• Subscribe

Logo

Navigation
  • HOME
  • Leadership
  • Innovation
  • Finance
  • Marketing
  • Strategy
  • About
    • Upcoming themes
    • Advertise
    • Partnerships
    • The app
    • The journal
    • Contact Us
  • Subscribe

How to survive a minefield

By Dialogue Review | on 20 July 2018 | 0 Comment
Blogs Finance

There are traps associated with the ‘fail fast, fail cheap’ principle. Here’s how financial firms can avoid them, writes Camelia Ram

READ THE FULL GRAPHIC VERSION

Negative emotions exert an important and powerful influence on actions. Psychological studies show that we tend to regret things that we do not get to act upon. On one hand, this knowledge can stimulate action over inaction. On the other hand, perceived obstacles, painful emotions and past experiences can trigger a protective stance. This is harmful at individual and organizational levels, as it inhibits learning from mistakes and choosing more effectively in future.

This phenomenon is particularly pronounced among traditional financial services players. Historically, banks have capably integrated new technology into their processes and systems. However, the financial crisis resulted in preoccupation with regulatory concerns. Innovation became a distant priority, and the image of the trusted banker was tarnished. Meanwhile, Google, WhatsApp and Amazon set a new bar for customer service. The banks have lagged. Now, the gap in service is being filled by several fintech companies. Peer-to-peer lenders to robo-advisors are competing on transparency, cost and efficient, timely service. The incumbent players in financial services, and indeed any sector defined by strong regulations and hierarchical structures, recognize that they need to fail cheap and fast. Yet many continue to struggle. So what are the key traps into which traditional players are prone to fall? And how might those traps be overcome?

TRAP 1

Planning for the future based on what worked in the past

For many of those who sit on the boards of banking and capital markets companies, there is no mandatory retirement age for directors, which leads to many serving well into their seventies. In a world of increased complexity, ambiguity and inequality, there is inherent risk that what customers value most is overlooked in favour of an approach where the company believes it knows what is best. The bias towards protecting legacy may lead to missed opportunities because outdated ways of doing things are championed as part of brand identity. Protecting legacy is therefore confused with respecting legacy. The latter creates space for the right kind of failure while inventing the future. Projects where you know upfront that you do not know whether it will work create the space to learn as much as possible at as low a cost as possible. One example of this was the pilot project between OnDeck Capital and JPMorgan Chase on a digital banking small business lending product in early 2016. Chase, the main US banking unit, offered branding and funds. OnDeck provided the platform for almost real-time approvals and same, or next-day funding. In 2017, the partnership was extended for another four years.

TRAP 2

Decisions based on risk-avoidance

It has been shown that decision-makers who expect to have choices scrutinized with hindsight, such as physicians, chief executives and politicians who work within performance cultures, have a tendency not to take risks. This is perhaps due to the potentially irreversible damage to personal and institutional reputation, given the nature of the high-stakes decisions they take. Confirmation bias may also take hold in such situations, resulting in decisions being made based on information that supports a preferred view at the expense of alternative, equally valid information. Yet, it has also been shown that it may only take some simple and subtle manipulations to increase curiosity and overcome regret aversion. One such mechanism is to focus on no more than three ‘big ideas’ that will be true years from now, and enforce execution of those big ideas. For Amazon’s consumer business, these are low prices, fast delivery and vast selection.

TRAP 3

Allowing negative outcomes to stall action

It has been shown that negative outcomes tend to stimulate the search for causes, whereas good outcomes tend to elicit little cognitive activity. The concept of regret can be especially helpful to risk-avoiding decision-makers in better understanding what is at stake.

Regret is the difference between the maximum achievable performance across all options, and the expected performance of a given option. While partnerships between banks and fintech startups can be fraught with challenges, when one considers the potential for long-term gain in terms of enabling access to billions of financially underserved individuals, there is little anticipated regret.

For example, MicroBank, a subsidiary of Caixa Bank, and Entrepreneurial Finance Lab Global, collaborated on a psychometric scoring model and machine-learning to assess creditworthiness. The new model led to an improvement in approval rates of credit requests by 50-60% compared to traditional risk models.

Fortune favours the active

The inclination to avoid risks can be circumvented in two main ways.

First is to recognize that doing nothing may incur regret in the long-term, while action now increases the odds of success over time.

Second is to invest resources with clear parameters on objectives, measures and timeframes.

Banks would do well to focus on better products, efficient delivery and low cost to create a financial system that works for everyone.

–– Camelia Ram holds a PhD in operational research from the London School of Economics

JOIN THE CONVERSATION

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • Print

Recent Posts

  • How to create the future

    20 February 2019 - 0 Comment
  • The art of situational feedback

    18 February 2019 - 0 Comment
  • Organizational excellence on the superhighway

    18 February 2019 - 0 Comment

Author Description

Dialogue Review

Dialogue Review

No Responses to “How to survive a minefield”

Leave a Reply Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*
*

Browse the archive

Keep up to date with Dialogue

By entering your email address, you agree to receive emails from Dialogue

RSSSubscribe

Do you have a game changing team

Login

  • Register
  • Lost Password
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies.
To find out more, as well as how to remove or block these, see here: Our Cookie Policy
  • Most Read
  • Recent
  • Comments
  • Dialogue Classic: A softer hand for a hard-wired world

    18 August 2017 - 4 Comments
  • Dialogue Classic – The Gandhi principle: Five myths about soft leadership

    1 January 2016 - 3 Comments
  • Dialogue Classics: Four bad habits of super-smart leaders

    20 December 2017 - 2 Comments
  • Look into their eyes

    15 February 2018 - 2 Comments
  • The constant gardener

    26 March 2018 - 2 Comments
  • How to create the future

    20 February 2019 - 0 Comment
  • The art of situational feedback

    18 February 2019 - 0 Comment
  • Organizational excellence on the superhighway

    18 February 2019 - 0 Comment
  • The five ambassadors of leadership

    18 February 2019 - 0 Comment
  • The expectations management game

    18 February 2019 - 0 Comment
  • Effective leaders create a culture of service

    […] “Servant leadership is interpreted in different ways by...
    27 June 2018 - ILM Discussion: Trust and transparency -
  • The constant gardener

    Hi Bruce - thanks for your comment - I find that in collaboration,...
    14 March 2018 - richard watkins
  • Novartis: Culture is at the heart of performance

    Enjoyed reading through the article. I like the term OQ. I think it...
    8 March 2018 - Moitreyee Chatterjee- Kishore
  • Novartis: Culture is at the heart of performance

    OQ needs to be addressed a bit differently than IQ and EQ. The former...
    8 March 2018 - Rajiv Hazaray
  • The constant gardener

    "Leading collaboration is different from hierarchical leadership."...
    3 March 2018 - Bruce
February 2019
M T W T F S S
« Jan    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728  

Who we are

Dialogue is an original, practical and world-class journal, which focuses on key issues and challenges encountered by business leaders and managers around the world.

The content of Dialogue will cover a wide range of topics relevant to leaders in different management functions and geographic locations, drawing on the opinions and research of some of the world’s most prolific business writers.

Top Posts & Pages

  • Download Dialogue App for free
    Download Dialogue App for free
  • HOME Dialogue Review
    HOME Dialogue Review
  • DIALOGUE JOURNAL: ARCHIVE
    DIALOGUE JOURNAL: ARCHIVE
  • The golden rules of luxury brands by James Ogilvy, Ogilvy & Co.
    The golden rules of luxury brands by James Ogilvy, Ogilvy & Co.
  • Agility, Chinese style
    Agility, Chinese style
© 2015 LID Publishing All Rights Reserved. | Privacy and Data Protection