Actualités

The automation journey: types and benefits

Intelligent automation is set to transform our lives. For business services, it promises huge gains, including lower costs along with better market insight into customer experiences.

As a result, many organizations are already using basic robotic process automation (RPA) to carry out simple, rules-based tasks to become more productive.

To realize intelligent automation benefits faster, many organizations want to accelerate the automation journey. In our experience, seeking this goal requires planning that should follow four principles:

  1. Business led; technology enabled
  2. Start small, execute well and scale up rapidly
  3. Develop an internal automation capability to sustain progress
  4. Use RPA to achieve greater productivity and as a stepping stone for enhanced process and cognitive automation that can lead to transformational change

The next step is to introduce more sophisticated intelligent automation classes that have the potential to lead to transformational change.
KPMG2

Rethinking Automation Myths

Misconceptions about intelligent automation can delay the automation journey or dilute potential benefits. Following are five common myths along with our views on the truth.

  • “ Implementing a bot will significantly improve productivity.” – Yes, but boosting productivity is often more complex than expected. For example, implementing a new process and managing change simultaneously can dilute savings.
  • “We need to transform our processes before adding RPA. »– Ideally yes, but you can incorporate process transformation into your RPA journey, either before or after automation. RPA is another lever that can be combined with more traditional transformation tools.
  • “We can deploy our first bot quickly.” – The pilot can take longer than expected. This is because you need to build the right infrastructure, capabilities and sponsorship. The cost per bot will decrease significantly as you scale up and accelerate your execution speed.
  • “We need to build lots of bots.” – Don’t get mesmerized by volume. Utilization per bot is a better measure for understanding automation effectiveness and efficiency.
  • “We can move straight to cognitive solutions.” – Evaluate your needs and capabilities. While some organizations begin with small cognitive pilots, RPA can also be a stepping stone in your automation journey.

See the bigger picture – Implementing intelligent automation is more than just technological change. It affects components across your operating model.

KPMG3

Click here to access KPMG’s discussion paper

 

Make the right decisions about emerging technologies

Today’s businesses are innovating across

  • business models,
  • products,
  • services
  • and customer engagement

while disrupting markets and entire industries. Much of this innovation is driven by applying emerging technologies throughout the value chain. It creates great opportunities but at the same time presents significant challenges and unknown risks and consequences to organizations. Competitors can completely disrupt an industry, or an organization can disrupt itself first and lead a new phase of growth.

This pursuit of everything digital is happening at an accelerating pace. Speed has become a huge source of value whether measured by faster decision-making or how quickly an organization can go from ideation to revenue. This need to deploy digital capabilities quickly and at scale is the antithesis of IT-led projects that are typically months or years long and, as a result, often out of frustration, the business is increasingly sidestepping the IT function to procure new technologies. The combination of an increasingly tech-savvy population combined with the proliferation of cloud-based software as a service (SaaS) solutions has greatly simplified this process. In this race to harness emerging technologies and innovate it is easy to forget about governance and that can lead to significant costs and risks.

Understanding when, how, why, and what new technologies are introduced to an organization is critical to both maximize the opportunities that they present and minimize the inherent risks.

Establishing a governance framework that embraces disruptive technologies and encourages innovation while ensuring risks are identified and managed is essential to an organization’s ability to survive and thrive in a digital world. Innovation / Emerging Technology Councils comprised of the right mix of internal and third party experts can ensure that the right approach is taken, investment is available and prioritized, and opportunities can be scaled.

The unique characteristics of emerging technologies

  • their diverse applications,
  • the myriad concerns raised by some new capabilities,
  • the need for public engagement,
  • and the challenge of effective coordination between governance players

– create the need for a new governance approach and a new lens through which to view risk management.

KPMG1

Click here to access KPMG’s detailed article

How to Protect and Engage Customers

Think about the many devices and channels your customers use today and the barrage of marketing messages coming across them. It’s overwhelming. How do you break through to meaningfully engage with customers, keep them loyal, and increase incremental revenue?

Finding ways to stand out from entrenched competitors and innovative upstarts is becoming increasingly difficult. Traditional offerings and marketing continue to decline. At the same time, your customers and employees face a host of evolving and confusing cyber threats that can quickly derail their lives. That, no doubt, partially explains why 79 percent of consumers prefer to do business with companies that provide identity monitoring services, according to a GfK Survey.

