Project portfolio representation

Large corporations often struggle to represent their huge projects portfolio in a structured and readable manner.

Of course, there are number of ways to present projects portfolio from a performance point of view. SPI, for example, is comparing the earned value to the planned value displaying along the projects maturity. CPI does the same comparing the earned value to the actual cost. Others are trying to highlight the projects dependencies in order to represent the portfolio's complexity linking graphically the projects together. Others represent the projects risks highlighting the ones on which management should focus attention.

All these representations are analytical and do not show much about the projects functional impacts.
Grabbed into Back Office and Operational risk from Mervyn J. King, there is another very interesting representation which shows how the corporate strategy is declined into number of projects and how much impacting these projects are:

© Mervyn K. King

In this representation, it easy to understand which company's areas are impacted and how deeply each project is impacting each department. This view is nicely complementing the other representations mentioned earlier.

Open innovation and private banking

In the last years, banks have been attacked in many segments of their value chain. New entrants like Pay Pal and more recently Apple have been very successful in developing activities in new areas. Moreover, other competitors are growing all along the value chain, attacking niche markets one after the other. Even though there is no global new competitor yet, the pressure banks are feeling is definitely increasing.

Digitalization is a disruptive change in this industry which is creating space for new entrants. Fortunately for banks, the entry ticket is rather high as regulation is heavier and heavier every year (Mifid 2 and Basel 3 for example). Nevertheless, the regulation cost is also increasing for established banks cutting down profits and limiting the investment capacity in new territories. Furthermore, some niche areas are not fully regulated, leaving space for new entrants on markets with potentially high margin.

More specifically for private banking, we see new comers taking fully advantage of digitalization, not being slowed down by legacy cutting down costs and bringing a compelling value proposition to the market.On top, web giants like Google, Apple, Yahoo, are always seeking to expand. Banking sector could be for them a very attractive area as they already own the customers, have already access to a huge amount of information and have outstanding technological capacities. Banking knowledge is for them the only missing part.

In addition, to make things even worse, the fundamental value the banking industry was bringing to its customers, trust, has been quite damaged with the financial crisis. New entrants have not any more to overcome this entry barrier.The agenda for those banking organisations is rather challenging:

• Restore trust
• Streamline processes to reduce cost
• Increase product offering to compete with new entrants  

New forms of relations between companies and customers are emerging. Open innovation is becoming more and more popular in various industries. A recent book "Leading open innovation" is listing and detailing the various aspects of this approach. Some of those ideas could be applied to the banking industry though introducing a complete paradigm change in the customer relationship.

Restore trust

Restoring trust will be a better shield than regulation against competitors. Having a stronger and trusted relation with our customers will protect the banking business. To reach this goal, transparency will be the key word to rebuild the trust with the customers. In that matter, open innovation can be of great help, bringing this needed transparency. For example, active web communities enable to interact directly with customers, listening and understanding more their needs as well as explaining better the products and services and their associated costs.
This will require a deep and challenging transformation of existing sales and support teams to take fully in consideration these new interaction channels. 

Streamline processes

Banking processes can be streamlined. Digitalization is giving the opportunity of deeply transforming manual processes which are not any more in sync with most customers expectations. As a well known example of this disconnection between customers and banks, branches are less and less visited and are still being opened only when customers are busy working. Most of those branches are generating a very high cost not bringing back expected revenues. 

For streamlining processes, open innovation techniques could again bring some help : for example, one could setup an internal contest to voice the numerous ideas that are already within the company. An innovation team could trigger such a contest through an intranet channel, collect and prioritize those ideas from the employees and propose to top management an implementation plan of the selected ideas.
For the implementation phase, some projects could also benefit from open innovation : external innovation contests could be used to speed up the digital transformation of banking actors. Compared to its web competitors, the banking industry has not the same intimacy with technology and digital channels. Seeking for outsource resources will help to faster the digital transformation. 

Increase product offering

In the private banking area, customization is the rule. Customers want a dedicated service matching their needs. Here again, open innovation could bring new ideas : the toolkit approach enabling customers to customize products is a powerful way of enriching the product offering without bearing the full cost of it. It also enables to tailor the products to the exact needs. 
As an example, financial products could be inspired or even created by customer input, wizards could customize the service offering matching more customer needs, managed communities could help to share information along customers and identify new needs. 

As a summary, banking industry is declining and adopting leading edge approaches like open innovation is key to bring back banks in the forefront and radically change their image.

Season Greetings 2015

At least in Europe, economical crisis is still around... As the evolution pace in the IT industry is not slowing down, companies are squeezed between limited resources and growing needs in the IT space. Optimizing is therefore quite high on the agenda.

Hope that some of the ideas developed here will help in that matter...

All the best for 2015 !

Digitalization phases

Digitalization is not coming in one go, it goes through 3 main steps. 

