Latest / The Payments Shed / Ep. 23 - Leda Glyptis on Banks, Challengers and the Power of Ideas

Transcript

Ep. 23 - Leda Glyptis on Banks, Challengers and the Power of Ideas · The Payments Shed

0:00
Welcome to the Payment Shed Podcast, the weekly podcast that
0:03
dives into the big topics, trends and people shaping the
0:06
worlds of payments, fintech and business leadership with your
0:09
two Co hosts, myself Grant Evans and Justin Hannah.
0:14
Welcome to the payment share podcast.
0:16
Today we are very fortunate to be joined by fantastic lead
0:20
Ecliptis. Leader is a founder, author and
0:23
all round general fintech commentator and we are thrilled
0:26
to have you here today. Leader, please introduce
0:28
yourself. Tell us a little bit about what
0:30
first drew you into financial services and and banking as a
0:33
sector. Well, thank you for having me.
0:35
First of all, I'm I was very excited coming here, which is a
0:38
nice feeling on a, on a Friday narrator's voice.
0:42
We're recording this on a Friday.
0:43
We're probably not listening to this on a Friday.
0:46
What do you mean to finance? It was accident, to be honest
0:48
with you. I I never, ever wanted to be a
0:53
banker. And if you had asked me when I
0:54
was a university student, I would feel like anything but
0:57
that. But I fell into it and much to
1:02
my horror, discovered that I both liked it and was good at it
1:06
and found myself in, in banking entirely by accident.
1:10
And after a couple of years of winging it like most people do,
1:14
my then boss was moving to another bank and said, I'd like
1:18
to take you with me. And I said, I, I have a
1:21
confession to make. I'm mostly making it up as I go
1:24
along. I have no idea what's going on
1:26
half the time. And he was like, well, you know,
1:28
you, you, you follow me into this operations role with a
1:33
very, very heavy focus on technology and process redesign.
1:37
You're going to learn everything you need to know and quite a lot
1:40
more besides. And he was right.
1:42
So I found myself doing that for a few years, which meant I was
1:46
the right spot when the fintech wave started.
1:48
And I've looked back since. Very good.
1:53
And what were the biggest lessons that you think you
1:55
learnt working inside those big banks over the years?
2:00
I think that the first the first lesson's a good one, the second
2:03
one not so good. You want the happy one first go.
2:06
For it, yeah, go happy. First, the the first one is that
2:10
very often as we would go through pieces of work, there
2:15
would be people at the coalface, people who would do the doing,
2:19
who would have very good ideas, sometimes very practical, small
2:23
but impactful, sometimes huge and strategic.
2:26
And they would hold themselves back thinking somebody higher up
2:30
the food chain, higher up the pay scale than me will have
2:33
probably thought of this and dismissed it for good reason.
2:36
And I saw so many times people holding themselves back on the
2:40
assumption that the my betters, my seniors will have thought of
2:44
this thing. There is a reason why we're not
2:45
doing it. The realization that they mostly
2:48
haven't, largely because they're doing other things and, and, and
2:52
also because usually they haven't done your job.
2:54
They don't know what you're facing into.
2:57
It was a very liberating realization.
2:59
It actually accelerated quite a lot of what I was doing because
3:02
I have a personality that, as a friend of mine puts it, goes
3:05
around poking things to see if they go Boeing, and they usually
3:09
do go Boeing. So I poke again.
3:12
So for me that was liberating. The fact that the worst that can
3:14
happen is I will learn why we don't do it.
3:18
And that was a a massive realization and I wish we
3:21
instilled it more in people and had a mechanism that doesn't
3:24
involve bravery to be filtering through these things.
3:28
The second thing is, is the unhappy piece.
3:32
And so when I started my career, and I don't know if you guys had
3:34
the same as you were going through, I, I firmly believed
3:38
that what stood between my big organization and not getting in
3:42
in our own way was knowledge. Like if we actually understand
3:46
how this particular technology works, if we understand how this
3:48
methodology works, if we understand how soul crushing
3:52
some of our policies are for our teams, we will do better.