Yet the complexity of threats requires more than monitoring. Additionally, most identity and data protection service offerings haven’t kept up with the times and consumers’ expectations about self-service. At this intersection of evolving threats and customer needs lies a rare opportunity for you to establish a new type of valuable and ongoing engagement with customers.

In this article, we’ll explore this new opportunity for protecting and engaging your customers, examining:

  • Technology’s impact on customer interactions and loyalty
  • The tight correlation between security engagement and risk
  • Why it’s time for a new identity and data defense solution model
  • How a marketplace approach to identity management, privacy and cyber security can help you regularly engage customers, improve loyalty and grow revenues

Technology’s impact on customer interactions and loyalty

Today, most engagement is technologydriven, and customers expect nearly instantaneous responses for any type of query or request.

Engagement1

The tight correlation between security engagement and risk

It’s not just technology that has been evolving rapidly over the years. We’ve also seen a corresponding progression in the sophistication and types of identity and data fraud.

Engagement2

Why it’s time for a new identity and data defense solution model

We recognized the growing potential of cyber and identity protection services as a unique opportunity for ongoing necessary engagement. That’s why we took a step back and reconsidered everything from the changing threat landscape to changing customer preferences and began working on an innovative approach for organizations to engage customers.

Engagement3

Click here to access Cyberscout’s White Paper

 

Solvabilité II : Point de l’ACPR sur les SFCR collectés en 2017

Qualité

D’une manière générale, l’information consultable par le public via les SFCR de la collecte 2017 apparaît perfectible pour les motifs suivants :

  • Des rapports souvent désincarnés et peu accessibles pour un public non averti.
  • Des informations qui ne reflètent pas suffisamment les caractéristiques de l’entité :
    • Une absence de description du « business model » de l’organisme.
    • Des parties (gouvernance, ORSA, activité, résultat d’exploitation et capacité bénéficiaire) se limitant à l’énoncé des contraintes réglementaires.
  • Manquent également dans certains rapports publics les informations sur la politique et les pratiques de rémunération (dont les régimes de retraite anticipée et complémentaire de l’organe de gouvernance de l’organisme ou groupe).
  • Les modalités d’accès des responsables de fonctions clé aux dirigeants effectifs ne sont pas toujours suffisamment décrites.

Surtout, les effets – souvent considérables – des mesures transitoires, « provisions techniques » ou VA notamment, sur la solvabilité des organismes mériteraient d’être davantage détaillés, notamment quant à leur impact sur la solvabilité des groupes concernés.

SFCR France

Conclusion et recommandations

  • Cette première publication démontre la capacité de l’ensemble du marché à délivrer une information globalement conforme aux attendus réglementaires.
  • Cela étant, ces premiers SFCR se caractérisent par une grande hétérogénéité dans le niveau de détail et la cohérence de l’information délivrée au public et ne permettent pas encore suffisamment au lecteur de saisir les principaux enjeux et choix méthodologiques des assureurs.
  • Le SFCR n’est donc pas encore uniformément l’instrument de discipline de marché souhaité à l’origine, tant du point de vue de la conformité générale que de l’appréciation qualitative.
  • Pour les collectes à venir, notamment la collecte 2018, l’ACPR identifie les pistes d’amélioration suivantes :
    • Une publication du SFCR et de ses annexes aisément accessible sur internet pour les assurés ;
    • Une piste d’audit des données utilisées et publiées pour assurer leur traçabilité du QRT au SFCR ;
    • Une rédaction simple et fiable, selon les modes usuels de la communication financière, qui permette d’appréhender le profil de risque de l’organisme et son degré de sensibilité ;
    • Une mise en perspective des résultats avec les performances passées et les perspectives futures ;
    • La mention explicite des effets des mesures transitoires sur la solvabilité des organismes qui en bénéficient directement (obligatoire) et indirectement (si matériel) ;
    • Et d’une manière générale, des descriptions qui, au-delà de la stricte énonciation des attendus réglementaires, permettent de comprendre l’activité, l’organisation, les résultats, la solvabilité et le modèle de développement de chaque organisme.

