• No results found

New Operating Models for Reference Data Management Managed Service & Utility Models

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "New Operating Models for Reference Data Management Managed Service & Utility Models"

Copied!
10
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

New Operating Models for

Reference Data Management

Managed Service & Utility Models

Author

Ankur Bareja

(2)

Objective

In the challenging economic environment of increased regulatory monitoring post financial crisis, financial services firms have been evaluating their reference data operating models. Two such operating models which have emerged over the last couple of years are Managed Service and Reference Data Utility.

The objective of this paper is to discuss the key business drivers, business benefits, potential challenges and strategic roadmap associated with the vision of reference data utility.

Synopsis

Beyond cost reduction, the top three business challenges to reference data management are:  Regulatory Compliance – Keeping abreast of new regulatory requirements.

 Operational Efficiency - Providing more efficient support for business units.  Data Quality - Continuous improvement of data quality on a sustainable basis.

(ReferenceDataReview.com, 2014)

Emergence of new digital technologies, especially cloud based hosted solutions, are driving the development of new reference data platforms which are giving rise to new operating models for service delivery.

Managed Service and Industry Utility

 Objective is to drive process, data and technology standardization

 Deliver business value, leveraging economies of scale and Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) to Operating Expenditure (OPEX) conversion over and above traditional labour cost arbitrage  Beyond cost optimization, the key benefits comprise operational efficiency, effective governance,

risk management and regulatory compliance

A clear trend towards increased collaboration amongst data providers, software vendors and IT/ITES service providers is emerging with a number of alliances being formed to develop new service delivery models.

 Data subscription licenses

 Software application(s) for ETL, business rules based “Golden Copy” repository and

downstream distribution interfaces  IT team for development and support of

software application

 Data management operations team  Hardware and software infrastructure  Business liaison, program management

and vendor management team Reference Data

The term „Reference Data‟ is interpreted to include the following data sets in the context of this paper –  Security reference data, such as security master elements and identifiers

 Prices and FX

 Ratings (Issue as well as Issuer)

 Corporate actions (only reference data – excludes entitlements processing)  Indices and benchmarks data

 Issuer and counterparty data

 Fundamental data like Company Fundamentals, Funds data, Research, Economic data  Other reference data such as countries, currencies, and exchanges

(3)

Various Operating Models for Reference Data Management

Traditional Outsourcing

 Traditional resourcing model usually on Time and Material contracts dedicated to a single client covering IT and/or ITES.

Managed Service

 Co-Managed Service – End-to-end reference data solution on client owned infrastructure and systems.  Fully-Managed Service – End-to-end reference data

solution on a hosted platform owned by a vendor onshore, near-shore or off-shore.

Utility Model

 Source the data once, process it once and distribute to multiple organizations by collaboration amongst reference data providers and IT/ITES providers.

Key Business Drivers for Reference Data Management

•79% Organizations require manual intervention

•55% FIs consider data integration as the biggest hurdle

•62% Firms struggle to meet reference data delivery SLAs (99% On-time delivery)

Operational Efficiency

•58% Financial services organizations consider maturity of data governance model among their top 3 challenges

Governance

•54% Organizations are grappling with regulatory mandates (DFA, FATCA, EMIR, MiFID 2) in their data models Regulatory

Compliance

•36% Organizations face high total cost of ownership as one of their primary pain areas

(4)

Cost of Data Management Operations

It has been observed that the cost of managing reference data usually is 3-5 times the cost of reference data itself, though this varies significantly from firm to firm.

 People and Process – Personnel cost pertaining to data management operations which includes acquisition, validation, aggregation, enrichment and exception management could be attributed to the following :

 Data operations – Oversight of Golden Copy preparation, resolution of data exceptions, data governance, data quality management and reporting

 IT – Developing and maintaining reference data management systems as well as supporting daily data feeds and resolving production issues

 Vendor management – Working with data vendors to resolve data issues and change management pertaining to ongoing content and format changes of data feeds

 Business liaison and support – Catering to data needs for critical downstream systems such as Risk Management, Portfolio Management, Performance Measurement and Attribution, Client Reporting, etc.