3:58
I believed that fully when I started my career.
4:01
I don't anymore. I know that's not what's holding
4:04
us back and that is depressing. And these two realisations often
4:09
go hand in hand. So you mentioned there kind of
4:13
what you thought when you were doing the roles.
4:15
What do you think the lessons you learned from doing them
4:17
roles and and have to kind of you mentioned there about asking
4:20
the questions and and doing the pointing.
4:22
What do you think the lessons you learn from doing that or not
4:24
doing that in circum circumstances?
4:27
So I'm, I'm the kind of person who does do that.
4:30
So the, the lesson learnt is that actually you can get a lot
4:34
further than you originally fear.
4:37
Sometimes you get a lot further than the organization you're in
4:40
was prepared for. And then you have some comical
4:42
conversations going. This succeeded more than we
4:46
anticipated. Roll it back now because the
4:49
organization isn't ready for it. But I think the from a, from a
4:52
personal career perspective, you realize that actually the
4:55
boundaries you assume are there are not.
4:58
But the second learning is exactly the second piece of
5:01
that, which is you have to take the organization with you and
5:05
the maturity of systems processes, but also people's
5:10
appetite for change isn't, isn't yours to to shift.
5:19
So the biggest learning actually is that you go in to do a big
5:22
systems implementation or to implement a strategy.
5:25
But the only conversation that matters is getting your, your
5:28
senior stakeholders, your shareholders, your executive
5:31
team around the table and having an honest conversation on do we
5:34
have the stomach for this? And if not, do we have the
5:38
honesty to bring our strategy back to whatever we have the
5:42
stomach to execute? Do I have time to tell you a
5:45
story? Go for it.
5:46
So I did a piece of work with an insurance company a few years
5:50
back. Everything you're thinking of
5:53
right, was a room of middle-aged men in suits.
5:58
It looked like they were wearing the same suit, although I'm sure
6:00
they were wearing. I walked in.
6:01
I was like, oops. And it was a digital strategy
6:05
off site. We were, we were doing and we
6:08
were together for quite a long time.
6:09
They were committed to a process that entailed actually really
6:13
staying with the questions, having experts in the room that
6:16
could explain the stuff that would normally be like, oh,
6:19
let's let's pick up in a few weeks once we've looked into it.
6:22
So it was, it was a really committed set of sessions.
6:24
We put a lot of work into it. It was exhausting.
6:28
And we got towards the end of the week and the chairman of the
6:30
board stood up and said, this has been eye opening.
6:35
And I think I speak on behalf of everyone when I say we don't
6:37
have the stomach to do any of what you've put in front of us.
6:42
I was crushed. I don't think I've ever been
6:44
this close to tears in a meeting room before.
6:48
But he didn't stop there, he said.
6:50
So learning what we've learned and knowing what we are, what do
6:55
we have the stomach for? And we designed a strategy that
6:58
if you had asked me then, and it was a long time ago when I was a
7:01
lot younger and a lot hungrier, they came up with a strategy
7:06
that wasn't particularly exciting, but they've executed.
7:10
And that's the, the, the big thing.
7:12
They were honest about that appetite.
7:14
And that's when I got that, that learning.
7:16
It was not even that day. It wasn't the year after, it was
7:18
several years later when every time we had a check in, they had
7:23
actually met their targets, got in their sea legs, and the next
7:27
iteration of the strategy was more ambitious.
7:30
And again, they executed because they didn't go in with a
7:33
futurist saying let's move to Mars.
7:35
They actually started from that. Do we have the stomach to do
7:39
this question? And at the time I was crushed.
7:41
But now I look back and think, biggest lesson ever.
7:46
That's what it needs to be like. That's an interesting one as
7:48
well because you know, segue into the next question around
7:51
the point in which you pulled the handbrake.
7:53
And when I'm, I've had enough being on this side of the fence
7:55
and I'm going to step out and become a challenger voice in, in
7:58
the kind of banking sector that there are obviously positives
8:01
you take from that story. But I guess there were several
8:03
of those that maybe didn't go in such a positive way.
