Distribution of Corporate Practitioners)
Thechannelsusedbydifferentsectionsofthesamplevariedgreatly.Forexample,largercompaniesarefarmorelikelythansmallerorganizationstouseasingle integrated bank portal providing access to service from multiple bank providers.TheyarealsomorelikelytouseaSWIFT solution,orhost to host connections.Understandably,largerorganizationsareusingmoreofthesechannelsthansmallercompanies.
Which of the following channels do you use to access or connect with your bank(s)?
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Singleintegratedbankportalprovidingaccesstomultipleservicesfromasinglebankprovider
54% 70% 37% 56% 33% 61% 40% 48% 43%
Singleintegratedbankportalprovidingaccesstoservicesfrommultiplebankproviders
19% 10% 22% 33% 13% 21% 18% 25% 19%
Multipleportals(separatechannelsforspecificservicesatthesamebank)
38% 27% 52% 39% 29% 47% 48% 44% 40%
ViaSWIFTsolution 33% 30% 22% 56% 33% 37% 34% 33% 34%
Treasuryworkstation 32% 10% 48% 50% 29% 37% 40% 40% 40%
Hosttohostconnections 33% 17% 30% 56% 38% 32% 36% 35% 38%
Paperbased/fax 13% 13% 11% 17% 8% 21% 18% 10% 11%
Mobileapps 14% 17% 22% 6% 17% 18% 12% 10% 6%
Third-partyaggregator 7% 10% 7% 6% 8% 11% 8% 4% 4%
Servicebureau 14% 23% 7% 17% 13% 21% 14% 15% 17%
2222
PreferredBankAccess
23PreferredBankAccess
Preferred Bank Access
Aswasthecaselastyear,thecorporates’mostpopularmethodofaccessingbanksisthroughasingle integrated bank portal that provides access to services from multiple bank providers.Justoverafifth(22%)oforganizationsselectedthisastheirpreferredbankaccessmethod.However,morethanathird(34%)ofcorporatesselecteditlastyear.
Fallingalittleoutoffavourfromlastyear,single integrated bank portal providing access to multiple services from a single bank providerwasselectedby19%ofcorporatesthisyear,comparedwith24%in2016.
Whichmethodsarestealingsharefromsingle integrated bank portal providing access to services from multiple bank providers?Manymorecorporatespreferhost to hostconnectionstoanyotherbankaccessmethodwhencomparedwithlastyear.Theproportionoforganizationsselectingthismethodastheirpreferrednearlyquadrupledfrom3%lastyearto11%thisyear.Similarly,theproportionofcorporatesselectingtreasury workstationastheirpreferredbankaccessmethoddoubledfrom7%in2016to14%in2017.
Preferred Bank Access Methods(Percentage Distribution of Corporate Practitioners
Single integrated bank portal providing access to services from multiple bank providers
20%
19%
22%
11%
5%
4%4% 3%
14%
Via SWIFT solution
Single integrated bank portal providing access to multiple services from a single bank provider
Treasury workstation
Host to host connections
Service bureau
Multiple portals (separate channels for specificservices at the same bank)
Mobile apps
Third-party aggregator
24PreferredBankAccess
Preferred Bank Access Methods(Percentage Distribution of Corporate Practitioners)
Thistableshowsthatwhereassmallerorganizations(thosewithanannualrevenueoflessthan$500m)aremorelikelytofavourusingasingle integrated bank portal providing access to multiple services from a single bank provider,largercompanies(withanannualrevenueofatleast$5bn)prefer–byfar–a single integrated bank portal that provides access to service from multiple bank providers.
Largercorporatesarealsomorelikelytopreferusinghost-to-hostconnectionswhenconnectingwiththeirbanks–justunderaquarter(24%)selectedthismethodastheirpreferredoption.Forthesebusinesses,withannualturnoverofatleast$5bn,themostpreferredwayofconnectingtothebanksisviaSWIFT solution,with29%citingthismethod.
Whencomparingpreferencesacrossgeographies,SWIFT solutionsemergeasbyfarthemostpopularmethodofconnectingwithbanksinNorthAmericaandWesternEurope,with28%oforganizationsinbothregionsselectingitastheirfavourite.TwopreferredmethodscametopofthepileinAsiaPacific–viaSWIFT solutionsandsingle integrated bank portal providing access to services from multiple bank providers–eachcitedby25%oforganizationsinthisregion.
OrganizationsinNorthAmerica,comparedwiththoseinAsiaPacificorWesternEurope,prefertousetheirtreasury workstationstoconnectwiththeirbanks–19%citedthisinNorthAmerica,comparedwith8%forAsiaPacificand11%forWesternEurope.
Publicorganizationsaremorethantwiceaslikelyastheirprivatelytradedcounterpartstoprefertouseatreasury workstationasabankaccessmethod(17%ofpubliccompaniesciteditastheirpreferredmethod,comparedwith8%ofprivatecompanies).
Which of these would be your preferred method to access your bank(s)?
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Singleintegratedbankportalprovidingaccesstomultipleservicesfromasinglebankprovider
19% 30% 19% 6% 21% 19% 13% 13% 19%
Singleintegratedbankportalprovidingaccesstoservicesfrommultiplebankproviders
22% 20% 19% 24% 17% 22% 25% 19% 21%
Multipleportals(separatechannelsforspecificservicesatthesamebank)
4% 7% 0% 6% 4% 5% 0% 4% 2%
ViaSWIFTsolution 20% 13% 19% 29% 21% 16% 25% 28% 28%
Treasuryworkstation 14% 3% 27% 6% 17% 8% 8% 19% 11%
Hosttohostconnections 11% 13% 4% 24% 13% 14% 17% 9% 11%
Mobileapps 4% 3% 8% 0% 4% 5% 4% 0% 0%
Third-partyaggregator 3% 3% 0% 0% 0% 5% 2% 2% 2%
Servicebureau 5% 7% 4% 6% 4% 5% 6% 6% 6%
25PreferredBankAccess
Types of Access to Bank Services
Onceagain,oftheoptionsgiveninthesurvey,mobileisthemostwidelyprovidedmethodofaccesstocorporateclients,with58%ofbankingservicesprovidersofferingittotheirclients.However,itappearsgrowthinthisareahasstalled–59%ofbankssaiditwaspartoftheirpackagelastyear.
Theproportionofbanksprovidingsingle sign-onasatypeofaccessfortheircorporateclientsincreasedbysevenpercentagepointscomparedwithlastyear,from44%to51%.Thisovertakeslastyear’ssecondplacetypeofaccesstobankservices,integrated (one portal for the bank for all services),whichclimbedmodestlyfrom47%lastyearto50%thisyear.