 Program Management – Management resources required for Program Management, Change Management and Governance

 Technology – Cost of developing and operating IT systems required for reference data processing and distribution which covers the following :

 Reference data software application – In-house built or commercial off-the-shelf software (COTS) which incurs capital expenditure in the form of development cost and/ or license cost

 ETL framework – Flexible and scalable framework for extraction, transformation and loading of reference data feeds into reference data application

 Golden copy data repository – Data-hub/ data-warehouse storing and maintaining the single source of truth for enterprise-wide reference data

 Data distribution – Multiple types of data distribution interfaces to cater to requirements of hundreds of downstream consumers of Golden Copy

 Indirect hidden costs – Data inaccuracies lead to errors such as regulatory compliance issues, trading errors which could result in severe financial and reputational losses.

Cost Structure of Reference Data Management

The analysis of total cost of ownership of reference data management could be structured into two major categories viz. Data Cost and Cost of Data Management Operations.

Data Cost

 The licensing cost of reference data varies considerably across organizations according to several factors such as:

 Data cost for a publicly traded and widely held security is significantly less than that of, for example, a complex derivative

 Vendor selection plays an important role in helping overcome cost versus quality conundrum. Judicious selection of data sources, not just at market or asset class level but down to data attribute level has significant impact on timeliness, cost and quality

 Most importantly, firms with efficient data governance in place are able to eliminate redundancy and duplication within their subscriptions

 The correlation between AUM and data subscription costs is less (largely depends on the nature of data, security types and commercial terms of data licenses) and firms have been seen to be spending between less than 1 million USD up to more than 25 million USD.

(5)

UTILITY MODEL

Generic - Business Process and IT Outsourcing MANAGED SERVICE Value Delivered Co-Managed Fully-Managed Hosted Solution Industry Utility Multi-Tenanted Early Adoption Phase Increased Maturity Driving Business Drivers

Vertical Integration Driving Standardization of Data, Process

and Technology

Though reducing the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) is the dominant theme in discussions pertaining to reference data operations, increasingly organizations are realizing that data management could be a source of competitive advantage as well. This is a paradigm shift where firms are increasingly focusing on data

management.

The key levers which are shaping up the trajectory of reference data in financial industry are –

 Regulations – With a spate of regulations coming through since financial crisis of 2008, the financial institutions have been spending an ever increasing amount of resources to ensure adherence to regulatory requirements.

More than Cost – A Business Case for Reference Data Utility

IT and operations outsourcing seems to be entering a maturity phase after most of large financial institutions have developed established operating models which allow them the benefits of labour cost arbitrage. However, there is still a lot of value which could be unlocked by adopting more matured models such as managed services or industry utility. As the maturity of operating models evolve, financial institutions move up the value curve and thus unlock much more business value.

 Data Quality – High quality of data is of paramount importance. Data quality could be a two edged sword as over emphasis on data quality (e.g. expensive though necessary practices such as manual 4-eye-validations)

(6)

6

 Economies of Scale – As articulated by several thought leaders in financial technology, the overarching vision towards which the industry seems to be driving is – “Source the data once, process it once and

distribute it multiple times.” This is likely to help organizations reap the benefits of economies of scale both

within the organization as well as the industry level.

 CAPEX to OPEX Conversion – Utility model imposes minimal requirements for building systems, which requires significant capital expenditure. This cost structure results in high upfront fixed cost getting completely transformed into an ongoing operating cost. Also, utility providers have been working on outcome based pricing models such as pay-per-usage pricing which enables clients to optimize their cost of data subscription based on their usage.