8:05
So what what was the trigger point where you went?
8:07
I need to get on the other side of the fence and I need to talk
8:09
about doing things better in this space.
8:11
So I've, I've, I've crossed the Rubicon twice because I was a
8:15
banker for a very long time. And I started, I started writing
8:20
and speaking as therapy, to be honest with you.
8:23
And it was, it was back then when you had to come with a cafe
8:26
out of my, my company does not condone any of the craziness I
8:29
say here. And I found myself crossing from
8:33
traditional banking with all the legacy to challenger players in
8:38
the Co banking space, in my case, as a challenge to myself
8:42
more than anything to put my money where my mouth was.
8:45
It's like, OK, you're, you're constantly constrained by policy
8:49
and governance and legacy. Move over to the other side with
8:52
a blank sheet of paper and, and do it.
8:55
And undeniably that comes with a whole host of of other
8:59
challenges. It's a lot of the constraints
9:02
you had out the shackles are removed and it's liberating.
9:04
But you have new problems and some of you anticipate and some
9:08
you don't. As always, the the, the crossing
9:13
over that you, you talk about going from a, a full time role
9:16
to more of a sort of portfolio career I have now, which is a
9:19
combination of advisory and writing, commenting, speaking
9:25
and working with companies of all sizes at their executive and
9:28
board level. It was it was a personal choice
9:32
for quality of life more than anything.
9:36
And and by that I don't mean I wanted to work less and sit on
9:40
the beach. I'm actually working longer days
9:41
now than I ever did before. What I don't have to spend any
9:45
time or mental energy on this politics, because their reality
9:49
is even the smallest organisations, when they get to
9:53
a tipping point, which is about 30 people start having politics.
9:59
They have internal politics, they have egos.
10:01
We're in finance, so we tend to hire a particular type of person
10:06
and we all know what happens around these people.
10:08
So in any organization, no matter what work you do, a big
10:11
chunk of your time is spent managing things that just stop
10:16
you from going backwards. People's emotional reactions,
10:23
sometimes very narcissistic reactions to power struggles.
10:28
I don't wanna do that anymore. It resonates so much.
10:31
I mean, we've gone corporate style, corporate style in our
10:35
careers in different places, but we we joke about this a lot.
10:37
You know, the the politics is very much still there.
10:41
It's just in a different, it presents in a different way, but
10:43
it does still exist. So no fascinating insight.
10:46
I think sometimes, well, you have certain leaders that take
10:49
you to 20 employees, then you may need a different leader to
10:51
take you to 50 employees and a different leader.
10:54
And you also can have fantastically that can that can
10:56
adapt as the business grows. But sometimes to be able to push
10:59
that business forward, you need to bring in new blood.
11:02
It doesn't mean the person at the top needs to leave the role,
11:04
but what's best for them and best for the business by them
11:07
doing that role A. 100% and and actually, so there's a, a
11:11
chapter called Christian Nentwich.
11:12
I don't know if you've met him before.
11:13
Actually his office was around the corner.
11:15
I interviewed him for my latest book and he agrees with you
11:18
100%. He says that chances are the
11:21
person who founded the company isn't the right person to lead
11:23
it as it scales. But even if it is you, the
11:27
version of you that started isn't the right version to
11:31
continue. You need to change and, and I
11:33
guess to to your earlier question, I gave myself
11:36
permission to ask myself, what do I want now out of all of
11:40
this? And that that has been my latest
11:41
iteration. And you know, I'm, I'm old
11:44
enough to know better, but young enough to probably make a change
11:47
again in a few years. So watch this space.
11:50
Look, you mentioned there around legacy banks and around
11:52
challenges and we'd look at Starling, Monzo, Revelry, they
11:56
kind of reshaped UX journey, right?
11:59
What do you think the impact has been on legacy banks?
12:01
Do you think they're fighting back enough?
