This presentation is a supplement to the Global Risk Management Study Banking and Global Capital Markets reports and summary presentations. It presents data based on answers from the study’s U.K. based banking and capital markets respondents. Download the full Banking report (https://accntu.re/2jHhdS7) or Capital Markets report (https://accntu.re/2w54j1R).
28. DOWNLOAD OUR
BANKING AND CAPITAL
MARKETS REPORTS NOW
RISK FUNCTION’S
FUTURE SUCCESS
Or contact:
Peter Beardshaw (Banking): peter.beardshaw@accenture.com
Ashley Davies (Cap Markets): ashley.davies@accenture.com
Mark Wheaton (Cap Markets): mark.wheaton@accenture.com
Visit:
www.accenture.com/RiskStudyBanking
www.accenture.com/RiskStudyCapitalMarkets
Today more than ever, modern banks and
investment firms need a risk function that goes
far beyond compliance to become an integrated,
strategic cog in the primary gears of the business.
NOTE:
Global versions of the Banking and CM presentations include more background information on the Global Risk Study, a summary view on the evolution of risk management (based on 2009 to 2017 risk study results), and a narrative that explains each of the three themes the risk study explores: technology (harnessing smart technology), integration (rising to meet coordination challenges) and talent (building new layers of talent).
This presentation covers the same themes and presents the UK data, plus comparisons with other countries (US and Japan).
WE SURVEYED 50 U.K. BASED BANKING AND CAPITAL MARKETS RESPONDENTS
UK respondents – based in London/UK. Not necessarily just UK headquartered. May include respondents working for global banks/CM firms in the UK
Breakdown of UK CM vs Banking respondents
N=32 for UK Banking, N=18 for UK CM
USE WITH CLIENTS
NOTES FOR PRESENTOR:
This table shows how respondents believe they can benefit from adopting these technologies. The responses for AI/ML and Big Data/Analytics are from those organizations who are actively using the tools
Side note on reporting to regulators:
- Given that this is number one risk challenge (from slide 3), and that 62% agree systems/capabilities need to be improved for reporting regulators – interesting that regulatory data management is quite low.
Addressing cost pressures, does not equal reducing costs.
The technologies could enable any of the ways risk is responding to cost pressures we outlined in the previous question (Q4):
Aligning management and employee skills with the changing needs of the risk function
Improving efficiency through smart technologies such as robotic process automation, artificial intelligence, or Big Data and analytics
Changes to the operating model: (e.g. use of shared services, low cost locations).
Outsourcing non-core activities
Taking a holistic approach by investing in future-proofed systems that reduce investment costs over the long run
Adopting a standardized approach to risk management (e.g. move from advanced models to a more standardized approach).
Reducing head count
Side note
Outsourcing of risk reporting and technology implementation will increase over the coming two years. This could help with efforts around integration:
54 percent expect to increase outsourcing of risk reporting (U.S. 52 percent; Japan 49 percent; total 50 percent)
58 percent expect to increase outsourcing of technology implementation (U.S. 61 percent; Japan 55 percent; total 54 percent)
Side note (originally in the slide but pulled out to keep slide cleaner, now moved to notes)
Lack of integration impedes risk management effectiveness (identified as one of the top challenges)
72 percent agree that lack of integration with other business functions impedes the overall effectiveness of the risk management function
(U.S. 65 percent; Japan 55 percent; total 62 percent)