Cliquez ici pour accéder à la présentation détaillée de l’ACPR

The Customer Journey of a Lifetime: Step-by-Step Modernisation to Maximise Retention

Customer experience is the insurer’s latest hot topic. Improving it at existing touchpoints and finding new opportunities to deliver it beyond purchase, renewal and claims dominate discussions. McKinsey found in the B2B sector that improved customer experience lowered churn by 15%, increased win rate from 20% to 40% and lowered costs to serve by up to 50%.

But understanding how to deliver great insurance customer experience, whether on mobile, in a contact centre or at a repair shop means far more than finessing an individual point of interaction. How the customer experiences each interaction and how it colours past and future interactions is critical to building a successful customer experience.

In other words, if you don’t give your customer the best journey, they’ll never arrive at the desired destination.

In this paper we look at the latest research supporting customer journey analysis and speak to three insurance executives who are putting this strategy at the heart of their customer experience and engagement policy. Progress towards the optimal customer journey is examined in the following stages:

  1. Proof points for customer journey analysis
  2. Embedding effective customer tracking
  3. Solid data collection practice
  4. Assessing and enhancing the availability of information
  5. Upskilling the organisation to manage the journey
  6. Discovering and mitigating pain points in the customer journey
  7. An atmosphere of continuous improvement

Proof points for customer journey analysis

Customer journey analysis and optimisation is so important because of the multiple channels and external influences involved in the buying process. So much can happen between intent and purchase. No-one is exempt. Google and Ipsos found that 90% of people move between devices in a sequential fashion to accomplish a goal. In online shopping, 61% of internet users and 80% of online millennials start shopping on one device but finish on another.” This is a pretty simplistic view. If we turn to research by user experience research house, GfK, the customer journey looks even more convoluted:

CX Survey

From this infographic, we note that most insurance customers use branded search but also go across around eight touchpoints including social media and email. Only 14% don’t do any research and for those who do, most will research online covering around five different websites. Further research on the insurer journey from GfK found that hardly any purchasers bothered with word of mouth (5%) but price comparison sites (PCS) wield a strong influence (26%).

This diagram only relates to the insurance purchase journey. There are many more influences on customer retention such as claims journey, customer engagement campaigns (increasingly popular under the influence of internet of things (IoT) technology).

Embedding effective customer tracking

The business case for journey analysis established, insurers need to make sure they are tracking all the essential touchpoints.

ERGO Group AG’s Head of Customer and Sales Service Health, Dr. Carsten Rahlf explains his process: “If a phone number is saved in the database we can see the customer’s profile upon calling, their historic interaction points, so we know where he is in the process. If he went to the doctor, paid him and wants to be reimbursed, also we can see when and how he submitted his bills. He may have sent them by post or used the app. He and we can see through the online portal that his request has been accepted and the customer and the agent can then track it to see if it has been executed.”

Wesleyan’s Group Head of Marketing Robin Gibson is in the middle of bringing CRM data into a Microsoft Dynamics system to improve their single view of the customer – vital to make any sense of customer tracking data. Executives looking to follow his lead should be aware it is a long-term project: “We spent the last three years on integration, migrating all the data into new CRM systems. The first part is to allow financial consultants and the customer to jointly have a single view of finances. »

« The next part is to allow customers to self-serve on their devices. Next, we need to put marketing plugins into the system to simulate interactions and use the database to find new customers.” He adds that a manageable, clean source of customer information is vital to comply with May 2018’s GDPR legislation which requires explicit data consent ongoing. It’s clear that tracking the customer journey means not just focusing on points of customer interaction such as cookies on a website or calls to a call centre but also looking internally to see what processes are helping or hindering that customer journey.

This will never be an exact science. Explaining where tracking begins and ends in MyCustomer, SEO expert Martin Calvert admits a degree of arbitrariness is expected “The start and end points of a customer journey are always going to be debatable. Does the journey ultimately start when they see one of your brand’s adverts years ago…does it end after they’ve bought their last product from you in their 80s?”

The learning is to track what you can and hunt out two specific areas:

  • one, where gaps in the customer journey appear
  • and two, where customers appear to experience pain points that are unaccountable – so far.

To get reliable pictures of this, insurers need to access as much data as possible.

Customer Journey

Click here to access InsuranceNexus’ White Paper

Mastering Risk with “Data-Driven GRC”

Where are organizations heading ?

