Why Open Banking Represents a Seismic Shift for Fintech

January 17, 2019 FinTech and Alternative Finance, Fintech International, Fintech Interviews and Podcasts, Innovation and Resources No comments

Wharton | University of Pennsylvania | Jan 16, 2019

Open banking, a collaborative model in which banking data is shared with third-party players, is expected to revolutionize the financial services ecosystem. For consumers, the opening up of banking data could mean better control over their finances. At the same time, the trend has also raised concerns over data privacy and security.

In a conversation with Knowledge@Wharton, Jane Barratt, chief advocacy officer at MX, a Utah-based company that provides data to financial institutions and fintechs, talks about how open banking will impact legacy institutions as well as nimble startups.

Knowledge@Wharton: What is open banking? What are some of the factors that have led to the opening up of banking data to make it shareable via secure APIs [application programming interface] with third parties?

Jane Barratt: Over the past decade or so, we have seen open government and other open initiatives. There’s an expectation now of increased transparency. The idea of people sharing their data — their financial data — is not a new one. It’s happening, and it’s happening with methods that aren’t necessarily private or secure or transparent. People don’t really know where their data is going. Open banking is basically accessing the APIs that the financial institutions use to get greater transparency into your own data, and then being able to share that, with your consent and permission of course, with third parties of your choice.

See: MoF Consultation (Deadline Feb 11): Department of Finance Canada Launches Consultations on Open Banking

Knowledge@Wharton: Could you give some examples of how this is happening, both in the U.S. and in other parts of the world?

Barratt: The U.S. is in the early stages of having an ecosystem built around open banking. Europe has had PSD2 [the revised Payment Services Directive]. You’ve got open banking in the U.K. European banks have a head start on the U.S. in terms of getting the frameworks and the technology in place.

There have been some gaps in terms of understanding by the general public about what open banking actually is. If there is a use case for sharing your data, most people understand. “I can use it to share data with my accountant or a budgeting app.” Or, “I don’t have to manually share my data through a statement or [by] writing it down for them.” But the ecosystem around it is still coalescing.

When you look at Europe or Australia, for example, or potentially Canada and Mexico, these are countries that are leading with regulators. Regulators and governments have come together, and they have a strong seat at the table. Australia has a singular consumer data right — not rights. It’s just the data right, which is that it’s yours. They’re starting with open banking as the first vertical, and then moving into energy and telecommunications. You can see your usage and pricing and competitive offers.

“There’s a lot of talk of the customers being at the center of everything we do, but organization charts do not reflect that.”

And you can see information that often used to be behind the scenes within institutions. The U.S. is much more of an industry-led solution versus a government-led solution. It is by far the most complex banking model in the world. There is a lot of momentum, but it’s still relatively early days.

Knowledge@Wharton: What changes do you think open APIs will bring to banks’ organizational structures and also their competitive positions in the market?

Barratt: From the early days of digital, I used to joke, “Show me a website, and I can draw you your org chart,” because it was always laid out by division and byproduct. There’s a lot of talk of the customers being at the center of everything we do, but organization charts do not reflect that. You now have companies investing heavily in, say, data lakes. These tell us where our customers are and what they do. I think that will start to coalesce around organizational changes.

For instance, who is driving the structure of this? Who is extracting the intelligence from it? How is it being put to work? That’s a more sensible organizational approach than every division having their own databases and CRM and all of the different product databases. It has gotten very messy over the years. Hopefully, true data centricity will come about through how data is collected and what tools are layered on top of it, and all this will help the end customer.

See: Fintech firms want to shake up banking, and that worries the Fed

We have some data on return on investment from both the institutional perspective and the individual perspective. We have seen that when someone can access their data and is given access to tools, their financial strength improves. Institutions spend a lot of money acquiring customers and cross-selling to customers. Instead of this, institutions could focus on reducing high-interest debt, increasing deposits and moving customers up the value chain to higher value products.

There is now so much more competition [to be the] customer’s primary financial institution — even Amazon could be a peer at some point soon. If financial institutions can organize themselves around customer outcomes, they will be able to retain that primary financial institution status. But if they continue to just cross-sell a bunch of products, then it’s going to be [downhill] for them.

Knowledge@Wharton: Will a platform strategy be profitable for incumbent banks that own most of the deposit and lending market share?