12:04
So when I was when I was a banker, the the watchword was
12:08
disintermediation, right? And we were concerned that the
12:13
fintech space would provide a like for like challenger for the
12:18
areas of activity that made us some our money, right?
12:22
That's not at all what happened and and the technologies and the
12:26
businesses that have come in have completely changed
12:29
everything including that. But there hasn't been a like for
12:33
like challenge. So you're absolutely right that
12:35
when the challengers, the Monzo's, the starlings, the
12:38
revolves came out, UX was the first thing people looked at and
12:42
that is fairly easy to copy. Like it's not a defensible mode.
12:49
Then it was unit economics and a lower cost base, which is a much
12:53
harder thing to replicate. But I would to the second part
12:57
of your question, I would argue that traditional banks in the
13:00
consumer space are looking at the challengers and going, we
13:05
haven't reached reached the sort of scale that scares me yet.
13:08
So I'm not going to be replicating your unit economics
13:14
discipline because you haven't quite made it work yet.
13:19
But if you speak to the founders of those banks, the the joke is
13:22
always, well, we never said how long it would took.
13:23
Nobody expected it to be an overnight thing.
13:25
And as you've seen them tipping into profitability, it may be
13:31
too late to do the unit economics part, especially as
13:36
you have organizations going. Leave that for now, because I
13:40
have to think about what AI is doing to my user interfaces
13:44
anyway across the board. So what do you see as the kind
13:47
of key advantages then I guess that the legacy banks struggle
13:51
to match? And then beyond that, on the
13:53
flip side, you know, what are the the strengths that those
13:57
incumbents have? You know, there must be a sort
13:59
of strengths and weakness play that you would break down
14:01
between the two parties. A. 100% So let me start with
14:05
the, the strengths of of the incumbents, 'cause I, I, I've
14:08
never subscribed to the to the view of beating them up.
14:12
They are, they're scaled, they're diversified and they
14:16
have money. They have money, right?
14:19
They, and I don't just mean they have your money, I mean they
14:22
have money to invest in whatever it is they believe needs to be
14:27
invested in in anger. But that scale also means that
14:31
they can absorb their own delays in their own prevarication.
14:39
Sometimes that scale also means that there is an opportunity to
14:45
protect certain businesses should they want to.
14:48
Now I hesitate because of course we were all around when names
14:52
that you never thought would go under went under.
14:55
I remember going up to work and in the in one Canada Square and
14:59
Bear Stearns was listed on the on the building's tenants and
15:03
leaving the office that day and they were no longer there.
15:06
So and it was not funny at all if you were working for Bear
15:09
Stearns at the time. But so we have seen big names
15:12
collapse. But but that scale is important
15:14
and it's particularly important because consumers banking has
15:18
historically not been particularly profitable.
15:21
And so those big banks have made it profitable on the whole on
15:24
the round as part of a of a bigger set of capabilities.
15:29
So the challengers come in to make possibly the the hardest
15:33
bit of banking profitable. They're trying to do it with a
15:37
consumer centric view, but the business model is exactly the
15:40
same. And I know that some of the
15:42
founders will not like me saying that, but it is the the unit
15:45
economics are different, but how it works is exactly the same.
15:49
So what it's what it needs is scale.
15:52
And that scale is very hard to achieve without doing some of
15:54
the traditional stuff. Like we're seeing that the
15:56
challengers are actually leaning into profitability when they
15:59
bring lending into the mix because that's how banking
16:02
works. So, so I think the gulf between
16:04
the two is not as stark and wide as it was when it started when
16:09
UX was, was the thing we were all looking at.
16:12
But I think we will actually end up having a conversation around
16:15
what are you trying to do? How are you trying to do it?
16:18
And do you have the right tech stack to do it sensibly,
16:21
reliably, robustly and at a sensible cost.
16:24
I actually think the challengers will come into their own in that
16:27
space because they do, they have cleaner estates, more, more
16:32
scalable and if they've done everything they said they're
16:35
doing. Cheaper to run.