“Data Driven GRC” represents a consolidation of methodologies, both functional and technological, that dramatically enhance the opportunity to address emerging risk landscapes and, in turn, maximizing the reliability of organizational performance. This paper examines the key opportunities to leverage change—both from a risk and an organizational performance management perspective—to build integrated, data-driven GRC processes that optimize the value of audit and risk management activities, as well as the investments in supporting tools and techniques.

Functional Stakeholders of GRC Processes and Technology

The Institute of Internal Auditors’ (IIA) “Three Lines of Defense in Effective Risk Management and Control” model specifically addresses the “who and what” of risk management and control. It distinguishes and describes three role- and responsibility-driven functions :

  • Those that own and manage risks (management – the “first line”)
  • Those that oversee risks (risk, compliance, financial controls, IT – the “second line”)
  • Those functions that provide independent assurance over risks (internal audit – the “third line”)

The overarching context of these three lines acknowledges the broader role of organizational governance and governing bodies.

Technology Deficiencies in the Three Lines of Defense

Since the emergence of Sarbanes-Oxley, the use of technology in risk and control related processes has truly started to take meaningful shape in many organizations. However, when looking across the risk and control oriented functions in most organizations, technology is still typically used on a departmental or point solution basis.

Third Line (internal audit) use of risk & control technology

For the past decade, surveys of internal auditors have consistently identified the more effective use of technology as among the most pressing issues facing the profession. Specifically, the responses to the surveys also referred to the need for increased use of technology for audit analysis, fraud detection, and continuous auditing. Other surveys also highlight a shortage of sufficient technology and data analysis skills within audit departments.

Much of the driving force for improving the use of technology is based on the desire to make the audit process itself more efficient and more effective, as well as to deliver more tangible value to the rest of the organization.

During the past decade, the role of the internal audit function itself has changed considerably. Internal audit’s traditional focus on cyclical audits and testing internal controls is evolving into one in which internal audit is expected to assess and report on the effectiveness of management’s processes to address risk overall. This often includes providing guidance and consultation to the business on best practices for managing risk and compliance within business process areas and maintaining effective control systems. The use of technology is an increasingly critical component of these best practices and in some cases internal audit is able to champion the implementation of high-impact, high-value technology within the business’s risk management and compliance processes, based on their own experience in using technology for assurance purposes.

There is considerable variation in the extent to which internal audit departments leverage technology. However it is certainly fair to say that for audit to be truly valuable and relevant within the context of organizational strategy, a significant improvement is required across the board. Internal audit as a profession simply is not moving forward at the pace of technology.

Some specific statistics from recent research reveals:

  • Only approximately 40% of internal audit departments use audit and documentation management systems from specialized vendors. The remainder use disorganized tools and processes, typically based on Microsoft Office® & shared folders.
  • Audit programs for specific business process areas and industries are usually developed through a combination of previously used programs and those shared on various audit-related websites. This approach does not address organization-specific risk.
  • Next generation testing techniques, especially data analytics, are overwhelmingly underutilized.

Second Line (risk, compliance, financial controls, IT) use of risk & control technology

Outside of audit, in other areas of risk and compliance, some organizations have acquired specialized departmental software, but the majority use only basic Office tools to maintain inventories of risks, document controls and perform risk assessments. In larger enterprises, it is not unusual to have a variety of different technologies and approaches applied in different operational entities or in different functional areas. This approach is usually more costly and less effective than one based on a common platform. Effective testing methods using technology are usually unavailable or left unconsidered.

In fact, second line of defense functions often rely heavily on inquiry-based methods such as surveying, which are proven ineffective at identifying the actual manifestations of risk in the organization. If analytical software is used in the business for investigations or monitoring transactions, it in many cases involves standard query tools or some form of generic business intelligence (BI) technology. Although good for providing summary level information or high-level trends, BI tools struggle to show the root cause of problems. And while they may have certain capabilities to prevent fraud and errors from occurring, or to flag exceptions, they are not sufficient to effectively trap the typical problem transactions that occur.

First Line (management) use of risk & control technology

While in some cases, first line management have access to better technology for use on specific pain point areas (e.g., continuous transaction monitoring technology used within finance departments), there is a common tendency for management to place far too much reliance on core business systems for effective control. While the large ERP and other system vendors seem to have extensive capabilities for preventing control deficiencies, the reality is that these are extremely extensive and complex systems and internal controls are usually the afterthought of those implementing them, not a core focus. For example, in many cases certain control settings are turned off to enable the ERP system to run more efficiently.

