The Financial Services Club is a unique service designed for Senior Executives and Decision Makers from any firm interested in understanding and planning strategies for the future of banking and finance.
Another presentation that surprised me in Oslo came from Tor Jacobsen, CEO of TSM Nordic.
It surprised me as I had no idea about TSM, a mobile wallet provider owned by Telenor and DNB – Norway’s biggest mobile network operator (MNO) and biggest bank – and will launch in the Norwegian market later this year under the brand name ValYou.
This video provides a brief overview of how it’s being promoted:
I used to think that we were good at designing systems. We would phase test them, user test them,
stress test them and more, and eventually we would roll out the system and it would
work. And life was good.
Then we started getting into a new world of developments
where systems relied on networks, networks relied on servers, servers relied on
mirroring, mirroring relied on programs and programs relied on programmers.
The interlinkage and interdependcies became more and more complex
and clouded, rather than simpler and easier, and the systems started to
fail. And life was bad.
I must admit, having listened to Jeremy Roe regarding banks mis-selling swaps contracts along with Which? and the leader of bank employee union Unite talking about how general staff and customers feel about mis-selling, I’m a
little bit cynical.
Have banks behaved badly or are customers a little bit
There's a theme that keeps cropping up at most conferences I attend around the remodelling
It came up again today in a discussion about data leverage
at the Asian Banker Summit, and it occurred to me again recently, when I chaired the future focused day at IPS 2013.
The theme is how do you turn a vertically integrated
business that owns the customer process end-to-end and organises itself around
products and channels, into a horizontally structured business that wants to
provide functionality to the customer at their point of need and organises
themselves around the customer’s data.
That’s a long sentence and, for those who get this, it will
make perfect sense.
This is why I wouldn’t bother writing anything further, except
that this is so fundamental to the dialogue we’re having that I feel the need
to break it down step-by-step.
There’s an old saying that cropped up the other day in
respect of Margaret Thatcher’s son, Mark. It was a joking reference by
Margaret that her son was so clever he could sell “snow to eskimos or sand to
Arabs” or, as one wag put it, arms to anyone.
Anyways, it’s a message worth remembering as most fintech
companies could not sell sand to eskimos, snow to Arabs or guns to anyone, as
they have no idea how to market or sell their wares.
As mentioned yesterday, I introduced a discussion about Fixing Our Banks this week, alongside a
distinguished panel comprising:
Charles Middleton, Managing Director of Triodos
Seamus Gillen, Policy Director with the
Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators (ICSA);
Dominic Hook, National Officer for Finance and
Legal with the Unite union;
James Daley, Head of Money Content with the
Which? Consumer’s Association; and
Andrew Chambers, Professor of Internal Auditing
at London South Bank University.
It was an interesting dialogue covering bank, shareholder,
employee, customer and auditor’s views of how to fix the banking system.
Charles began with a discussion of many of the issues in the
industry: bonuses, trust, casino capitalism, risk and more. He talked a little about how the bonus culture
arose, as partners who risked personal capital moved to firms with no risk
That’s what my colleague said yesterday, when I said that my
new presentation has three themes:
Mobile is irrelevant;
Money is meaningless; and
Capitalism is dead.
I wondered what she meant by polemic, so checked out the definitions online and Wikipedia
defines it quite well: a polemic is “a
contentious argument that is
intended to establish the truth of a specific belief and the falsity of the
contrary belief. Polemics are mostly seen in arguments about very controversial
I also found another definition I prefer from Merriam-Webster
which is that a polemic is “an aggressive controversialist”.