A tailored approach to designing, implementing and operating independent project governance that enables and delivers sound infrastructure
The Basle Committee paperBCBS239 requires banks to have integrated risk, trade and finance reporting by 2016, including a requirement to have a governance structure which will lead to an IT architecture capable of producing good quality aggregated risk data. This is a big ask given banks existing infrastructure and governance processes supporting the design and delivery of that infrastructure.
Threat or Opportunity ?
Some banks see this as a threat and try to pass off existing infrastructure and processes as broadly acceptable with minor enhancements or tweaks, while others see an opportunity to make a fundamental difference to the cost of infrastructure and the quality of data it delivers.
What is needed?
- A set of sound IT design principles agreed with the bank’s senior management
- An IT architecture based on these principles, with enough detail to guide projects towards a sound end-state, but not too detailed to delay immediate decision-making
- An honest and unbiased assessment of current infrastructure capabilities and opportunities for re-use
- A roadmap from current to future state that makes pragmatic choices given existing infrastructure (i.e. does not include re-building the entire infrastructure), but is architecturally sound while still solving the critical business problems in a timely fashion
- An honest and unbiased assessment of both project initiation and ongoing delivery against the target architecture (based on principles) and short term business value (all factors included in project RoI)
- Useful MI that can guide future decision making that includes analysis of IT & Project spend as well as benchmarking against peers (both on spend as well as architectural soundness)
How can this be achieved?
A tailored approach to designing, implementing and operating the governance structure that enables a bank to deliver a sound infrastructure while meeting the high standard set by BCBS239. Key features include:
- objective and independent perspective without the unintended bias of current internal processes
- based on deep subject matter knowledge and experience in tier 1 banks (no on-the-job training)
- ongoing regular reviews to allow optimal knowledge of internal infrastructure while retaining independence (using the same individuals who will gain enough understanding of bank-specific infrastructure to assess practical project delivery risks)
- targeted to ensure the bank only pays for time required to perform necessary work
- targeted to multiple tier 1 banks to allow proper insights and peer comparison
- tailored to allow banks to choose most cost effective engagement model if current internal processes can support some of the "heavy lifting"