An integrated and collaborative approach to managing risks and monitoring controls in collaboration with the second and third lines of defense, using a common, independent methodology and technology platform, typically proves the most effective in accomplishing management’s key risk mitigation strategies.

DD GRC

 

Click here to access ACL’s White Paper

Organizing and Orchestrating Digital Transformation

Organizing for a Digital World

What makes the shift to more robust digital offerings, channels and operations so tricky is the stress it puts on old-line companies’ operating models. Many new activities and capabilities—ranging from advanced analytics and rapid prototyping to cybersecurity and external partnership management—will need to be developed and located somewhere in the organization.

  • Who takes ownership for these activities
  • Who decides investment levels for each
  • And how they will work

are all major operating model questions.

In addressing these choices, companies usually start to realize that their legacy processes don’t move fast enough to keep up with changing customer demands and behavior, which are shaped by digital interactions in other parts of their lives. Decision speed also may be too slow, because it’s tied to budget cycles. Companies may find digital innovations hard to scale up beyond small projects. And certain kinds of digital talent have become very tough to source and hire. As a result, digital transformations are significantly harder to pull off than conventional change programs. Bain & Company recently surveyed 1,000 companies around the world to gauge their level of digital readiness. After comparing financial results for five categories of companies based on their degree of digital sophistication, we found that revenues for the digital leaders grew 14% over the past three years, more than doubling the performance of the digital laggards in their industries. Profitability followed a similar pattern. Yet while the payoff from digital transformation can be impressively high, the success rate is regrettably low. In our survey, just 5% of those companies involved in digital transformation efforts reported that they had achieved or exceeded the expectations they had set for themselves (versus a success rate of 12% for conventional transformations found in an earlier survey). A full 71% of these companies settled for dilution of value and mediocre performance.

Leading companies realize that making the transition to digital 2.0 or 3.0 requires systematically examining and adjusting each element of their operating model— the blueprint for how resources are organized and operated to get critical work done. The operating model encompasses decisions around the shape and size of the business, where to draw the boundaries for each line of business and function, how people work together within and across these boundaries, how the corporate center will add value to the business units, and what norms and behaviors should be encouraged. It entails choices in five areas:

  • Structure involves drawing appropriate boundaries for lines of business and functions, and defining centers of expertise and other coordinating units.
  • Accountabilities describe the roles and responsibilities of the main organizational entities, including ownership for profit and loss statements and a clear, value-adding role for the corporate center.
  • Governance refers to executive forums and management processes that yield high-quality decisions on strategic priorities, as well as budgets and incentives to align behavior.
  • Capabilities refer to how the company combines people, process and technology in a repeatable way to deliver desired outcomes.
  • Ways of working describe the expected cultural norms for how people collaborate, especially across the boundaries between functions or teams.

Executives should consider how each area will change in turn as the organization’s digital intensity rises.

Bain DigOrg

Click here to access BAIN_BRIEF_Organizing_for_a_Digital_World

 

Orchestrating a Successful Digital Transformation

Among the five categories of companies in the research, the most advanced digitally achieved the best balance between the inner and outer games. Those just embarking on digital transformations typically start from a set of isolated initiatives targeting their most acute pain points (the outer game), but they struggle to translate these prototypes into products and capabilities that can have a meaningful impact on the company’s economics. More advanced businesses do a good job of clustering digital initiatives around a common strategic ambition and start to focus on improving select enabling capabilities, particularly IT. But these initiatives also tend to plateau somewhere short of broad organizational impact or end up creating “two-speed” organizations that are responsive in limited respects but still held back by legacy systems.

The true digital leaders pull away from the competition by linking a bold strategic ambition to the specific inner game capabilities and behaviors that they will need to achieve it. First they translate their strategy into a clear set of digital initiatives that point the organization toward a clear vision of full potential. Then they invest heavily in the fundamental changes to their ways of working and culture that allow them to develop those initiatives rapidly and execute them at scale.

Bain DigOrchestration

Click here to access BAIN_BRIEF_Orchestrating_a_Successful_Digital_Transformation