An IT mindset has dominated the way organizations view and manage their data. Even as issues of quality and consistency raise their ugly head, the solution has often been to turn to the tool and approach data governance in a project oriented manner. Sustainability has been a challenge, relegated often to IT managing and updating data management tools (MDM, data quality, metadata management, information lifecycle management, and security). Forrester research has shown that less than 15% of organizations have business lead data governance that is linked to business initiatives, objectives and outcomes. But, this is changing. More and more organizations are looking toward data governance as a strategic enterprise competence as they adopt a data driven culture.
This shift from project to strategic program requires more than basic workflow, collaboration, and data profiling capabilities to institutionalize data governance policies and rules. The conversation can't start with data management technology (MDM, data quality, information lifecycle management, security, and metadata management) that will apply the policies and rules. It has to begin with what is the organization trying to achieve with their data; this is a strategy discussion and process. The implication - governing data requires a rethink of your operating model. New roles, responsibilities, and processes emerge.
Only 20% of European customers trust their bank to treat them fairly and honestly, but with a lack credible banking alternatives it doesn't actually seem to matter. As most customers see it, they can either have a bank account, or they can not have a bank account. Account switching legislation in the UK perpetuates the problem, Henry Ford style: “you can have an account with any provider you want, sir…..as long as it’s a bank”. Our new report, “Disrupting Finance: Digital Money Managers”, profiles a series of disruptors offering your customers a third way. Here’s why we think you should be worried:
1. They offer aggregation. Digital money managers offer aggregation because they have to, of course, but in doing so they enable users to manage their finances independently of the firms they don’t trust. Users can pick and choose products from different providers then manage everything in one place - a sort of iTunes for financial services. There's clear disruptive potential here, particularly if an already proven price comparison site acquires a promising digital money manager, as we've already seen in the UK with MoneySuperMarket’s acquisition of OnTrees.
I was invited to speak at the Big Data and Business Analytics Forum in Hong Kong last week, and introduced our latest research on big data in Asia Pacific for both marketing and technology management professionals in the age of the customer. Listening to other speakers at the event who discussed Hadoop and explained the 4Vs of big data — volume, velocity, variety, and value — it dawned on me that there may be a significant gap in big data development between mainland China and Hong Kong. While Hong Kong is perceived as more technologically advanced, these terms were already buzzwords on the mainland 18 months ago. There are several constraints could have hindered big data adoption in Hong Kong:
Demographic limitations. With a total population of 7 million, Hong Kong doesn’t generate data volumes as gigantic as mainland China’s. This raises the unit cost of big data for Hong Kong businesses.
Budget to invest in new technologies. Hong Kong businesses are still struggling to recover from the 2008 financial crisis and maintain hiring freezes. It’s difficult for tech management to convince business leaders to invest over HK$1 million in a big data project and hire data scientists.
There are few local practices in unstructured data like social, location, and mobile. Hong Kong is open to global social platforms like Facebook or Twitter, meaning that multinationals can use global big data solutions to cover social in Hong Kong and keeping local adoption of big data technology for SoLoMo low.
It’s no secret that UK banks were slow to take mobile banking seriously. The iPhone launched in 2007, and it wasn’t until 2010 that we had the first mobile banking app from NatWest. Barclays and HSBC, two of the biggest banks in Europe, let alone the UK, didn’t release apps until 2012. But our new report, 2014 UK Mobile Banking Functionality Benchmark, suggests all that is changing. UK banks now do well where it matters most to customers - across money movement, balance checking and transaction history search. Some of last year’s laggards have overtaken last year's leaders, and many UK banks now offer mobile sales functionality - ahead even of their peers internationally. Here’s the headline story:
Many of you know that Forrester has surveyed the global banking platform market since 2005. For 2013, we analyzed the deals of 29 vendors. Seven of these vendors – Infosys with Finacle, Misys, Polaris Financial Technology, SAP, SunGard, TCS with TCS BaNCS and Temenos – continuously participated since 2006. Earlier this year, we delivered a Forrester Webinar on some results of the survey analysis; and just recently Forrester published further results in a report.
