financial crisis

We are in the midst of a global productivity crisis. The IMF estimates that if productivity growth had followed its pre-2008 financial crisis trend, overall GDP in advanced economies would be about 5% higher today. However, to blame everything on the financial crisis is misleading. The overall trend in productivity growth is stagnant and has been on a downward trend for the last several years. This is costing the U.S. a staggering $450–$550 billion a year. In the U.K., concern is such that there have been calls for the government to set new targets and create an independent watchdog to monitor progress to improve national productivity. There is also a workforce engagement crisis. Most people are simply not engaged at work, with industry research showing that typically 66% of people are either partly or not engaged at all at work. This means that only 1 in 3 people at work are fully motivated and productive. Yet most companies are oblivious to this fact. Some run annual emplo

We are in the midst of a global productivity crisis. The IMF estimates that if productivity growth had followed its pre-2008 financial crisis trend, overall GDP in advanced economies would be about 5% higher today. However, to blame everything on the financial crisis is misleading. The overall trend in productivity growth is stagnant and has been on a downward trend for the last several years. This is costing the U.S. a staggering $450–$550 billion a year. In the U.K., concern is such that there have been calls for the government to set new targets and create an independent watchdog to monitor progress to improve national productivity. There is also a workforce engagement crisis. Most people are simply not engaged at work, with industry research showing that typically 66% of people are either partly or not engaged at all at work. This means that only 1 in 3 people at work are fully motivated and productive. Yet most companies are oblivious to this fact. Some run annual employee sa

The risk reporting environment for banks has changed. Regulatory imperatives that were largely driven by the financial crisis of 2007— such as Dodd-Frank, Principles for Effective Risk Data Aggregation and Risk Reporting (BCBS 239) by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS), Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) and others—are impacting banks around the globe. These imperatives are forcing banks to rethink and reinvent how their systems integrate and how data from across the bank flows into the aggregated risk and capital reports required by regulatory agencies. Banks must be able to convey to agencies that the data is complete, correct and consistent in order to establish that the reports are trustworthy

Three key market dynamics are currently driving the need for transformation in almost every industry: 1) The need to leverage digital technologies to drive the core business 2) Next generation online consumers and socially networked buyers 3) The financial crisis Companies are under tremendous pressure to bring digital technologies at the center of their business to remain competitive, innovate, create new revenue streams, and drive greater customer intimacy. As a result the need to leverage technology to significantly reduce the cost of going to market while driving growth has led to increasing interest in software-based business models.

Higher education is in financial crisis, according to 71 percent of chief business officers (CBOs) surveyed by Inside Higher Ed. Read the 2017 report to understand how these leaders view the financial and other challenges facing higher-education institutions in the U.S.

In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis regulatory exams have become increasingly demanding for governance, risk, and compliance professionals. New rules brought about by the Dodd-Frank Act will continue to shape future examinations including safety and soundness, compliance, market conduct, and risk-based targeted exams. We can expect these changes will require examiners to spend more time onsite, request more documents, and extend the scope and/or depth of their examinations. This means it is more important than ever to avoid the classic mistake of sharing examination documents through ad-hoc, manual processes and delivering highly sensitive data through unsecured channels like mail, e-mail, thumb drives, and FTP. In response to these increasing burdens financial institutions are looking to take control with a more structured, collaborative process for collecting, refining, and submitting regulatory information. Download this white paper to learn more about Intralinks VIA.

In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, financial institutions are faced with increasing scrutiny from government regulators. The Dodd-Frank act was passed in response to the disaster, creating the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and mandating 398 new rulemakings, many of which remain to be finalized. In light of these events financial services organizations are increasingly relying on Intralinks® as the most secure way to control sensitive information when collaborating within and outside their organizations. Intralinks meets the strictest security, auditability, and compliance requirements of regulated entities around the world – regardless of business complexities. Download this white paper to learn how Intralinks VIA for Financial Services can help you control your communications with regulators and other third parties.

For decades, the financial services industry has endured constant change and uncertainty, from the depths of a financial crisis to widespread regulation overhauls. With the advent of more advanced cybersecurity threats, the industry has responded with rapid digital transformation to remain competitive while also pushing the envelope. Today, managing and mitigating cyber-related risks not only draws government scrutiny, but increased consumer scrutiny as well, with longstanding brand reputations anchored to institutions’ ability to protect its most sensitive data. In a recent survey of Americans, financial information was considered by consumers to be their most valuable personal information, worth even more than personal or family photos and videos. For consumers, failing to protect their data is a grave violation of trust, to the point where 72% would consider leaving their current financial institution if their sensitive information was taken hostage by ransomware.1 Not only does the

Banks today are continuously challenged to meet rigorous regulatory requirements. They must implement strict governance programs that enable them to comply with a wide variety of regulations stemming from the financial crisis that began in 2007, including the DoddFrank Act, Basel Committee on Banking Supervision regulations, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the Revised Payment Services Directive (PSD2) and the revised Markets in Financial Instruments Directive To keep pace with regulatory changes, many banks will need to reapportion their budgets to support the development of new systems and processes. Regulators continually indicate that the banks must be able to provide, secure and deliver high-quality information that is consistent and mature.