16:36
I think the way the legacy, the, the thing the legacy providers
16:39
should be more scared of is not just the UI and the UX anymore,
16:41
but for me the value added services that they're adding,
16:45
which is also adding to their bottom line.
16:47
They're delivering in such a clean and easy way.
16:49
You know, embedded finance that the lending element is, is one
16:53
part of it, but there's premium card offerings that we see in
16:55
that market, you know, other quirky features, phone
16:59
insurance, whatever it might be, travel insurance, you know,
17:01
these value added service products, they're so easy just
17:03
to flick on and off. Yeah.
17:05
Within those banking apps, it can't be that difficult for the
17:07
legacy providers to build similar solutions, but they just
17:09
seem fundamentally flawed in the way they they deliver a lot of
17:13
those products to market. Are they generally capable of of
17:15
transformation though? Well, so I I find myself drawn
17:19
into that discussion a lot and I think the the answer is is many
17:23
fold. The the first piece that has to
17:25
be said is that it's much easier to deliver solution on a on a
17:30
tech stack designed for adaptability.
17:33
I I have a a client who has a particular system, non critical
17:37
admittedly, but a system that it's on its 32nd year of code
17:43
freeze so you can't change the code base.
17:45
Now I doubt there's anyone who knows how to change it.
17:48
There's the vast majority of banks will have systems that are
17:52
older than me. I have a challenge with a friend
17:55
that I will talk about mainframes at least once a day.
17:57
So here it is. We're we're, we're building
17:59
digital capabilities alongside or sometimes on top of
18:03
technology of a different era. So if you're trying to create an
18:06
operationally resilient and risk managed solution that needs to
18:11
use a customer masked 70s, then then you will, you have a much
18:16
more complicated job at hand than if you're, if you're
18:19
building it around a cloud native core that can just spin
18:23
things up. So, so problem #1 is that the
18:25
longer we carry this legacy, the more complicated everything
18:28
becomes. The second is muscle memory,
18:31
right? We, you know how when you, you,
18:34
you move house the first day you leave the office, you, you're
18:37
halfway to your old house before you realize that's not where you
18:39
live anymore? I exaggerate slightly, but but
18:42
people in big organizations are trained to have workarounds for
18:46
the things that they know don't work well.
18:49
Whereas in an organization that was designed to not have any of
18:52
that. You go in a straight line, but
18:54
then you create situations that go back to what we said right at
18:57
the beginning. People are so used to going in a
19:01
zigzaggy way to get from A to B that they might not even ask is
19:05
there a door there? Because it would be so
19:07
convenient if we had a door there and we could walk in a
19:09
straight line. So everyone is capable of
19:12
change. What man made man can unmake,
19:16
but it's infinitely more complicated.
19:20
You need to, if you say, OK, what we're going to do, I mean,
19:22
look at we're allowed to name individuals.
19:25
Look at the HSBC Zing example, right?
19:28
I personally don't think it's an example of them failing to
19:32
innovate. I think it's, it's a it's a
19:35
testament to the fact that they looked at what wise we're doing.
19:38
And so that looks nice. And then the steps that needed
19:42
to be taken internally meant that by the time they hit the
19:47
market, they were so late. Yeah, we see there's quite a lot
19:50
though where legacy providers rise.
19:52
They want to get to market parity and beyond.
19:54
So they sought out a project to try and get to market parity.
19:57
And by the time they get there, they're already 234 years behind
20:01
where the innovators already are because they just need to catch
20:04
up quicker, unfortunately. And then what happens is that
20:06
someone like me in that bank who'll go, right, let's talk
20:10
about all the reasons why we didn't make it on time.
20:13
Let's talk about our procurement policy.
20:16
Let's talk about our onboarding policy.
20:18
Let's talk about testing. The fact that I, I worked for
20:22
the a Bank of years back where you had, we had release cycles
20:27
that we had fought to get them down to four weeks, but our
20:31
testing schedule had to be locked in a year in advance,
20:37
right? Make it make sense so.
