Through Thick and Thin- Branch and Teller Deposit Automation Redux?

Just when you thought branch and teller deposit automation was done and dusted, a new interesting development is slowly making waves. Early forms of both types of deposit automation were thick client applications that resided on PCs at the branch. In previous posts, I have touched upon the headed and headless versions of teller deposit automation. And there the technology sat until merchant capture hit the scene (I say capture deliberately, because that is what most of them were- remote capture with the rest of the work-flow centralized upstream).

The question was asked, "If a merchant can capture and send relatively large deposits using thin client technology, why can't the same thing be done from the branch?" Why not, indeed? The thin client approach minimizes the challenge associated with initially deploying and updating applications deployed across a branch network. Do it once centrally, and the entire network is current.

Not so fast, say some. What about the network latency in performing the entire capture-correct-balance continuum using thin clients? Will that not slow things down, and affect branch efficiency? After all, a merchant does not have to worry about people waiting in queue to make the next deposit. What if connectivity goes down? What are the offline recovery alternatives? How do deal with exceptions- missing checks and data?

While the battle is being fought, here are some perspectives on the issue. I think the cases for automating deposits at the teller and branch back counter will are driven by different imperatives. As discussed in previous posts, teller deposit automation (TDA) is increasingly getting bundled with teller systems. Teller systems are headed in a thin client direction. Therefore, I think it will be difficult for thick client TDA systems to survive when the mother ship is headed elsewhere. Deposits made at teller stations typically small, and it is likely that network latency will not significantly affect queue length at the teller. This, of course, makes sense for brand new teller deployments. Keep in mind, nevertheless, that there are many thick client teller desktops out there that can be retrofitted with traditional thick client TDA.

The branch back counter is a different kettle of fish. As observed previously, the landscape ranges from very large institutions that capture at the branch and perform data perfection and balancing centrally, to smaller banks and credit unions that perform the entire work-flow at the branch level. The deposits dealt with at the branch back counter tend to be larger, and therein lie the seeds of an interesting trade-off. If the paradigm is to only capture at the branch, and defer correction and balancing to centralized operations, a thin client front end for capture may make sense. If, on the other hand, the entire process of item correction, amount entry and balancing is to be done at the branch level, network latency and offline recovery considerations may be an issue in a thin client environment. We may perhaps see a hybrid work-flow evolve, a la merchant capture, where items are captured using thin clients, transactions nominally balanced against a control total from a teller tape, and sent to central operations for downstream operations. Yes, this will add work at the branch, but it may reduce workload centrally- particularly in smaller institutions that do not have complex balancing rules.

Interesting how technologies considered ready for benign neglect have a habit of asserting themselves when you least expect it. Thoughts?

Why can't Tellers be Sellers?

Stepping into a debate that is as old as retail banking is perhaps unwise. There are passionate adherents ranged on both sides of the question. To some, the issue is not whether, but should tellers be sellers?

The question brings the raison d'etre of the retail branch network into sharp relief. Are branches retail storefronts with the primary mission to enhance customer relationships, or are they collection points for myriad transactions processed by centralized back office operations centers? Is the driving imperative one of customer intimacy, or does operational efficiency rule the roost?
A tilt towards operational efficiency has traditionally driven retail banking, with occasional overtures to the selling side of the equation. These overtures, however, tend to be fleeting, and with few exceptions, have not survived beyond some concerted marketing and employee incentive programs.

To understand why the push towards serving and selling the customer has not been sustainable, consider a few points. Making check deposits is by far the main reason customers visit a branch. When they do visit, the teller is the person they most often interact with. Regardless of all the training and incentives that may have been put in place, consider what tellers actually do. They are heads down punching numbers into keyboards (try counting the number of teller keystrokes the next time you're in a branch). They have barely enough time to complete the data entry and squeeze out a quick thank you before the next customer is at their window. Imagine a Neimann Marcus salesperson wordlessly packing what you've picked out and intently ensuring that the bow on the package is just right! Yes, the analogy is not quite right- but you get the picture.
So despite many a marketing push, it is the fundamental transaction tether that yanks the teller back into the role of a frontline operations clerk- the first cog in the vast infrastructure that we put in place to process paper checks, featuring planes, trains, automobiles and giant "paper factories".

There is an alternative, courtesy the legislative cover of Check 21 and advances in imaging and recognition technology. Teller Capture allows the teller to drop the entire deposit into a small foot print scanner and interact heads up with the customer, while an imaging application reads all the necessary information, ensures the transaction is balanced, and prints out a receipt when done. Teller Capture eliminates teller induced data entry errors, and also catches math errors up front. This "ready-to-post" transaction at the very beginning of the deposit stream results in major efficiency savings further down the value chain. It is as close to straight-through-processing as one can get in the check world.

"Not so fast," say some. "You want to make my tellers into check operators?" The reality is that the opposite is true. There is now evidence of major savings in teller time per deposit, including data from a Top 5 U.S. bank of having reduced keystrokes from 75 to 5!