Banks today are continuously challenged to meet rigorous regulatory requirements. They must implement strict governance programs that enable them to comply with a wide variety of regulations stemming from the financial crisis that began in 2007, including the DoddFrank Act, Basel Committee on Banking Supervision regulations, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the Revised Payment Services Directive (PSD2) and the revised Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID2). Many of these new regulations are spurring banks to rethink how data from across the enterprise flows into the aggregated risk and capital reports required by regulatory agencies. Data must be complete, correct and consistent to maintain confidence in risk reports, capital reports and analytical analyses. At the same time, banks need ways to monetize, grant access to and generate insight from data

Card members at this consumer retail bank, enjoy a large variety of products and services. The bank offers standard banking transactions, credit cards, insurance, and investment products. After the 2008 financial crisis, the bank experienced a sharp decline in overall customer satisfaction, and also learned that its customers were more empowered than before. In order to adapt, the bank adopted a customer-centric approach by introducting: • A new customer motto: “Know me, value me, make it easy for me, and protect me” • A new core initiative is to always teach digital first • An understanding that customers are serviced on the digital channels they prefer to use SundaySky SmartVideo enables the bank to take a strategic approach to enhancing the customer engagement process with personalized video experiences that welcome new card members and assist them in fully understanding how to get the most out of their new product.

"Three key market dynamics are currently driving the need for transformation in almost every industry: 1) The need to leverage digital technologies to drive the core business 2) Next generation online consumers and socially networked buyers 3) The financial crisis Companies are under tremendous pressure to bring digital technologies at the center of their business to remain competitive, innovate, create new revenue streams, and drive greater customer intimacy. As a result the need to leverage technology to significantly reduce the cost of going to market while driving growth has led to increasing interest in software-based business models. "

In the white paper, "Toward Transparency and Sustainability: Building a New Financial Order," you'll see how businesses are building sustainable, stable systems for the years to come, while fulfilling their brand promises.

This whitepaper unveils research that shows how banks are moving beyond organization silos, infrastructure complexities and other constraints -- toward an operation focused on the client.

The global financial crisis of 2008 still reverberates today. Sluggish economic growth, stricter regulatory requirements and rapidly changing consumer behavior are placing unprecedented demands on the banking industry. In recent years, banks – particularly those with substantial retail operations – have relied on the lethargy of their customers to maintain their business. Customer loyalty has been based more on proximity of local branches and convenience of ATM networks than the quality of customer care or products and services priced and tailored to a bank’s best customers. In response to the financial crisis, banks have focused on wringing complexity and costs from their systems – exacerbated by mergers and acquisitions – while dealing with new and tighter regulations. Yet, their traditional “one-size-fits-all” mass-marketing approach to customers has remained constant.

The Economist Intelligence Unit examines the lessons learned from the current financial crisis, and proposes ten practical lessons that could help to address perceived weaknesses in risk identification, assessment and management.

The global credit crunch that began in 2007 threw the financial industry into turmoil and highlighted the need for financial firms to improve their risk management practices. Today, the credit crisis is far from over. Markets remain volatile, and financial firms face waves of regulatory requirements intended to safeguard the solvency of individual firms and the stability of economies worldwide. These reforms will dramatically affect firms — burdening the profitability and growth of some, and the very survival of others.

Millennials are members of a unique generation. Shaped by the 2008 financial crisis and Great Recession, these younger consumers stand behind brands that support causes they believe in and demonstrate value. Loyalty is not guaranteed from this group, but must be earned through relevance and brand engagement.

Since the global financial crisis of 2008, stress tests have taken on growing importance and prominence in financial institution supervision and regulation. These tests, designed to measure an institution’s ability to maintain capital buffers and withstand extreme economic shocks, were imposed initially, and primarily, on the biggest multinational firms – those designated global significantly important banks (G-SIBs) or financial institutions (G-SIFIs). However, the circle for supervisory stress testing has widened to include a growing number of banks as defined by domestic jurisdictions – in the United States, for example, down to banks with $10 billion in assets under the Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test (DFAST) rule. What’s more, stress tests and their underlying scenarios can be of considerable value as a strategic management tool to a financial services company of virtually any type or size.

The financial collapse of 2008 had the greatest impact on the financial services industry since World War II, resulting in consolidation and extensive regulation. The crisis coincided with increased competition from emerging economic powers, nonbanks and fintech organizations. Consumer behavior, from the adoption of mobile banking to P2P payments, forced banks to retool and respond with innovative products and investments in new delivery channels. Technology changed rapidly as well. In the capital markets, trading became fully automated, with pricing, risk decisions and settlement across exchanges made in milliseconds

Banks and financial institutions have faced a spate of regulations centered on capital adequacy since the financial crisis started in 2008. The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) initiated a series of reforms to strengthen risk, capital and liquidity rules across banks. Among the important changes recommended are new rules for calculating Tier I and Tier II capital and the inclusion of additional risk measurement components for market risk, liquidity risk and counterparty risk. Despite these changes, a key drawback of the Basel framework is its focus on historical capital adequacy. While being useful, it does not help assess the impact of stress events on banks from an ex-ante basis. Hence regulatory agencies in several jurisdictions have mandated banks to define a forward-looking capital plan that incorporates stress scenarios.

The concept and practice of stress testing has been around for many years. While traditional stress testing methodologies are still valid for firmwide scenario analysis and stress testing, special techniques and attentions are needed to successfully achieve the goal of firmwide capital adequacy in forwardlooking stress scenarios. During the 2007 financial crisis, many financial institutions were not sufficiently prepared for the ensuing liquidity crunch and capital drains. Perhaps if banks had worked through different economic scenarios prior to the crisis, they would have been in a better position to weather the storm. Inadequate preparation for crisis can lead to systemic risk and severe economic and political turmoil.

The financial crisis that began in 2007 highlighted the major shortcomings of the regulatory framework around minimum capital requirements and liquidity requirements. In response, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision made substantial revisions to its guidelines - specifically, by including more demanding capital and liquidity requirements now commonly referred to as Basel III framework. National banking authorities around the world are adopting the new Basel III framework as a way to eliminate systemic liquidity risk and promote greater transparency of risk management practices.

Download this white paper to learn how Intralinks VIA for Financial Services can help you control your communications with regulators and other third parties.