20:38
Make it make sense but also once we've had a project that didn't
20:42
deliver as we had all dreamed and wished for, let's sit down
20:46
and talk about all the systemic factors that got in the way so
20:48
that we don't repeat the same mistakes next time.
20:51
But you know what happens? Everyone has to move to the next
20:53
project. So you go into the next project
20:56
and you'll your testing cycle is exactly the same and your
20:59
procurement requirements are. So all of the things that become
21:04
impediments, you just carry between projects.
21:08
The Payment Shed Podcast is proudly sponsored by Tammy AI,
21:12
the market intelligence and lead generation platform built for
21:14
sales and marketing teams who want precision, not guesswork.
21:18
Tammy helps businesses identify their best fit prospects, gain
21:21
deep market insights and boost revenue growth.
21:24
And it really has become the go to solution for the payments and
21:27
fintech industries. Both Justin and I have used the
21:30
tool in previous organizations that we've been in and we really
21:32
can't recommend it highly enough.
21:34
There's a link in the bio to click on the Tammy website and
21:37
find out more about their product.
21:38
You really won't regret it. Now it's really interesting and
21:43
I want to move on to the the cultural side of this as well.
21:46
But just before I do that, on the Zing note, you know, the
21:48
point you made before about the huge, you know, banks of money
21:52
that these legacy providers have, it was a huge loss on
21:55
paper. But actually, for someone like
21:57
HSBC, it was nothing really, and it was worth the risk.
22:00
But then that segues maybe into this cultural question.
22:03
We, you know, we're gonna ask you around.
22:05
We've talked about the technology side of things, the
22:07
cultural difference between those those challenges, those
22:09
neo banks and the legacy providers.
22:11
And Zing's may be an example of trying to create this trendy
22:14
brand. And then people go, oh, there's
22:16
still HSBC that sits behind it, right?
22:18
Do you think the big banks are stroke struggling culturally to
22:22
kind of move forward? I mean that's a quite an
22:24
open-ended question. I appreciate.
22:25
It and then it's a good question.
22:26
And look, I, I, I, I am an HSBC customer.
22:29
I'm, I'm an everyone customer. I have it's, it's almost like a
22:32
banking advert. If you open my wallet because
22:35
I'm just, I'm curious and I'm, I'm, I bank with everyone for my
22:38
education. So I'm among other things, an
22:40
HSBC customer. And, and it was very jarring for
22:42
me that I had to on board as a new customer.
22:45
So of course, because I know how the thing works in the
22:47
background, I was like, you haven't set set up your identity
22:53
asset properly. Now I had a similar conversation
22:56
with one of the neo banks without a hapless poor person
23:02
was at the the other end of the of the phone.
23:05
What was different is that, and maybe I shouldn't be naming HSBC
23:08
here, but what happened with the HSBC was nothing right.
23:11
I whoever I spoke to was like, yeah, I don't, I don't know.
23:14
I'm just a phone. Setting.
23:15
I don't know. I don't know, lady, what do you
23:17
want from me? Whereas on the other side, the
23:20
challenger bank, I got a call from a very senior person going
23:24
what are you doing terrorizing my team?
23:26
Yes, it's fair question. It is how we set up ABC and we
23:32
have a plan to change it. And I appreciate the question
23:34
and I was like, you know what, I appreciate the fact that the
23:37
question reached you because that is a process thing and a
23:41
culture thing and the two coexist.
23:43
So a, a very long winded way to coming back to your, to your
23:46
question, culture is an extremely hard thing to get
23:51
right. Because again, I quote from my
23:54
book, I was talking to the founders of Infuse for, for my
23:57
last book and they were saying they were very mindful of
24:00
culture, but it was very artificial because it's like,
24:04
OK, this, it's the two of us now.
24:07
Do we need to talk about culture?
24:09
And where there's five of us, do we need to talk about culture?
24:11
But when there's 15, is it too late?
24:15
So it is a, it is a trial and error thing.
24:18
And there's a lot of habitual culture forming things that
24:22
happen inside a big organization that get in the way of what you
24:26
want. And they're not intentional.
