New tech and toys are only useful if you change your culture and processes to drive your revenue models
Last week Greg Smith sent me an article written by Shana Richardson about how Fintech is eating credit unions’ collective lunch. In it she suggests that Fintechs have been successful because they approach consumer lending (among other services) through the lens of consumer needs and expectations, while credit unions “are too focused on the tactical aspects of their business model.”
No doubt the fascination with Fintech firms instead of ideas is a bit disingenuous and frustrating. If CUs wanted to work at the ideas for financial services first, and then build something based on the viable and actionable service models that CUs would really pick up and run with, then I would be much more excited about many of these.
But if they are just “causes for the sake of causes” toys to engage your marketing image, then they really give no hope to solving CU consolidations or renewing income foundations. I will read the blog over a few times to make sure I can speak to this more effectively in the future.
Like most cores we are putting in place API platform solutions (DHD/DIY) so CUs can extend to these solutions more readily, but extensions most often cost, not enhance, credit unions, especially in the cases where CU culture does not bend to the tactic. CUs often suffer from these pitfalls:
- Too wary to say yes….underwriting based on a lack of trust, not speed to trust.
- Poor affirmation of bad or good actors post the transaction or relationship opening….too slow to verify and act.
- Automated underwriting is still not a core culture trusted solution….no momentum from building success.
- Too little data content to exchange value through automation and third party front ends.
- Too few small wins to create repeatable muscle memory and take tangent ideas mainstream…..
Shana is a thinker, a leader, and has the energy to move things. I like the push. Tell me why I’m wrong!