Types of Access to Online Services Offered to Corporate Clients(Percentage of Banking Services Providers)
TheproportionofbanksofferingopenAPIsaccesstoservicesmorethandoubledfromlastyear’sfigure,from15%to32%.ThisislikelyareactiontotheintroductionofPSD2,whichmandatesthatbanksmakecustomerdataavailabletonon-bankpaymentplayers,withaviewtoincreasingcompetitionandchoiceinthefield.
APIswillplayalargeroleinenablingthisdevelopment,whichisexpectedtobringusclosertoanopenbankingstandard.APIs,orapplicationplanninginterfaces,makeiteasierforsoftwareprogrammestotalktoeachother,andcanprovideaccesstoanorganization’sdataandservices.Whatthismeansfortreasurersisfasterconnectivity,andreal-timevisibilityofbankingactivityontheirtreasurymanagementsystems.
Theproportionofbankingservicesprovidersnotprovidingonlineaccessatallfellslightly,from6%to5%.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Do not provide online access
Separate sign-on (for specific services)
Open APIs
Integrated (shared multi-bank portal access)
Integrated (one portal for the bank for all services)
Single sign-on
Mobile
32%
28%
5%
37%
50%
51%
58%
2626
AreasforImprovement
27AreasforImprovement
Aswehavealreadyfound,themajorityofcorporatesishighlysatisfiedwiththeservicesoftheirbankingpartners.Butdotheybelievethereareanyopportunitiesforbankstoimprovetheirofferings?
Forthethirdyearrunning,harmonization of standards between bankswasthemostcommonlydesiredareaforimprovement,thoughtoagreaterdegreethisyear–wherehalf(50%)ofcorporatepractitionersselectedthisasanareaforimprovementlastyear,60%oforganizationsciteditthisyear.
Desired Areas of Improvement for Banks(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Additional services (please specify)
Proactive guidance and advice
Integrated forecasting
SWIFT connectivity
Availability of online and mobile tools
Greater support in service onboarding,including set-up and data input
Geographic coverage
Automated payment remittance andreceivables tracking and reconciliation
Single integrated point of entry for all services
Seamless integration of corporateto bank processes
Integration of data from many banks
More timely information (e.g., real time instead of next day)
Harmonization of standards between banks
25%
5%
26%
30%
30%
31%
33%
43%
43%
46%
53%
53%
60%
28AreasforImprovement
Integration of data from many banksisseenasfarmoreimportantasanareaforimprovementthisyearcomparedwithlast.Where36%selecteditin2016,morethanhalf(53%)didsothisyear,thejointsecondmostcitedareaforimprovementinthisyear’ssurvey,alongwithmore timely information.
Thisincreaseintheproportionofcorporatesviewingintegrationofdataasanimportantareaforimprovementmaysuggestthattreasurershaveabetterunderstandingofthepotentialofdata,orthattheyareclosertorealisingthepotentialbigdataholds.Theabilitytoderivemeaningfulinsightsfromdataisakeydifferentiatoramongbusinessesacrossallsectors,offeringgainsinefficienciesandcuttingorganizationalcosts.
Forthetreasurer,havingaccesstodifferentdatasetsandameansforanalysingtheminrealtimecanmakeforecastingvastlymoreaccurate.
Desired Areas of Improvement for Banks(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners)
Harmonization of standards between banksismoreofaconcernforlargercompanies.Infact,thelargertheorganization,themorelikelyitistocitethisasadesiredareaofimprovement.
What would most improve your banking services?
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Moretimelyinformation(e.g.realtimeinsteadofnextday)
53% 57% 52% 50% 42% 58% 56% 48% 53%
Harmonizationofstandardsbetweenbanks
60% 53% 67% 72% 54% 71% 58% 67% 66%
Singleintegratedpointofentryforallservices
43% 47% 44% 33% 33% 58% 44% 50% 43%
Availabilityofonlineandmobiletools
30% 43% 22% 17% 29% 37% 26% 21% 19%
Geographiccoverage 33% 27% 30% 44% 25% 42% 42% 42% 40%
Integrationofdatafrommanybanks
53% 47% 59% 56% 46% 61% 52% 56% 49%
Seamlessintegrationofcorporatetobankprocesses
46% 37% 52% 56% 50% 45% 44% 50% 45%
Automatedpaymentremittanceandreceivablestrackingandreconciliation
43% 47% 41% 44% 25% 53% 46% 35% 32%
Proactiveguidanceandadvice
25% 27% 19% 33% 17% 26% 20% 21% 21%
Greatersupportinserviceon-boarding,includingset-upanddatainput
31% 27% 26% 50% 33% 32% 30% 27% 30%
SWIFTconnectivity 30% 20% 30% 44% 25% 34% 34% 33% 32%
Integratedforecasting 26% 23% 26% 28% 29% 26% 26% 27% 23%
Additionalservices 5% 3% 4% 11% 8% 5% 4% 4% 6%
2929
Challenges
30
Forcorporatepractitioners,thejointmostsignificantchallengesfacedwhenintegratingwithabankforcashmanagementservicesareease of integration into your environment and processesandKYC onboarding,eachcitedby56%oforganizations.
AlthoughtheproportionofcorporatescitingKYConboardingasachallengefellslightlyfrom60%lastyearto56%thisyear,ease of integration into your environment and processeshasemergedasachallengeformoretreasurersthisyearthanitwasin2016.Wherejustoverathird(34%)oforganizationsselecteditlastyear,thisroseby65%thisyear.
Challenges Faced When Integrating with a Bank for Cash Management Services(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners)
Challenges
Challenges Faced when Integrating with a Bank for Cash Management Services
File formatting issuesalsoemergedasagreaterchallengethisyearthanlastyear,withjustoverhalf(52%)ofcorporatesselectingitasoneoftheirbiggestchallengeswhenintegratingwithanewbankprovider,comparedwith45%lastyear.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Other
Use of their security protocols and procedures
Ease of integration across and with your current banking providers
Testing procedures for new bank services including technology
Differences between what was sold versus what is to be implemented
File formatting issues
Ease of integration into your environment and processes
KYC onboarding 56%
56%
52%
42%
33%
33%
31%
4%
31Challenges
Challenges Faced When Integrating with a Bank for Cash Management Services(Percentage Distribution of Corporate Practitioners)
What are the biggest challenges you face when integrating with a new bank provider?
