Cheryl Nash, president of Fiserv Investment Services, spoke to FTF News about disruptive technologies and their ripple effects.
(Cheryl Nash, president of Fiserv Investment Services, gave the closing keynote address last month at the ISITC 24th Annual Securities Operations Summit, and her talk focused on the inevitability of change. Nash has been serving in her current post for more than six years, and her expertise includes the development of “multiple strategy portfolios, known today as unified managed accounts (UMAs),” according to her biography via Fiserv. “She is the driving force behind the wealth management strategy at Fiserv with focus on three core product solutions — unified wealth platform, wealth management network and turnkey wealth and advisory partnerships — to comprehensively support the wealth management community.” Nash spoke to FTF News during the ISITC event about disruptive technologies and their ripple effects.)
Cheryl Nash, president of Fiserv Investment Services
Q: How will the emergence of disruptive technologies impact your guidance of Fiserv Investment Services?
A: Great question. Fiserv is uniquely positioned to bring value to our clients through both the depth of our solutions and our ability to integrate new capabilities into a seamless experience. But this is about more than integrating components. It’s about delivering a better wealth management, and ultimately, a better investor experience. I think it’s all about building trust in a digital world.
So, when you think about some of the disruptive technologies, digital is a big one. At this [ISITC] conference, you hear a lot about distributed ledger technology [DLT] such as blockchain, artificial intelligence, cryptocurrency, etc. I think the emergence and evolution of those are only going to make technology solutions like ours better.
So, through APIs [application programming interfaces], it’s easy to integrate those technologies into some of the technologies that have been around for some time, that are stable, that are secure, and that are scalable.
We look forward to these different technologies and understanding how we can integrate them within our core platform, to help drive change in the industry and transformation.
Q: Does your group have any projects underway to review these emerging technologies?
A: We do.
We have a couple of use-cases with blockchain — more on the reconciliation piece. We are looking at some clients who have come to us asking about some small project work.
Really, when you think about it, everything is data driven in artificial intelligence. And we have an API library that we’re getting a lot more use out of, which is really driving efficiency.
We also have intraday cash adjustments or intraday new accounts coming in through automation and electronic signature and we are, in various cases, using these emerging technologies.
Q: Some say the push for regulatory reform for financial services appears to be slowing down across the globe. Do you agree with that premise?
A: Where do you see that? It’s not slowing down.
I’d say that there are changes. We’re seeing redefinition, delays, proposed rollbacks, and we think regulation is always going to be there.
They’re talking about MiFID III in this [ISITC] session. We’re looking at what that next regulatory change will be — perhaps it’s T+2 moving to T+0. That move could help make financial services easier. As long as there is risk potential and a demand for transparency, I still see the need for regulation. Given this, I don’t know that it’s going to slow down. While it may not speed up, I think it will stay about the same.
For our part at Fiserv, we continue to be responsive and I know regulatory obligations from a technology perspective are important to us. We will make sure we stay on top of that.
If regulations start to plateau, we think that it would free up budgets. Many of our clients have spent significant budget on regulatory compliance; they will be able to move that budget toward more innovative initiatives such as artificial intelligence, distributed ledger technologies and so forth.
Q: It seems that people are chomping at the bit to get away from regulation and onto something more innovative, something that would bring in more money not just for the sake of innovation.
A: Everyone is looking for ways to be more efficient to save money and to grow revenue. So, it helps to put out some new products to enable that.
Q: With so many advancements in technology, many securities firms have been stuck with manual processes for key operations. What will it take for them to make the leap into automation, if ever?
A: I think it actually starts internally with talent and change management.
There are a lot of new technologies out there that you can adopt and you can understand how to use from an automation perspective. But it’s really important to recognize that the people who are running your operations are the people who mostly built that operation over the last 20 or so years. To enable them to take advantage of these new technologies, you have to invest in them.
I think you have to make sure that you have change management practices in place. You have to make sure you invest and develop your people so they can learn the new technologies and embrace automation.
You also have to figure out how to re-deploy them. There’s automation that is so efficient, you may find you don’t need as many people in the back office.
I think until firms really understand that, and put some focus on change management and talent, it’s going to be tougher to take on some of this automation.
I was just reading an article this weekend about the five things you should think about if you run an operations staff. The first one that really hit home is: ‘Are you doing the same thing that you did two years ago?’ If you are, then you’re doing something wrong and you should really step back and think about what automation you can start putting in place to prevent doing the same thing over and over again.
Q: As a follow-up, does change management have to happen faster? Does it have to be more flexible?
A: I think so. I think mobilizing change management has to be somebody’s job and the people affected need to know that they’re expected to change and have a clear road map of what their new job is going to be. They have to buy into it because they’re the ones who are going to be instrumental in its success. I think change management has to happen faster and must be recognized as a need.
Need a Reprint?