How Cognitive Automation Can Help to Assess and Mitigate Third-Party Risk
Mark Buesser, Chief Executive Officer of RegTech company IMTF, has a wealth of experience in the world of wealth management and digitisation. He addressed delegates at the Hubbis Compliance in Asian Wealth Management Forum to explain the need for intermediaries and advisers to understand relevant risks and then tailor risk assessment, leveraging enhanced technology with quality data sources. He told them how AI and Contextual Analysis provide the platform on which IMTF's 'I-match' and 'Find-it' are based.
Buesser began by explaining that KYC an Source of Wealth Protocols today at the Wealth Management firms remain stuck in a traditional approach of finding anomalies, exceptions and pointing towards financial crime, but with little precision.
'If you have the technology,' he noted, 'your systems will likely be generating hundreds or thousands of false positives alerts, while very often you have no clue why the alert arose. Moreover, the information flows are expanding all the time, and so do the demands of regulators, and in business, the products and services which you are offering are both growing and evolving all the time.'
How then do FIs cope, Buesser pondered, especially with layered concerns also about GDPR, reporting, consolidation and data management in general? 'Well actually,' he said, offering the audience some hope, 'technology can not only help you to find solutions to these actual and imminent problems but also to find solutions for the various stakeholders in your bank or your firm who have to be concerned with all of these issues, so that if risk is detected the right people are basically triggered to a decision or an action. Ultimately, the right technology should be able to help you achieve an excellent user and employee experience.'
However, Buesser warned that most technology is still not fit for the purpose, with probably 85% of algorithms employed being outmoded, and open source investigation (for example via 'Googling') is not in any way efficient for these tasks, and tend to also create other false positives. 'I have some numbers from one bank,' he said, 'reporting that it takes on average 2.5 minutes just to work out one false positive, so if you have 10,000 – and we have seen some banks that have hundreds of thousands a year – that would be 52 man-days of work. That is not an efficient use of time or money. However, I also know from research into private banking that while most would say technology is critical, they face significant budgetary constraints. That must change if they want to enjoy what technology truly can offer today.' […]