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Fileformattingissues 52% 40% 70% 44% 42% 50% 55% 56% 49%
Differencesbetweenwhatwassoldversuswhatistobeimplemented
42% 40% 37% 56% 42% 45% 43% 48% 43%
Testingproceduresfornewbankservicesincludingtechnology
33% 33% 33% 28% 13% 45% 33% 35% 32%
Useoftheirsecurityprotocolsandprocedures
31% 33% 26% 33% 21% 34% 29% 31% 30%
KYCon-boarding 56% 57% 48% 61% 54% 66% 63% 56% 66%
Easeofintegrationintoyourenvironmentandprocesses
56% 60% 59% 44% 50% 50% 49% 50% 47%
Easeofintegrationacrossandwithyourcurrentbank-ingproviders
33% 37% 19% 44% 25% 34% 29% 33% 32%
Other 4% 3% 0% 11% 8% 3% 4% 4% 6%
32Challenges
Service Providers
Weaskedcorporatepractitionerswhethertheywereusing,orconsideringusing,differenttypesoffinancialservicesbeyondtheirbanks.Oursurveyfocusedonfourdifferenttypesofnon-bankserviceproviders:FX providers, payment networks, supply chain finance, and on-boarding service providers.Foreachofthenon-bankservices,nomorethanaboutathird(37%)ofcorporateswerecurrentlyusing,orconsideringusingthem.
Non-bank Service Providers Used(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners)
Ofthesefouroptions,corporatetreasurersweremostlikelytobeusingnon-bank FX providers–17%oftreasurersarecurrentlyusingthis,with16%consideringusingitinthenext12monthsorlongerterm.However,afargreaterproportion,68%,isnotconsideringusingtheserviceatall.
Just9%ofrespondentsarecurrentlyusingnon-bankpaymentnetworks,though28%plantostartusingthisserviceinthenextyearorbeyond.Only1%ofrespondentssaidthattheywerecurrentlyusingnon-bankKYCandon-boardingserviceproviders.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Not consideringConsidering for the longer term
Will use in the next 12 monthsCurrently using
Non-bank KYC and on-boarding service providers
Non-bank supply chain finance
Non-bank payment networks
Non-bank FX providers
76%19%4%
1%
76%17%4%
63%7% 21%9%
3%
68%13%17%
3%
3333
ChallengesforBanks
34ChallengesforBanks
Ofthe14barrierstogrowthhighlightedinthesurvey,thosecentredaroundregulationwerethemostcommonlycited.Regulatory complexity in new countrieswasthemostcitedbarriertogrowthbybankingservicesproviders,withmorethanhalf(51%)selectingit,whileregulations in existing countrieswasselectedby47%ofbanks.
Greatest Barriers to Bank Growth(Percentage of Banking Services Providers)
Beyondregulatoryconcerns,systems limitations/scalability of current infrastructureemergedasasignificantconcern,with46%oforganizationsidentifyingitasabarrier,fourpercentagepointupfromlastyear.
Disruption, new entrants and/or changing business needs wasselectedbyslightlylessthan50%moreorganizationsthisyear(citedby22%in2016vs31%in2017).
Barriers to Growth
56% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Other
Cross selling in existing client base
Access to skilled labour, e.g. digital talent
Changing or declining market demand
Discretionary funding / investment
Sales capability (availability,skills, training, tools)
Entry costs to new countries
Disruption, new entrants and/orchanging business models
Cost
Multiplicity of legacy channels/poor customer experience
Competition
Fragmentation / silo of technology solutions and platforms
Systems limitations / scalability of current infrastructure
Regulations in existing countries
Regulatory complexity in new countries
16%
4%
17%
18%
19%
22%
24%
31%
39%
39%
39%
42%
46%
47%
51%
35ChallengesforBanks
Greatest Barriers to Bank Growth(Percentage Distribution of Banking Services Providers)
What are the greatest barriers to your bank’s growth today?
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Entrycoststonewcountries 24% 24% 38% 23% 23% 27% 29% 30% 30%
Regulatorycomplexityinnewcountries
51% 53% 33% 62% 52% 57% 64% 63% 53%
Regulationsinexitingcountries
47% 39% 62% 45% 48% 41% 55% 50% 53%
Multiplicityoflegacychannels/poorcustomerexperience
39% 43% 48% 30% 31% 48% 34% 30% 30%
Systemslimitations/scalabilityofcurrentinfrastructure
46% 43% 48% 55% 45% 48% 46% 40% 43%
Fragmentation/silooftechnologysolutionsandplatforms
42% 45% 29% 43% 47% 34% 47% 45% 40%
Discretionaryfunding/investment
19% 10% 29% 26% 21% 16% 21% 20% 21%
Salescapability(availability,skills,training,tools)
22% 29% 14% 15% 16% 25% 14% 17% 13%
Crosssellinginexistingclientbase
16% 18% 19% 13% 14% 23% 16% 15% 11%
Disruption,newentrantsand/orchangingbusinessmodels
31% 29% 38% 36% 37% 27% 39% 35% 34%
Changingordecliningmarketdemand
18% 20% 29% 13% 24% 11% 17% 20% 16%
Competition 39% 49% 38% 36% 42% 41% 46% 35% 36%
Cost 39% 43% 48% 38% 37% 46% 42% 32% 36%
Accesstoskilledlabour,e.g.digitaltalent
17% 18% 24% 11% 11% 23% 13% 12% 13%
Other 4% 4% 0% 2% 4% 2% 5% 5% 3%
Comparingtheresponsesacrossincomebandsrevealssomestarkdifferencesinopinionaboutbarrierstogrowth,particularlybetweenmid-sizedcompanies(thosewithannualrevenuesofbetween$500mand$4.9bn),andsmallerandlargerbanks(whichrespectivelymakelessormorethanthisband).
Forexample,regulatory complexity in new countriesappearedtobeagreaterbarrierforthesmallerandlargerbanksthanformiddle-sizedorganizations.However,mid-sizedbanksaremorelikelytoseeregulations in existing countriesasabarrier,as62%oftheseorganizationscitedthiscomparedwith39%ofsmallerbanksand45%oflargerbanks.
Mid-sizedbusinessesarealsomorelikelytofindaccesstoskilledlabourabarrier–nearlyaquarter(24%)oftheseselectedaccess to skilled labour, e.g. digital talentasoneoftheirgreatestbarriers,comparedto18%ofsmallerorganizationsand11%oflargerones.
3636
ReviewingRelationships
37ReviewingRelationships
Costemergedasthemostsignificantreasonforreviewingbankingrelationshipsamongbothcorporatesandbankingservicesprovidersthisyear,withjustoverfour-fifths(81%)ofrespondentsselectingit.Thisisa19-pointincreaseonlastyear.
Thesecondmostcitedreason, bank stability and reputation,wasselectedbynearlytwo-thirds(62%)ofrespondents–adramaticincreaseonlastyearwhentheequivalentoption,bankstability,wasonlyselectedasadriverbehindbankingrelationshipreviewfor35%ofallorganizations.
Reasons for Reviewing Banking Relationships(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners and Banking Services Providers)
Sincelastyear,theproportionoforganizationsselectingimproving the integration of services into your systemshasfallenfivepointsfrom59%to54%.Onerespondentsaidthattheirbankingrelationshipswerealwaysunderreview.