Barratt: Banks are already platforms, especially institutions that have multiple product lines around insurance and deposits and lending. They just haven’t acknowledged it yet. It’s not that big of a stretch to put a level of intelligence on top of it with which people can engage. At present, the language is still around segments. For instance, if you’re newly married, you’re put in that segment. But your financial profile may be the same as a boomer because you’ve inherited money or you’ve got good financial habits and you’ve got good savings. And then you have boomers who have the same profiles as millennials.

It’s only when you get to a platform level that you can extract the intelligence around who a person is based on their true profile. Who I am with my credit card company is different from who I am with my insurance company, or who I am with my primary institution. No one has given me a really great reason to connect all of them. And that is the platform that an institution could be, because they have the biggest advantage out of anyone in the ecosystem, which is trust.

I’ve trusted you all this time with my money. I could trust you with my data. There is a great quote from Walter Wriston, who was the CEO and chairman of Citicorp in the 1970s. He said, “Information about money is as valuable as the money itself.” An institution could be a major value-add player in the data-as-currency space. No one’s talking about this as yet. It could be a seismic shift in the industry.

Knowledge@Wharton: How should challenger banks position themselves in this environment?

Barratt: Challenger banks have done a great job in different countries, to varying degrees. They have done a good job of being more digitally savvy. That has been their value proposition. “I’m going to give you a better app. I’m going to give you a better experience. I’m going to give you better transparency.”

See: Passion For Banking Innovation Fueled By Fintech, Big Tech Disruptors

They haven’t necessarily invested in their brands or in the trust. As your financial life becomes more complex, are you going to trust your deposit account with your mortgage or insurance provider? It’s still early days to be able to point to a challenger, but I think there are some examples of players who have done an amazing job, like Aspiration out of Los Angeles, which is a values-led bank.

“The newer players are telling compelling stories and offering compelling digital experiences.”

Knowledge@Wharton: What are some of the key lessons that the bigger institutions could learn from them?

Barratt: It’s about being able to tell a stronger story. There is a genuine human need to understand the story behind companies with which you do business. The newer players are telling compelling stories and offering compelling digital experiences. Of course, bigger institutions can do it. They can micro-target it down to the individual if they wanted to and tell a story that’s great for me. It’s just that organizationally they’re not set up for it at this point in time.

Knowledge@Wharton: Is the introduction of APIs going to bring improvements in banking services? If so, what might be some examples?

Barratt: Definitely. We are seeing giant institutions engaging in a deep way with the ecosystem from a contractual perspective. The data aggregators, who have traditionally been the middle men between the fintechs and the APIs, are doing a lot more direct connection. People no longer have to share their credentials. Out into the ecosystem, you can now have much more secure, token-led engagements.

What some of the institutions are doing is that they are opening up their internal APIs. It’s not heavy lifting for them. You can’t see everything. But they’re getting out there quickly, and they are then seeing how the data moves.

For them, it’s less around, “Let’s make this a uni-directional flow of data.” It’s very much the expectation that it’s bi-directional. And if I can get the incentive to connect my investments, insurance, etc. back to my primary institution, they’re in a much better place to be able to service me.

See: RBC first Canadian bank to open an API developer portal

Knowledge@Wharton: What do you think are the biggest challenges of open banking for both banks and for their customers?

Barratt: With increased transparency, there is definitely increased risk. There is an expectation that the industry should be able to solve these challenges and risks — because that’s what we’ve been doing. But there is a nefarious element to the financial services industry, and so [the question is] with more open data, is there more chance for more scammers, for example? The answer generally — and in theory — should be no, because the personally identifiable information (PII) is taken out. All I’ve done is to allow someone to have a look at my transactions. That’s not going to track back to me. So, the risk element from privacy and transparency should be reduced. However, there are some very creative scammers out there.

Continue to the full article --> here

NCFA Jan 2018 resize - Why Open Banking Represents a Seismic Shift for Fintech The National Crowdfunding & Fintech Association (NCFA Canada) is a financial innovation ecosystem that provides education, market intelligence, industry stewardship, networking and funding opportunities and services to thousands of community members and works closely with industry, government, partners and affiliates to create a vibrant and innovative fintech and funding industry in Canada. Decentralized and distributed, NCFA is engaged with global stakeholders and helps incubate projects and investment in fintech, alternative finance, crowdfunding, peer-to-peer finance, payments, digital assets and tokens, blockchain, cryptocurrency, regtech, and insurtech sectors. Join Canada's Fintech & Funding Community today FREE! Or become a contributing member and get perks. For more information, please visit: www.ncfacanada.org