Today, I would like to highlight some of the key results:
2013 saw the second highest number of counted deals ever. The 29 vendors submitted more than 1,600 banking platform deals in 2013, making the number of counted deals the second highest we have yet recorded. New named deals decreased in number, while the amount of extended business deals grew.
Good customer relationship drove individual vendor success. In 2013, very successful vendors were those that were able to leverage good client relationships to extend deals and thus increase their market share. The number of combined new named and extended business deals grew by 4% from 2012 to 2013.
Customer-facing functionality drove 2013 banking platform deals. Banks signed for more functionality related to channel solutions, customer data/party management, and customer relationship management than in the past while more transactional functionality such as core banking and lending still grew, but reduced its footprint within the overall sold banking platform functionality. Banks refocused on customer-facing capabilities to win, serve, and retain customers and increase top-line growth.
Ever since Facebook CFO David Ebersman admitted last October that young teens were visiting the site slightly less frequently, most have accepted as fact that young people are fleeing Facebook en masse. Ivy League researchers have forecast that the service will be all but dead by 2017; President Obama recently claimed that young people “don’t use Facebook anymore”; and when comScore recently reported that fewer college students were using Facebook, media outlets ran stories on the “social platforms college kids now prefer.”
But if you take a closer look at the data it tells a very different story. Sure, many data sources show that Facebook’s usage among young people has declined slightly — but the drops are small, and the huge majority of this audience still uses the site. For instance, that comScore report only found a three-percentage-point drop in college-aged adults’ Facebook usage and reported that 89% of this audience still used Facebook — far more than used any other social site.
To investigate teens’ social behaviors further, we recently asked 4,517 US online youth (aged 12 to 17) not just whether they use social sites like Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and Tumblr — but if they use those sites “about once a day,” “at least a few times each day,” or even if they were on any of the sites “all the time.”
Internet giants like Alibaba and Tencent are aggressively promoting digital wallet usage via competing mobile apps for taxi-hailing. Alibaba has gone further and is cooperating with big brick-and-mortar shopping mall chains to promote mobile commerce via the Taobao and Alipay digital wallets, with the aim of boosting merchant adoption of its digital wallet solution.
In light of the emerging trend of digital wallets in China, my first Forrester report, Understanding Digital Wallet Options For Your Business In China, introduces the digital wallet solutions that the major players in the Chinese market provide, the typical usage scenarios, and merchants’ adoption strategies. Most of the digital wallet options offer abundant value-added services as a means of attracting consumers.
The following chart shows the digital wallet options that the major players provide in China. They fall into three types: remote-only, proximity-only, and omnichannel wallets. The latter incorporates the different types, provides the most value-added services, and integrates mobile commerce, payments, and financial management in a single mobile app — giving digital wallet players the most space to deliver their services and capture consumers.
Organizations fail to deliver a quality of service that customers expect. Our data shows that 67% of US online consumers say they've had unsatisfactory service interactions in the past 12 months. This parallels recent data from Accenture Global Consumer Pulse Research survey. This is because companies need a variety of queuing and routing, CRM and WFO software to support end-to-end operations - software procured from a number of different vendors. Today’s set of un-integrated components restricts contact center managers from obtaining a full, multichannel view of customer interactions, makes it difficult to configure more effective rules for contact flow, and ultimately impacts the quality of service delivered.
The last decade has seen continued consolidation and turmoil in each of the three software categories, as vendors have acquired direct competitors to fill in gaps in their offerings. More importantly, vendors have acquired companies in adjacent spaces to broaden their customer engagement management capabilities and offerings. Today, the leading vendors within each respecive category offer robust end-to-end solutions, and you have to dig deep to find feature differentiation between software solutions. This has left vendors focusing on different verticals, geographies and deployment sizes in order to grow their footprint. In addition, some vendors have made moves into developing capabilities or making acquisitions outside of their respective categories to increase market share. Many vendors offer a combination of 2 of the three foundational building blocks for the contact center - but no vendor has robust end-to-end offerings across all three categories.