Drivers for Change
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Other
Leveraging non-bank services, e.g. blockchain
Forecasting
Lack of credit facilities
Concerns with security
Business growth outside of your current banks’geographic or industry coverage
Improving digital customer experience / service
Improving end-to-end real time capabilities
Simplifying or consolidating yourbanking relationships
Improving the integration ofservices into your systems
Bank stability and reputation
Cost
10%
10%
14%
19%
25%
33%
40%
46%
52%
54%
62%
81%
38ReviewingRelationships
Reasons for Reviewing Banking Relationships(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners and Banking Services Providers)
What is driving you to review your banking relationships?
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Cost 81% 75% 92% 85% 86% 84% 82% 79% 80%
Bankstabilityandreputation
62% 56% 75% 69% 64% 63% 63% 62% 60%
Improvingdigitalcustomerexperience/service
40% 44% 50% 39% 43% 47% 48% 38% 36%
Improvingend-to-endrealtimecapabilities
46% 44% 42% 46% 36% 58% 44% 35% 44%
Improvingtheintegrationofservicesintoyoursystems
54% 63% 58% 46% 43% 68% 44% 55% 52%
Lackofcreditfacilities 19% 25% 17% 15% 7% 32% 22% 17% 20%
Businessgrowthoutsideofyourcurrentbanks’geographicorindustrycoverage
33% 31% 50% 39% 29% 42% 52% 41% 52%
Concernswithsecurity 25% 19% 33% 31% 14% 32% 19% 28% 20%
Simplifyingorconsolidatingyourbankingrelationships
52% 38% 42% 69% 50% 53% 48% 59% 52%
Leveragingnon-bankservices,e.g.blockchain
10% 6% 17% 15% 7% 16% 15% 10% 12%
Forecasting 14% 19% 25% 8% 14% 16% 11% 21% 16%
Other 10% 6% 8% 8% 14% 5% 11% 7% 8%
39ReviewingRelationships
Costwasagreaterconsiderationformid-sizedcompaniesthanitwasfortheirsmallerandlargercounterparts,citedasadriverforbankingrelationshipreviewfornearlyall(92%)ofthisesurveyed.Smallerorganizationsaremorelikelytobedriventoreviewtheirbankingrelationshipsduetoalack of credit facilities–25%citedthis,comparedwith17%ofmid-sizedorganizationsand15%oflargerfirms.
Publiclyheldandprivatelyownedorganizationsappearedtohavethemostsignificantdifferencesofopinionwhenitcametodriversforreview.Forexample,wherejust7%ofpublicorganizationsselectedlack of credit facilitiesasadriver,nearlyone-third(32%)ofprivatecompaniesdid.Privatecompaniesaremorelikelytobeconcernedwithimproving end-to-end real-time capabilitiesthanpubliccompanies–58%ofprivatecompaniescitedthisasadrivercomparedwith36%ofpublicorganizations.
Therewerealsosignificantdifferencesinoptionbetweenpublicandprivateorganizationswhenitcametoimproving the integration of services into your systems(citedby43%ofpublicorganizationsv68%ofprivatebusinesses),business growth outside of your current banks geographic or industry coverage(29%v42%),andconcerns with security(14%v32%).
40ReviewingRelationships
Rating Performance
Theareainwhichcorporatepractitionersaremostlikelytoratetheirbankingpartners’performanceas‘good’or‘excellent’issecurity record.
Aswasthecaselastyear,justoverhalfratetheirpartners’understandingoftheorganization’sbusinessandoperationsas‘good’or‘excellent’,thoughthatpercentagewasslightlylowerthisyear(52%in2017comparedwith56%in2016).However,slightlymoreareratingbank acts as a strategic partner and working for longer term solutionsas‘good’or‘excellent’thantheywerelastyear(51%in2017comparedwith45%in2016).Justunderathird(32%)ofcorporatesratetheirpartners’digital servicing capabilitieshighly.
Performance of Organization’s Current Banking Partners(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners rating “good” or “excellent”)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Other
Digital servicing capabilities
Ease of integration with current systemsand processes
Continually improving their products andservices and providing innovation ideas
Conformance with industry standards
Bank acts as a strategic partner andworking for longer term solutions
Face to face relationship management
Bank’s understanding of the organization’sbusiness and operations
Banks provides credit
Security record
20%
32%
37%
40%
47%
51%
52%
52%
54%
56%
41ReviewingRelationships
Scope of Service
Inachangefromlastyear,whenbanksweresplitfairlyevenlyacrossthefourdifferentmodels,bankingservicesprovidersarenowmostlikelytoadoptaglobalbankingmodel–morethantwofifths(43%)ofbankssaidthattheyprovidedthisscopeofservice,comparedwith31%lastyear.Asmallerproportionofbanksarenowadoptingtheregionalbankingmodel–14%thisyearcomparedwith21%lastyear.
Scope of Service Provided(Percentage of Banking Service Providers)
A global banking model
43%
14%
21%
22%
A regional banking model
Local banking with either global / regional model
Specialist or niche provider
42ReviewingRelationships
Scope of Service Provided(Percentage Distribution of Banking Service Providers)
Unsurprisingly,largerbanksarefarmorelikelytobeusingaglobalbankingmodel–69%ofbankswithincomeofmorethan$5bnayeararedoingso,comparedwith34%ofsmallerbanks(withannualincomeofupto$500m)andmid-sizedbanks(withannualincomeofbetween$500mand$4.9bn).Mid-sizedbanksaremorethantwiceaslikelyassmallbanksandnearlyfourtimesaslikelytoprovidelocalbankingwitheitherglobal/regionalmodel.
What scope of service does your organization provide?
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Aglobalbankingmodel 43% 34% 29% 69% 51% 37% 58% 63% 58%
Aregionalbankingmodel 14% 9% 19% 19% 19% 11% 14% 14% 11%
Localbankingwitheitherglobal/regionalmodel
22% 21% 48% 13% 22% 20% 15% 14% 20%
Specialistornicheprovider 21% 36% 5% 0% 7% 33% 14% 9% 11%
4343
FutureGrowthStrategy
44FutureGrowthStrategy
A global banking model
36%
20% 11%
17%
15%
A regional banking model
Local banking with either global / regional model
Specialist or niche provider
Not currently moving towards any other model
Models
Aswasindicatedbythefindingsintheprevioussection,manybankingservicesprovidersaremovingtowardsaglobalbankingmodel.Morethanathird(36%)ofbankssaidtheyweremovingtowardsthismodelinthisyear’ssurvey,comparedwithaquarter(25%)lastyear.Meanwhile,fewerbanksaremovingtowardsaregionalbankingmodel(11%thisyearcomparedwith15%lastyear).