Some industries have been involved much earlier than others in the digitalization revolution. Capital markets have been involved in such a transformation more than 25 years ago when they became more and more electronic. This continuous process over 30 years supported by tremendous investments has been radically transforming this industry. This is not only true for capital markets, similar patterns apply to very different domains like airline, telco, … Later with the bloom of e-commerce, similar things started to happen in the brick and mortar world. Could some of the patterns we have seen from the digitization early adopters apply to the e-commerce world and to which extend?

When I first started in the Capital markets IT in 1988, digitization was the big thing just been introduced, we were moving from video terminals (already somehow electronic) to completely digital workstations connected to the various financial networks and exchanges. Quoting and trading were possible fully electronically which brought more speed and efficiency, it was great.
But after a while I clearly remember traders telling me: “this is great stuff but I cannot do much more than what I did in the past, I am still working the same way I was before, manually quoting those products even though I receive a huge lot of digital information”.
Then we started to use more the power of this new toy: quoting more products, trading electronically. In this phase we were going beyond the limits of the previous setup, we could go back any more to manual operation. 
Over the years the trades and product volumes increased so much that the traders were not able to manage the business the way they did. Quoting thousands of products is not possible individually for each product even if this is automated. The operator cannot follow those products individually and the bank cannot afford to increase the number of traders in proportion with the number of products traded.
This pushed us in another paradigm being able to manage all those products globally. We had to put together a model fitting the behavior of classes of products so that traders can concentrate on adjusting the model and analyzing the detected exceptions. In this last phase, digitalization completely disrupted the way products were elaborated and priced. This story illustrates the different phases of this digitalization process. 

To sum up those steps, first phase improves speed and efficiency of the same business. Second phase moves the business away from its original form up to a point where a new paradigm is needed. Third phase introduces the new paradigm that phase two was pushing for. At that stage the business has little in common with its original stage.

This concept can be extend to other industries even if they provide tangible goods: the matter is to cover all sorts of customer needs multiplying the number of products reaching ultimately a full customization.

One example, even if it is not coming from the a full customization is the airline industry: it is common to say that all customers in a plane are all paying a different price. Prices are adjusted almost real time based on a number of critical factors. Big teams are mobilized in each airline company to analyze and model the customer behavior in order to optimize pricing, trying to give to their companies a competitive advantage.

More recently, we have seen a huge attraction for a new technology called “Big Data” which purpose is to analyze huge data sets and perceive from there customers’ behaviors. This is clearly entering in this third phase were customization is so wide that no one can handle it any more without a proper model.

Culture and international companies

International companies are said to have a very strong culture. In fact, this is mandatory not only to motivate employees but also for offsetting cultural differences coming from different countries.



Even in Europe where cultural differences are supposed to be smaller, bridging cultural differences is important. As an illustration although it may appear as a cliché, different cultures such as Italian and German do not have the same approach regarding work. For example, efficiency is favored in Germany, spending less time at work whereas commitment is measured in Italy through long hours. Another example is the way work is organized: in Germany structured plans are preferred whereas they are viewed as a lack of creativity in Italy. Management is also perceived differently: considered more like a coordination role in Germany opposed to a leading role in Italy. If no one tries to bridge these differences, a mixed team will soon be impacted by these divergent views.


Cultural differences are influencing the way a company is organized and run. These differences are impacting companies on all levels: on the entire company, on managers, on teams as well as on projects.

Company wise, the company’s culture must be very strong to be able to offset cultural differences coming from various countries. If not there is no common ground for basic things like work hours, signs of commitment, …

Even if a strong corporate culture is in place, on a managerial level, managers have to understand and respect those cultural differences otherwise, they will be less efficient or fail. There is a limit to what you can force people to do. Respect is not straightforward in heterogeneous environments: a common behavior is to reject what is different.

From a team management perspective, diversity is a constraint but can also be a clear advantage if managed smartly. The art of management is using resources in the best possible way; in an heterogeneous environment this is made even more difficult as differences among people are wider. Therefore, identifying the best fit between people and tasks is more difficult but can be truly rewarding if a manager pays sufficient attention to differences.

Cultural differences also influence politics and consequently projects and project governance: depending on the culture, visibility is not always given to the same projects. In some organizations, business cases will be the main driver trying to maximize the value/cost ratio. For others strategy and long term plan may play a stronger role, for others a country can also be in the driving seat, …

Managing diversity does not mean that there is no common ground: vision and strategy are key to motivate teams: even from different backgrounds, understanding together what we are aiming at has been a powerful lever for success. Of course diversity is making this exercise more difficult as the vision and its implementation have to be translated and adapted to each culture.

Why CIOs should not report to COOs

It is very common to see CIOs reporting to COOs or CFOs. Of course there are advantages in doing so : less people directly reporting to the CEO, better alignment between support functions and IT, CEO able to focus more on business topics.