"What about the cost of a scanner and software at every station?" challenge others. "It is really difficult to integrate these capture applications with teller systems." The cost per node for both hardware and software is steadily declining, making it well worth the while to examine the return on investment. The hard numbers on transportation savings, back office labor elimination, and funds availability make it interesting- leave alone the soft benefits in customer service and added sales. Capture systems are also increasingly being integrated into teller systems, both by teller vendors that have acquired check-capture technology, and pure play check imaging vendors that have certified their applications with leading teller vendors.

Coming back to the tellers-to-sellers paradigm, what do you do with the saved time? Do you use it to push even more transactions through? Do you have tellers refer customers to other branch personnel based on prompts from an integrated CRM system? Or do you have tellers take on more of a sales and service role themselves? Those are decisions that will be driven by your overarching strategic intent. Do you want tellers to be sellers in the first place? As you ponder that question, you may want to look at teller capture as an opportunity to cut the transaction tether that keeps pulling you back, yo-yo-like, to the paper factory of another era.

Marketing Best Practices

It is difficult perhaps, to shed light on an often misunderstood discipline like marketing. In the minds of many, it is equated with advertising and promotion. In others, it plays a supportive role to sales as an administrative resource. When approached strategically, however, marketing can be a powerful source of sustainable competitive advantage.

Click on the link below to hear a webinar I did on the subject with the folks at Remote Deposit Capture. Com. While the presentation is geared towards financial institutions looking to offer remote deposit capture, the broad framework can be used in any business endeavor. Framework is really the key word here, as each of the bullet points can be expanded upon to drive tactical plans.

Enjoy!

http://www.remotedepositcapture.com/webinars/webinar.20091023.aspx

ET Phone Home (and zap up a check)

Mobile phone cameras have captured images of everything from election protests in Iran to the recent tragic collision of a helicopter and a small plane over the Hudson River. So, what could one possibly add to the list of things that would intrigue mobile shutterbugs? With apologies to Mr.McGuire in the movie The Graduate, "I have just one word for you. Just one word.....checks."

The recent announcement from USAA, allowing its customers to make deposits by sending images of checks taken with their Apple iPhones, brings together technologies from the 19th and 21st centuries. Until the advent of Check 21, the movement of deposited funds depended on the physical transport of paper. An extensive retail branch network was developed to act as collection points for deposited paper. USAA, which serves 7.2 million active and retired members of the U.S. military and their families from one branch in San Antonio, has consistently used technology to turn conventional wisdom on its head. Three years ago, it announced its Deposit @Home service that allows customers to make deposits by sending images of checks scanned at home. Despite early scepticism from many, USAA claims 150,000 users. The addition of mobile smart phones takes the remote capture notion even further.

In addition to this announcement, mobile deposit technology provider Mitek Corporation has announced relationships with Fiserv, RDM, NCR, and J&B Software to take the capability to their customers. As these formidable players get past their pilots and launch offerings, we will likely see more financial institutions make mobile deposit services available.

What about fraud, you say? Doesn't Check 21 require account and transit information to be read magnetically to ensure security? While I admit that the prospect of sensitive check images flying through the air can be unnerving, and there are issues of authentication, privacy and data integrity that need to considered (another post, another day), the fact is that there is no regulation that requires that the magnetic ink character recognition (MICR) information be read magnetically. In fact, Check 21 is silent on the subject. Thus absent regulation, it falls to the individual financial institution's tolerance for risk, versus the obvious convenience of the service.

There are two factors that can mitigate risk to some extent: the old dictum of knowing your customer (KYC), and the option to delay funds availability until the check has cleared. I believe we will see the adoption of mobile deposit capture in defined communities such as the USAA customer franchise, where the financial institution has a very good idea of risk exposure. Credit unions with well defined memberships are more likely to offer this service than banks (and like USAA, most credit unions are also not extensively branched allowing them to make virtue out of necessity). We will likely see the service offered to the "safest" customers first, based on their deposit history, followed by a gradual expansion using funds availability agreements as a tool to calibrate exposure.

The banking community at large has a different challenge. Deposit acceptance is arguably the raison d'etre for large retail branch networks. Remote capture in general, and mobile deposit in particular, poses an interesting channel conflict paradox (see BAI Insights for a summary of a presentation I did with Bob Meara from Celent on the RDC/Branch paradox). Thus, my take is that banks (particularly the larger ones) will perceive mobile deposit as a bridge over troubled waters and be reluctant to put their branch network at risk.

While I don't see the airways saturated with check images from mass deployment, I believe mobile deposit will do well through niche (not necessarily small) adoption. Technology providers, transaction processors, and financial institutions all have different but related niche marketing challenges ahead. Astute target market selection will likely govern success. The alignment of factors like service and product features, pricing (ex: who pays for the data plan for zapping all those images, and what's the payback?), as well as path-to-market partnerships, are imperatives to be carefully considered.