Thinking about your future growth strategy, which of the following models are you moving towards?(Percentage of Banking Services Providers)
Banksaremorelikelytobemovingtowardsanewbankingmodelthisyearthantheywerein2016–wherejustunderthree-fourths(73%)saidtheyweremovingtowardoneoffourmodelsaspartoftheirfuturegrowthstrategyin2016,83%saidsothisyear.
Localbankingwitheitherglobal/regionalmodelalsoappearstobegainingpopularityasapotentialbankingmodelforbanks.Athirdmorebankssaidtheyweremovingtowardthismodelthisyearthantheywerelastyear(15%in2016vs20%in2017).
45FutureGrowthStrategy
Thinking about your future growth strategy, which of the following models are you moving towards?(Percentage Distribution of Banking Services Providers)
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Aglobalbankingmodel 36% 27% 38% 48% 36% 38% 46% 48% 41%
Aregionalbankingmodel 11% 17% 14% 8% 11% 16% 4% 8% 14%
Localbankingwitheitherglobal/regionalmodel
20% 19% 29% 17% 24% 13% 24% 17% 20%
Specialistornicheprovider 15% 23% 0% 2% 7% 18% 6% 6% 6%
Notcurrentlymovingto-wardsanyothermodel
17% 14% 19% 25% 22% 16% 20% 20% 20%
46FutureGrowthStrategy
Business Strategy
Inanincreasinglycompetitivemarket,theprevailingopinionappearstobethatprovidingexcellentcustomerexperiencesisakeydifferentiatorforbanks.Asmorecompetitorscanbeefuptheirtransactionalcapabilities,itwillbethenatureoftherelationshipwiththeircustomersthatdetermineswhichbanksaremostsuccessful.
Thiswasreflectedinthefindingsofoursurvey.Innovationandcustomer experiencearethetwoprimaryconcernsforbanks’businessstrategiesthisyear,eachcitedbytwo-thirdsofrespondents(67%and65%respectively).Alongwithcustomerexperience,innovationholdsgreatpotentialfordifferentiation.
Innovationappearstobefarmoreimportantforbanksasanareaoffocusinbusinessstrategiesthisyearthanitwaslastyear.Where47%ofbankingservicesproviderssaidthattheywerefocusingitonitpredominantlywithregardstotheirbusinessstrategylastyear,67%didthisyear,a43%increaseyearonyear.
Areas of Focus in Business Strategies(Percentage of Banking Services Providers)
Banksarealsofarmorelikelytobefocusingoncybersecuritythisyearthantheywerelastyear,as26%citeditasapredominantfocusintheirbusinessstrategythisyearcomparedwithjust11%lastyear.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Other
Geographical coverage plans
Cybersecurity
Integration of services
Cost efficiency
Compliance and regulatory change
Customer experience
Innovation
26%
7%
7%
28%
40%
44%
65%
67%
47FutureGrowthStrategy
Thoseareasoffocusthatwereoveralldeemedaslessimportantthisyearthantheywerelastyearincludedcost efficiency,citedby55%ofbankslastyearcomparewith40%thisyear,andintegrationofservices(41%in2017,28%in2016).
Thinking about your business strategy, which of the following areas are you predominantly focusing on?(Percentage Distribution of Banking Services Providers)
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Costefficiency 40% 47% 33% 33% 31% 46% 38% 41% 42%
Customerexperience 65% 59% 81% 73% 81% 57% 70% 78% 76%
Innovation 67% 66% 71% 73% 68% 72% 65% 72% 73%
Integrationofservices 28% 32% 33% 17% 28% 26% 34% 17% 16%
Cybersecurity 26% 21% 19% 35% 22% 30% 29% 33% 28%
Complianceandregulatorychange
44% 34% 38% 46% 42% 39% 49% 41% 44%
Geographicalcoverageplans 7% 11% 10% 6% 8% 9% 6% 6% 6%
Other 2% 4% 5% 0% 0% 7% 1% 2% 0%
Whencomparedwiththerestofthepack,customer experienceisamoreimportantconcernformid-sizedcompaniesandpublicorganizations,withmorethanfour-fifths(81%)fromeachofthesepredominantlyfocusingonthesebusinessstrategies.Cybersecurityismorelikelytobecitedasafocusforlargerorganizationsthanitisforsmallerormid-sizedbanks.
48FutureGrowthStrategy
Mobile App Services
Nowthetreasurerhastakenonamorestrategicroleintheirorganization,theyaredemandingconstant,straightforwardaccesstotheproductstheyuseonaday-to-daybasis,sothattheymayworkmorenimblyandefficiently.Buthowmucharebankscommittingtoprovidingtheirservicesinawaythatcanbeaccessedonatabletorsmartphone?Inanewquestionforthisyear’sTransactionBankingSurvey,weaskedbankingservicesproviderswhatkindsofproductstheywereprovidingonmobile.
Banking Products Accessible via Mobile App(Percentage of Banking Services Providers)
Cash management services werethemostcommonlyofferedbankingproductviamobileapp,eitherasasingleproductormultiproduct,with83%ofbanksmakingthisaccessible.Thiswasverycloselyfollowedbyreporting,citedbyatotalof82%ofbanks.
Thethreeproductsleastlikelytobemadeaccessiblebymobileappareopen account (supply chain financing),withlessthanhalf(44%)thebankssurveyedprovidingit,investment banking/capital markets,providedby43%ofbanks,and‘tradefinance(lettersofcredit,collections),citedbyjust40%.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120
NoneMulti productSingle product
Trade finance (letters of credit, collections)
Investment banking / capital markets
Open account (supply chain financing)
Credit / lending
Depository services
Liquidity solutions (including pooling / netting)
FX (including hedging)
Payables
Reporting
Cash Management Services 17%
18%
24%
39%
44%
47%
48%
56%
57%
60%
56%
50%
49%
43%
36%
34%
31%
29%
29%
28%
27%
32%
28%
18%
20%
19%
21%
15%
14%
13%
49FutureGrowthStrategy
Competitive Differentiation
Banksappeartounderstandtheimportanceofbeingastrategicpartnertotheircorporateclients,andtheirunderstandingtheirclients’businessandoperations,astheareathoughttocreatethegreatestsourceofcompetitivedifferentiationcitedbymostbankingservicesproviders(81%)wasacting as a strategic partner to their corporate clients and working for longer term solutions.Thiswasfollowedbybank’s understanding of the organization’s business and operations,selectedby71%ofbanks.