Operating Model Traditional Outsourcing Managed Service

Pros

 Primary driver of value is Labor Cost Arbitrage

 Could be an important initial step in a long-term strategic

transformation

 IT Management, Project Management and Program Governance performed by vendor

 IT Management (including Infrastructure), Operational Management, Project Management and Program Governance performed by vendor

 Business Liaison retained by the client or shared with vendor

Cons

 Engagement scope is usually limited to a given project  Project Management and

Program Governance is retained by the client

 Business Liaison is retained by the client

 Typically business liaison and operational management is retained by client

 Infrastructure managed by client  In-case of co-managed service,

baggage of legacy architecture results in lower value delivered

Operating

Model Traditional Outsourcing Managed Service Industry Utility

Pros

 Primary driver of value is Labor Cost

Arbitrage

 Could be an important initial step in a long-term strategic transformation  IT Management, Project Management and Program Governance performed by vendor  IT Management (including Infrastructure), Operational Management, Project Management and Program Governance performed by vendor  Business Liaison

retained by the client or shared with vendor

 Business and Process Standardization  Economies of Scale  CAPEX to OPEX conversion  Lower operating

cost via Labor Cost Arbitrage  IT and Operational Management as well as Project Management and Program Governance  Business Liaison is retained by the client or shared with vendor Cons  Engagement scope is usually limited to a given project  Project Management and Program Governance is retained by the client  Business Liaison is

retained by the client

 In case of co-managed service -

− Business liaison and operational management is retained by client. − Infrastructure managed by client − Baggage of legacy architecture results in lower value delivered

 The model is in conception and yet to commence implementation in the industry

Attachment for reference.

 Process Standardization – Reference data essentially encapsulates information which is required by a plethora of business functions within a financial institution and yet the process which goes into preparation of this data repository fundamentally lends itself to standardization – to a great extent at an organization level and to a significant extent at the industry level.

(7)

Potential Roadmap to Utility Model

 Almost 100% organizations have cost savings as their topmost expectation from utility/ managed service model

 More than 60% companies are looking for models which will help in optimizing their 'Data-costs' itself

Cost

Effectiveness

 More than 90% organizations are looking at strong operational and risk management capabilities in their outsourcing partners

 In the increasingly regulated industry, over 50% of organizations prefer a regulated entity for reference data utility

Operating Model

 Over 60% of organizations have expressed flexibility in terms of adding new data sources and customizing services as one of the key requirements  Over 50% organizations prefer a phased transition to a managed service/

data utility where IT/ITES partner does a lift and shift on their existing systems and then gradually transitions over to the new platform which could be hosted near-shore as well

Agility

The key capabilities firms expect from prospective reference data utility provider are:

A Vision for Strategic Roadmap - The journey towards a reference data utility could be envisioned to comprise three phases-

 Business Process Standardization – In this phase service providers will standardize reference data sourcing, validation, aggregation and golden-copy dissemination processes across multiple clients.

 Multi-tenanted Hosting – Cloud enablement of platforms will enable the service providers to establish multi-tenanted platforms thus achieving economies of scale in data processing.

 True Industry Utility – Strategic collaboration amongst service and data providers will help realize the vision of „Source data once, process it once and distribute multiple times‟.

(8)

1) Business Process Standardization  Multi-instance platform  Standardized processing

2) Multi-Tenanted Hosting

 Multi-tenanted single instance platform  Standardized processing

 Economies of scale in data processing

Data Providers

Data

Processing Golden Copy Data Providers Data Providers Client Client Client Data Processing Data Processing Golden Copy Golden Copy Data Providers Data Processing Golden Copy Data Providers Data Providers Client Client Client Golden Copy Golden Copy Data Processing Data Providers

3) Reference Data Utility

 Multi-tenanted single instance platform  Collaboration with data-providers  Standardized data and processing  Economies of scale in data processing

Client Client Client Golden Copy Golden Copy Golden Copy

 Proving economic benefits to senior executive management – Investments in the utility model would have a certain gestation period. Therefore a strong business case for senior management buy-in is required to establish a strong commitment to the cause.

 Transition – The transition from traditional operating models to reference data utility needs to be well-coordinated in a phased manner to ensure smooth risk-free execution.

