How Not to Crash and Burn
Following on from our previous blog, Holistic Client Lifecycle Management (CLM). We want to discuss how not having a holistic view, (which enables the development of a planned target operating model and business/data process design), makes the strategic transformation of your client lifecycle management CLM domain difficult protracted and costly at best, and potentially impossible at worst.
Don’t Waste your Effort and Budget
In order to avoid a CLM change-programme crash and burn, or at the very least not waste years of effort and many millions – budget spend, then take the holistic (functional and data) view you have created for your initial CLM domain and apply it across all in-scope jurisdictions. If the business aim is to deploy a truly ‘global’ solution, then you need to also understand the same CLM flows across multiple jurisdictions, and how these flows and inter-operations may differ, region by region (and often even country by country within a region).
Modelling CLM Workflows Across Multiple Jurisdictions
Working out your CLM Capability – What Questions to Ask
It is an absolute necessity to work out the following when assessing capability across multiple jurisdictions:
- What clients need to be onboarded across jurisdictions?
- What multi-jurisdiction clients do you already have?
- In which jurisdiction is the primary relationship held?
- What risks are associated with the client, across all jurisdictions?
- Who’s going to get upset if the onboarding is slow or doesn’t occur in time, per jurisdiction?
- What volume and frequency of dealing will be associated with this client, per jurisdiction?
- What (multi-contextual) management information can be provided from the GLOBAL relationship with the client?
- What must happen when the client decides to depart from one or more of the relevant jurisdictions etc.?
The underlying assessment should be achieved by validation and gap analysis of:
- Scope; sector, client type, products, scenario/processes, functions, etc.
- Gap Analysis: local vs (target) global operating model for each business scenario in scope
- Gap Analysis: local against master data dictionaries
- Gap Analysis: local against master workflow dictionaries, including an assessment of all valid regulatory rules
In recent years, the absence of this sort of change programme due diligence has resulted in a variety of unfavourable outcomes for many firms, such as; ‘ prolonged programme delivery times’, massively customised platforms / brittle software, – stressed internal staff and vendor staff (resulting in high staff turnover, consistent leakage of valuable intellectual property, and continuity issues). All of which, in turn, results in unhappy clients, lost revenue, delivery of non-strategic outcomes (that probably need to be replaced ASAP) and significant overspend.
More Haste, Less Speed:
Without a doubt, when it comes to global CLM, more haste equals less speed. Acting too quickly and without due diligence, attention to detail and focus, will result in many avoidable mistakes and it will require even more time and money to complete your strategic change. Please feel free to- contact the iMeta team to ensure that you have the most experienced and best-placed partner for your journey.