Areas Thought to Create the Greatest Source of Competitive Differentiation(Percentage of Banking Service Providers)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Other
Conformance with industry standards
Banks provides credit
Excellent security record
Face to face relationship management
Ease of integration with existing systems and processes
Continually improving their products and services and provide innovation ideas
Digital servicing capabilities
Bank’s understanding of the organization’sbusiness and operations
Bank acts as a strategic partner andworking for longer term solutions 81%
71%
68%
67%
63%
48%
43%
37%
29%
2%
50FutureGrowthStrategy
Areas Thought to Create the Greatest Source of Competitive Differentiation(Percentage Distribution of Banking Service Providers)
Actingasastrategicpartnertoitscorporateclientswasalmostuniversallycitedbylargerbanks(thosewithanannualrevenueof$5bnormore),with89%sayingitwillcreatethegreatestsourceofcompetitivedifferentiation.
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Bank’sunderstandingoftheorganization’sbusinessandoperations
71% 65% 81% 75% 70% 73% 73% 71% 73%
Bankactsasastrategicpartnerandworkingforlongertermsolutions
81% 79% 76% 89% 83% 82% 86% 84% 88%
Bankprovidescredit 37% 42% 29% 40% 39% 40% 40% 44% 45%
Continuallyimprovingtheirproductsandservicesandprovideinnovationideas
67% 64% 67% 72% 67% 69% 72% 69% 73%
Easeofintegrationwithexistingsystemsandprocesses
63% 58% 62% 72% 66% 62% 78% 69% 67%
Conformancewithindustrystandards
29% 35% 19% 30% 26% 36% 35% 24% 26%
Digitalservicingcapabilities 68% 65% 76% 75% 66% 78% 73% 66% 71%
Facetofacerelationshipmanagement
48% 42% 62% 49% 46% 51% 47% 40% 46%
Excellentsecurityrecord 43% 46% 29% 53% 44% 49% 49% 48% 46%
51FutureGrowthStrategy
Value Added Services
Inanewquestionforthisyear’ssurvey,weaskedcorporateswhatvalueaddedservicestheywouldbepredominantlylookingforfromtheirbankingpartners.
Value Added Services Sought by Corporates(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners)
Forcorporates,support in understanding upcoming regulations and changeswouldbeamostwelcomedservicefromtheirbankingpartner,withnearlytwo-thirds(62%)oforganizationscitingthis.Nearlyhalf(49%)ofcorporatesdesiresupport in leveraging new technologies such as blockchainasavalueadd.
Banksandcorporatesappeartoaligninwhatserviceswouldaddmostvalue.Wehavealreadyseenthatnearlyhalf(49%)ofcorporatescravesupport in leveraging new technologies, such as blockchain,fromtheirbankingpartners–thiswasthesecondmostcitedvalueaddedservicetheywerelookingforfromtheirbanks.Ourresearchshowsthatbanksunderstandthisneed,asoftheoptionswegave,itwasthevalueaddedservicemostoftencitedbybanks.
However,oneareathatmorebanksmayneedtoconsidermoreofapriorityintheirofferingtocorporatesissupportinunderstandingupcomingregulationsandchanges.Wherethisvalueaddedserviceemergedasthemostimportantforcorporates,with62%seekingitfromtheirpartners,just39%ofbankssaidthattheywerelookingtoofferthisasapriority.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Other
Identity management for third-party services
Alternative originations / loans options
Alternative supply chain finance platforms
Embedding financial productsinto your business services
Security advisory services
Streamlined on-boarding / entitlement services
Enhanced working capital management
Support in leveraging newtechnologies e.g. blockchain
Support in understanding upcomingregulations and changes
4%
21%
26%
28%
31%
33%
41%
41%
49%
62%
52FutureGrowthStrategy
Value Added Services Offered by Banks as a Priority(Percentage of Banking Service Providers)
Anotherareawherecorporatesandbanksmightnotbeseeingeye-to-eyeisenhanced working capital management.Morethanhalfofallbanks(55%)areofferingthisserviceasapriority,despitejust41%ofcorporatesseekingit.Similarly,where50%ofbanksareprioritisingembedding financial products into their customers’ business services,thisserviceisonlysoughtby31%oftreasurers.However,anareainwhichthetwogroupsalignagainisstreamlined on-boarding/entitlement services.Justovertwo-fifths(41%)ofcorporatesindicatedthiswasimportanttothem,comparedwithasimilarproportion(45%)ofbankswhoareprioritizingitsdelivery.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Other
Security advisory services
Alternative originations / loans options
Cloud services
Identity management for third-party services
Alternative supply chain finance platforms
Support in understanding upcomingregulations and changes
Streamlined onboarding / entitlement services
Embedding financial products into yourcustomers' business services
Enhanced working capital management
Support in leveraging new technologiese.g. blockchain 57%
55%
50%
45%
39%
38%
23%
22%
19%
16%
5%
53FutureGrowthStrategy
Value Added Services Offered by Banks as a Priority(Percentage of Banking Services Providers)
Smallerbanks(thosewithannualincomesoflessthan$500m)appeartounderstandthedesireforsecurityadvisoryservicesfromtheirclientsbetterthanmid-sizedandlargerbanks.Wehavealreadyseenthatsecurity advisory servicesaresoughtbyathird(33%)ofcorporatesfromtheirbanks.Butjust10%ofmid-sizedbanksand15%oflargebanksareprioritizingitasavalueaddedservices,comparedwith25%ofsmallerbanks.
Generallyspeaking,thelargerthebank,themorelikelyitistoprioritiseenhanced working capital managementasavalueaddedservice,whichmissestosomeextentwhattheircorporateclientsseek.However,largerbanksarealsomorelikelytobefocusingonsupportingtheirclientsinleveragingnewtechnologies,whichindicatesanunderstandingoftheirclients’needsinthisarea.
When thinking about creating new revenue streams from value added services, which services are you looking to offer corporates as a priority?
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Enhancedworkingcapitalmanagement
55% 55% 62% 65% 67% 57% 71% 66% 62%
Alternativeoriginations/loansoptions
19% 25% 10% 10% 14% 22% 19% 14% 16%
Alternativesupplychainfinanceplatforms
38% 42% 33% 46% 40% 50% 50% 45% 38%
Streamlinedonboarding/entitlementservices
45% 42% 43% 42% 50% 35% 41% 39% 39%
Securityadvisoryservices 16% 25% 10% 15% 8% 26% 16% 11% 13%
Identitymanagementforthird-partyservices
23% 21% 29% 23% 18% 30% 18% 20% 20%
Supportinunderstandingupcomingregulationsandchanges
39% 43% 43% 40% 39% 39% 41% 27% 37%
Supportinleveragingnewtechnologiese.g.blockchain
57% 55% 62% 67% 58% 63% 64% 63% 56%
Embeddingfinancialprod-uctsintoyourcustomers’businessservices
50% 55% 57% 42% 50% 54% 46% 36% 45%
Cloudservices 22% 30% 14% 15% 14% 28% 23% 19% 48%
Other 5% 6% 5% 2% 6% 2% 3% 3% 1%
54FutureGrowthStrategy
Other Partnerships
Toimproveoperationalperformance,improvespeed,serviceandefficiency,andtosavecosts,bankingservicesmayoutsourcesomeoftheirnon-strategicfunctionstospecialistcompanies.Weaskedbankingrespondentswhichbackofficeservicestheywouldconsideroutsourcing,orpartneringwithotherbanksorserviceproviderstofulfil.