 Resolving potential conflicts of interests – To foster collaboration amongst various players in reference data ecosystem, resolution of potential conflict of interests (especially commercial) between various parties is very important.

 Ensuring regulatory compliance and risk management – The reference data utility would be a strong ally in standardizing the approach to address risk and compliance requirements, but the onus should continue to be on the clients.

Our journey so far - Introducing Tech Mahindra Managed Data Service

 Managed Data Service, MDS, is an established reference data platform that provides instrument static, pricing, corporate actions and taxation data covering both standardized and non-standardized financial products based on all major asset classes across all the major financial markets and caters to users located in any time-zone across the globe.

 The platform sources the data from major market data providers, which is then subject to an extraction-transformation-loading (ETL) process using customizable business rules that enhance data quality and prepares the golden copies for clients.

 A team of data management operations experts ensure necessary manual validations, exception handling/ reporting and vendor management are performed to conform to strict SLAs.

(9)

 A specialized product management and development team continuously works on future development and enhancement of the functional and technical features of the platform to ensure continuous regulatory compliance for its customers.

People  Domain experts, leads

with thorough business understanding

 Periodic training and e-learning module that keeps staff abreast of best practices/ process updates

 Quality assurance team with well defined audit procedures

Process  4-eyes priciple for

validation & workflow management

 Standard operating procedures which are reviewed with client regularly for updates  Capturing evidences for manual edits for accountability

 Complete „before and after‟ audit trail for history analysis and procedural

improvements  Embedded checklist

for BAU controls

Technology  In built rules and high

level of automation - 96% STP  Foolproof mechanism/alerts disallowing incorrect updates during exception management  Multi vendor data

comparison

 Integrated document management system for price management and evidencing  Integrated control flow

tool (TOPIC) for price management

References

 Cutter Associates. (2014). The True Cost of Market Data.

 FIMA. (2014). FIMA - Risk and Compliance in Data Management.  FIMA. (2013). FIMA Data Management Survey.

 ReferenceDataReview.com. (2014). A Case for A Reference Data Management Utility.  DTCC. (2013). DTCC Data Quality Survey, Industry Report.

.

Acknowledgements

 Ravi Vasantraj, Global Practice Head of Banking Financial Services and Insurance, Tech Mahindra  Jonathan Clark, CEO of Citisoft, Fully Owned Buy-side Consulting Subsidiary of Tech Mahindra  Abhijit Bhate, Practice Head, Financial Services, Tech Mahindra

 David Renn, Practice Head, Reference Data, Citisoft

 Haresh Gowri, Product Owner, Managed Data Service (MDS), Tech Mahindra  Navin MV, Head Operations, Reference Data, Tech Mahindra

(10)

Disclaimer

Tech Mahindra, provides a wide array of presentations and reports, with the contributions of various

professionals. These presentations and reports are for informational purposes and private circulation only and do not constitute an offer to buy or sell any securities mentioned therein. They do not purport to be a complete description of the markets conditions or developments referred to in the material. While utmost care has been taken in preparing the above, we claim no responsibility for their accuracy. We shall not be liable for any direct or indirect losses arising from the use thereof and the viewers are requested to use the information contained herein at their own risk. These presentations and reports should not be reproduced, re-circulated, published in any media, website or otherwise, in any form or manner, in part or as a whole, without the express consent in writing of Tech Mahindra or its subsidiaries. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or public dissemination of information contained herein is prohibited. Unless specifically noted, Tech Mahindra is not responsible for the content of these presentations and/or the opinions of the presenters. Individual situations and local practices and standards may vary, so viewers and others utilizing information contained within a presentation are free to adopt differing standards and approaches as they see fit. You may not repackage or sell the presentation. Products and names mentioned in materials or presentations are the property of their respective owners and the mention of them does not constitute an endorsement by Tech Mahindra. Information contained in a presentation hosted or promoted by Tech Mahindra is provided “as is” without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, including any warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. Tech Mahindra assumes no liability or responsibility for the contents of a presentation or the opinions expressed by the presenters. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice.

References

Related documents