IT is core

The main drawback of this is that de facto, IT is not considered as core business. A previous post was trying to paint how IT is becoming embedded in the business. There is, since now many years, an increasing involvement of IT in building end user products. This cannot be achieved efficiently if IT is perceived only as a support and not as a strategic function.

CIOs reporting to COOs or CFOs do not get the same information and experience on PnL. They are less likely to be able to understand which are the popular products, the customer needs, and how IT innovation could make the difference. A CIO should understand and know company's strategy. He should even contribute to it bridging together business and technology.
Understanding the business strategy, the CIO is then able to align his organization to this goal.

Alignment is key

This means that the entire team and not only the CIO should work on the same target. This is helping to be more efficient as experience shows that an IT team with a defined goal is by far more efficient. This is also avoiding projects that are not fitting with the strategy making the portfolio of projects more efficient and also the improving the perception from other groups.
Having a portfolio with a lot of pure IT driven projects not linked to the comapny's strategy generates a poor impression...

KYB

CIOs, as well as the IT team, need to know and understand the business : who are the competitors, what are those competitors doing, what are the revenues per product, what are the trends from a customer perspective, ...in short Know Your Business ! They also need to sell internally IT strength. Experience shows that when product guys are convinced that they can ask IT for innovation they tend to be more creative, not self restricting the scope of a new product

Indeed all of this is more difficult when CIOs are interacting with the company through the filter they get from their COO or CFO.

Traduction à venir prochainement ...

Capital Markets IT attractiveness

In a recent post, I tried to picture the changes transforming deeply the IT within Capital Markets especially in terms of sizing (or better in terms of downsizing).

Crisis is not only impacting budget

The crisis impact is not limited to budget and team size : it is also impacting the nature of the projects we do. Race for complexity is over and in most banks, proprietary trading is not really favored and high frequency trading is not anymore in focus.

Throughout those two specific examples, one can see that the nature of what we do in Capital Markets IT is also changing dramatically : much less exciting topics and IT also becoming less core than before. On the other hand, some other things are not changing : pressure coming from the markets, heavy procedures coming from former size, … the excitement is less but the pain remains the same which means that Capital Market IT is less desirable than before. This is true for people already working in this sector and one can see some people moving to other industries. This is also true for new comers who find this area much less attractive.

Competition with other industries is tougher

This trend is even stronger if we consider changes in other industries : in former times, Capital Market IT was one of the areas where IT was considered as core business. Since e-business is blooming, there are a lot of other areas relying on IT for their core business. Therefore IT guys interested in contributing to core projects, without belonging to a pure IT company, have now a wider range of possible target companies than before.

This is going to have a very strong impact on Tier2 and Tier3 banks which have to transform deeply to maintain their attractivness otherwise the gap between top players and the others will get larger.

Dans un post récent, j'ai essayé de dépeindre les changements qui transforment profondément l'informatique des marchés de capitaux en particulier en terme de taille (ou plutôt de diminution de taille)

La crise ne touche pas seulement le budget

L'impact de la crise ne touche pas seulement le budget et la taille des équipes, la nature des projets est également impactée. La course à la complexité est maintenant terminée, dans la plupart des banques le prop trading n'est pas en odeur de sainteté et le trading haute fréquence plus véritablement d'actualité.

A travers ces deux exemples, on peut voir que la nature même des activités des marchés de capitaux change fondamentalement : beaucoup moins de projets motivants, et une informatique s’éloignant du cœur de métier. D’un autre côté certaines choses ne changent pas : la pression venant des marchés, les procédures lourdes venant de la taille passée…la motivation baisse mais pas les difficultés. Cela signifie que l’informatique des marchés de capitaux est moins attractive qu’auparavant.

C’est vrai pour ceux qui travaillent actuellement dans ce domaine et on peut d’ailleurs voir des mouvements vers d’autres industries.

Ceci est également vrai pour les nouveaux entrants qui trouvent ce domaine moins attractif

La compétition avec d’autres domaines est plus rude

Cette tendance est même plus marquée si l’on prend en compte les changements intervenus dans d’autres industries : il y a quelques années, l’informatique des marchés de capitaux était l’un des domaines où l’informatique faisait partie du cœur demétier. Depuis l’explosion de l’e-business, il y a maintenant de nombreuses industries qui s’appuient sur l’informatique dans leur cœur de métier.

De ce fait pour les informaticiens intéressés à travailler sur des projets stratégiques, sans pour autant faire partie d’une société informatique, ont maintenant un choix plus large que par le passé.

Ceci va avoir un impact majeur sur les banques Tier2 et 3 qui devront se transformer rapidement pour maintenir leur pouvoir de séduction. Si cela n’est pas fait, l’écart entre les joueurs de tête et les autres va considérablement s’élargir.