Theareabanksweremostlikelytoconsideroutsourcingtootherserviceprovidersisopen account supply chain finance,citedby67%ofbanks.Thisisasignificantrisefromlastyear,whenjust51%ofbanksconsideredoutsourcingthisbackofficeservice.Asimilarproportionofbankswouldconsideroutsourcingpaymentstootherserviceproviders,with65%citingthis,asimilarproportiontolastyear(67%).
Aswasthecaselastyear,ofthesixoptionsinthesurvey,theareathatbanksareleastlikelytoconsideroutsourcingisFX(54%).Thisfiguredoeshoweverrepresentamodestrisefromlastyear,when50%consideredoutsourcingtheservice.
Bank Office Services Considered Outsourcing to Other Service Providers(Percentage of Banking Services Providers and Corporate Practitioners)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120
NeitherTo service providersTo banks
FX
Corporate treasury management services
Trade finance services
Customer / supplier onboarding
Payments
Open account supply chain finance 29% 38% 33%
32% 33% 35%
22% 42% 36%
28% 30% 41%
26% 32% 43%
31% 23% 46%
55FutureGrowthStrategy
Transaction Services
Aswasthecaselastyear,paymentsisthetransactionservicemostbankingservicesprovidersthinktobemostvaluabletothemifdeliveredinanintegratedandstandardizedway,citedby85%ofbanks,aseven-pointincreaseonlastyear.
Receivablesisbecominganincreasinglyimportanttransactionserviceforbanks.Itwasthesecondmostcitedservicethisyear(61%).Thismarksa10-pointincrease,placingitsecondinalistofthesevenserviceswegave,aleapfromfifthpositionin2016.
Transaction Services Thought to Deliver Most Value(Percentage of Banking Services Providers)
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Other
Forecasting
Open account
Trade finance
Payables
FX
Receivables
Payments 85%
61%
57%
57%
56%
40%
32%
2%
56FutureGrowthStrategy
Security
Thisyear,weintroducednewquestionsinordertocomparebankingservicesproviders’andcorporatepractitioners’perspectivesonsecurity.Theresultsindicatethatcorporatesandbanksaresomewhatalignedintheirviewsonwhichgroupshouldoverseeeachresponsibilityconcerningsecurity.Themajorityofbothcorporatesandbanksagreedthatbanksshouldtakeresponsibilityforreal-timepayments.
Themajorityofrespondentsfromeithergroupalsofeltthatbothcorporatepractitionersandbankingservicesprovidersshouldberesponsibleforalmostalloftheoptionswegave.Whenitcametocyberattacks,morethanfour-fifthsofallrespondentsthoughtthatbothgroupsshouldberesponsibleforprotectionfromcyberattacks(82%ofcorporatepractitioners,86%ofbankingservicesproviders).
Respondents were asked: Thinking about security, who do you think should be responsible for the following?(Percentage of Corporate Practitioners)
However,whilemorethanhalf(51%)ofbankingservicesprovidersthoughtthatitwasthemthatshouldberesponsibleforsecurityrelatedtoKnow Your Customer and on-boarding processes(withjust4%ofthisgroupbelievingitshouldbetheresponsibilityofcorporatetreasurers),justathird(33%)ofcorporatesthoughtthatitshouldbebanks’responsibility,with16%sayingthatitshouldfallundertreasurers’remit.
Anothersmalldifferenceofopinionemergeswhenweconsiderprotection from identity theft.Where24%ofcorporatetreasurersfeelthisshouldbethebanks’responsibility,just13%ofbankingprovidersthisway.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
BothBankCorporate
Protection from cyber attacks
Adequate screening and timely notificationof questionable / fraudulent transactions
Understanding upcoming regulations
Protection from data theft
Protection from identity theft
Encryption of sensitive and customer data
Know Your Customer and On-boarding processes
Real-time payments
82%
79%
75%
71%
68%
62%
51%
46%
13%
14%
21%
20%
24%
27%
33%
5%
7%
4%
8%
8%
11%
16%
52%
1%
57
Thinking about security, who do you feel should be responsible for the following?(Percentage of Banking Services Providers)
Whereas81%ofbankingservicesprovidersthoughtthatbothcorporatesandbanksshouldberesponsibleforprotection from data identity theft,just71%ofcorporatesthoughtthesame.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Both Bank Corporate
Protection from cyber attacks
Protection from data theft
Protection from identity theft
Adequate screening and timely notificationof questionable / fraudulent transactions
Understanding upcoming regulations
Encryption of sensitive and customer data
Know Your Customer and onboarding processes
Real-time payments
86%
81%
80%
79%
70%
65%
45%
38%
12%
15%
13%
18%
27%
32%
51%
2%
4%
7%
3%
3%
3%
4%
57%5%
58FutureGrowthStrategy
PSD2: The Revised Directive on Payment Services
WithjustafewmonthstogobeforeallEUmemberstatesmustcomplywiththeSecondPaymentServicesDirective(PSD2),whichcomesintoforceinJanuary2018,wewereinterestedtoseewhatbankingservicesprovidersaremostconcernedaboutwhenitcomestothelegislation,andwhethertherehavebeenanyshiftsinattitudesincelastyear.WeaskedbankswhattheirprimaryconcernssurroundingtheimplementationofPSD2were,andtoselectallthatapply.
Primary Concerns Surrounding the Implementation of PSD2(Percentage of Banking Services Providers)
Itlooksasthoughalthoughayearhaspassed,thesameconcernsaboutPSD2exist,andoftentoaslightlygreaterextent.
Onceagain,andwithexactlythesamepercentageofbanksselectingit(45%),themostcitedconcernaboutPSD2wascost of implementation.Thiswascloselyfollowedbylastyear’ssecondplacedconcern,security and cyber risks,citedby44%ofbanks.
0% 1%0 20% 30% 40% 50%
Other
Increased long-term costs
Not relevant / don't know
Prospect of increased competition
Reduction of existing revenue streams
Increased complexity of the payments sector
Variations in cross-border payments/country interpretation
Security and cyber risks
Cost of implementation 45%
44%
38%
36%
35%
32%
23%
21%
3%
59
Primary Concerns Surrounding the Implementation of PSD2(Percentage of Banking Services Providers)
FutureGrowthStrategy
SmallerbanksaremorelikelytobeconcernedaboutthecostofimplementingPSD2thanmid-sizedorlargerbanks,asmorethanhalf(54%)citedthisasaprimaryconcern(comparedwith24%ofmid-sizedbanksand44%oflargerbanks).Thiswasbyfarthemostcitedconcernforbanksmakinglessthan$500mayear,followedbyreduction of existing revenue streams, variations in cross-border payments/country interpretationandsecurity and cyber risks,eachcitedby39%ofsmallerbanks.
Ofthethreeincomebands,itisthemid-sizedbankswholooktobetheleastconcernedaboutcost of implementation,withjust24%ofbanksearningbetween$500mand$4.9bncitingthisasaconcern.
Mid-sizedbanksaremorelikelytobeconcernedabouttheincreasedcompetitionPSD2mightbringtothefield,as43%selectedit,makingitthemostcitedconcerninthisincomeband.Variations in cross-border payments/country interpretationwasjustonepointbehindthis,with43%ofmid-sizedbanksselectingitasaconcern.
Forlargerbanks(thosewithanannualincomeofmorethan$5bn),security and cyber risksarethemostpressingconcern.With60%ofbanksselectingthis,itwasthemostcitedconcernintheincomeband.RespondentsalsonamedlossofdataawarenessandclientsrushingtoPSD2withoutfirststreamliningtheirprocessesasconcernsaboutthedirective,thoughonesaidtheysawitasanopportunity.
Value All <$500M $500M-$5BN >$5BN Public PrivateAsia
PacificNorth
AmericaWesternEurope
Costofimplementation 45% 54% 24% 44% 43% 47% 49% 37% 39%
Increasedlong-termcosts 21% 29% 14% 21% 18% 31% 26% 24% 21%
Prospectofincreasedcom-petition
32% 33% 43% 29% 24% 42% 36% 32% 37%
Increasedcomplexityofthepaymentssector
36% 33% 19% 48% 32% 42% 40% 35% 39%
Reductionofexistingrevenuestreams
35% 39% 38% 40% 32% 51% 41% 38% 42%
Variationsincross-borderpayments/countryinterpretation
38% 39% 43% 44% 31% 58% 47% 48% 47%
Securityandcyberrisks 44% 39% 38% 60% 43% 53% 51% 48% 54%
Notrelevant/don’tknow 23% 17% 33% 15% 25% 11% 15% 19% 11%
Other(pleasespecify) 3% 2% 0% 2% 3% 2% 0% 2% 3%
60FutureGrowthStrategy
About the Survey
GTNewsconductedthe2017CGITransactionBankingSurveyfromJunetoJuly2017.ThesurveywassenttoGTNewscorporatepractitionersubscribersandbankingservicesproviders.Theprimarypurposeofthesurveywastobetterunderstandattitudesandemergingtrendsinbankingservicesandalsotoidentifyhowbankingservicesaremeetingtheneedsoffinanceprofessionals.
Morethan300responseswerereceivedfromabout140corporatepractitionersworkingintheirorganization’streasuryorfinancefunctionand240bankingservicesproviders.Duetothesamplesizeobtained,regionalanalysiswaslimitedtoresponsesfromthosefinancialprofessionalswhosebusinessesoperateintheAsiaPacific,NorthAmericaandWesternEuroperegions.
GTNewswouldliketothankCGIforitsunderwritingsupportofthe2017TransactionBankingSurvey.
Thetablesbelowpresentthedemographicprofileofsurveyrespondents.
Type of Organization(Percentage Distribution of Organizations)
Corporatepractitionerworkinginmyorganization’streasury/financefunction 37%
Bankingservicesprovider 63%
Ownership Type(Percentage Distribution of Organizations)
PubliclyHeld 32%
PrivatelyOwned 50%
Non-Profit 4%
Government(orgovernment-ownedentity) 15%
Annual Revenue (USD)(Percentage Distribution of Organizations)
Under$50million 22%
$50-99.9million 5%
$100-24.9million 7%
$250-499.9million 8%
$500-999.9million 6%
$1-4.9billion 19%
$5-9.9billion 9%
$10-20billion 9%
Over$20billion 16%
61
Geographic Region(Percentage Distribution of Organizations)
AsiaPacific 62%
Central&EasternEuropean 47%
Latin&SouthAmerica 33%
MiddleEast&Africa 42%
NorthAmerica 53%
WesternEurope 56%
Industry Sector(Percentage Distribution of Corporate Practitioners)
Banking/Financialservices 9%
Businessservices/Consulting 12%
Construction 1%
Energy(includingutilities) 8%
Government 8%
HealthServices 8%
Hospitality/Travel 4%
Manufacturing 9%
Non-profit(includingeducation) 3%
Realestate 5%
Retail(includingwholesale/distribution) 8%
Software/Technology 11%
Telecommunications/Media 1%
Transportation 1%
Other 11%
Disclaimer:Forallquestionsinthissurveythedatarecordedhasbeenroundedtothenearestwholenumberforclarity.Forthisreason,totalresponsesforanumberofdatafieldsmaytotal99%or101%.
6262
Conclusion
63Conclusion
Conclusion
Thisyear,theTransactionBankingSurveygoestopressjustbeforeawaveofsignificantchangeinthebankingsectorandbeyond,withtheintroductionoftheregulationsPSD2inJanuary2018,andGDPR,whichwillgoverndataprotection,inMay.
Thechallengespresentedbytheseregulatorychangeswilldemandstrongrelationshipsbetweenbanksandcorporates,however,asthefindingsinthisyear’ssurveysuggest,banksandcorporatesarenotentirelyalignedwiththeirprioritiesgoingforward.Forexample,therewasamismatchbetweenwhichservicesaremostsoughtbycorporates,andwhichwereofferedbybanksasapriority.Whileathirdofcorporatesseeksecurityadvisoryservicesasapriority,just16%ofbanksareofferingit.
Onamorepositivenote,however,thesurveyfindingsindicatethatbanksunderstandtheimportanceofcustomerexperienceasakeydifferentiator,afactorthatwillbecomeyetmoreimportantwiththepredictedinfluxofnon-bankplayersenteringthemarketafterPSD2.Asincumbentbanksmaystruggletocompetewithnimblerchallengerbanksinsomerespects,providingexcellentcustomerexperienceswillkeepthemahead.
ItisworthaddingherethatPSD2could,asonerespondenttothesurveynoted,presentgreatopportunitiesforbanks,asanopenAPIstandardcanenablethehigherqualitycustomerexperiencesthatarenowexpected.It’spromisingthatthepercentageofbanksofferingopenAPIshasmorethandoubledoverthelast12months,foraswenotedinlastyear’sreport,itisthosewhoembracetheOpenAPIEconomywhowillsucceed.Indeed,thenext12monthswillbecrucialforallplayersinvolved.