24:28
But, but I think for me, the biggest thing is there isn't a
24:32
muscle for talking about the real reason why things didn't
24:37
work. One of my former colleagues used
24:39
to call it the closet of shame. Everything goes in the closet of
24:41
shame. We'll never speak of it again,
24:43
which means we don't learn. There is a danger that as the
24:47
challengers get bigger and as they bring grown-ups in
24:50
quotation marks always in the room and we're seeing those more
24:53
seasoned bankers coming in, there is a danger that some of
24:56
that formality will come in. But I do think that that the
24:58
power of my question, and it was genuinely a question reaching
25:04
the top of that food chain, that was clever.
25:07
Now, it could be because that person Googled me to see who I
25:10
was and whether I was a journalist and going, oh, we
25:12
should, we should probably give this woman an answer.
25:14
But the fact that it reached them says a lot about their
25:17
culture. And I have no idea if I've
25:18
answered your question now because I've gone in 10
25:20
different directions. So how can how can big banks try
25:23
to mirror that kind of culture and breakdown them silos of of a
25:27
leader of a legacy bank calling you?
25:30
I don't think you can. Isn't that terrible?
25:34
I don't think you can. I, I, I think it's, you can't
25:38
start, you know that thing where you ask someone for directions
25:42
and they go, if that's where you're going and we start from
25:45
here, it's like, thanks if you are an HSBC, starting from where
25:52
you are and all this strength that comes with it.
25:55
The pride of working for a brand like that, the absolute belief
25:59
that you're an intrinsic part of the global economy.
26:03
There's actually a lot to be celebrated and, and big banks
26:07
are really terrible at that. I remember when I worked for
26:10
BNY, BNY Mellon, then our thing was who's helping you?
26:13
We're here to power big projects, investment success,
26:18
government infrastructure. That's our job.
26:20
We're here to power that. You trickle down to everyone who
26:23
worked there. So I think big banks are missing
26:26
a trick. There is an element of we, I
26:28
remember we, we were at the time of BNY, it was the top, but BNY
26:33
had stepped in to support the, the Federal Reserve part of the
26:37
deal of, of, of mortgage safety for the American market.
26:41
We weren't in America, you know how proud we were of that.
26:44
So I think there's a trick missed in look, yes, it's a big
26:47
organization, there are a lot of controls, but look, look at what
26:50
we're a part of and I think that celebration is important.
26:54
The second bit is the closet of shame needs to go.
26:56
You will never be just like those guys, but you can be
26:59
better than you are today, and you are seeing quite a lot of
27:03
the big organisations bringing people in who will smash through
27:06
some of that stuff. If you've had three projects
27:10
that were all late for the same reason, talk about the reason.
27:13
It's that simple. Do you think those big banks
27:16
underestimate the value in customer trust to the same level
27:20
of the the neo banks? Obviously they have to really
27:22
fight for that share of wallet that the neo banks out there.
27:25
But for me, and I've talked about this on on other episodes
27:28
we've done, you know, I still have my mortgage coming out of
27:31
my, you know, CMA 9 traditional bank it that.
27:33
And there is an innate thing even working in financial
27:36
services, where the back of my mind still says to me, I need my
27:38
savings there. I need my mortgage coming out.
27:40
And I know it's complete nonsense in terms of the
27:42
protections that I get. But that for me is a strength
27:44
for those challenge banks. And they should market that and
27:46
lean into that kind of legacy trust that exists.
27:49
But I don't know if you you feel they do.
27:50
That, well, I mean, look at what Chase did, right?
27:52
They're actually the, the, the best of both worlds in some ways
27:55
because you have that, that legacy name and the trust that
28:00
goes with it, even though it's a completely separate business.
28:04
And they, they tried to pick the best of all worlds in terms of
28:09
how they wanted to set up their business and the technology and,
28:12
and all the rest of it. I think when you're, when you're
28:15
the size of an HSBC or a Barclays, each individual
28:19
customer matters less. Like they would never say that.
28:22
And I don't think that the people who do the work think
28:25
that, but the numbers are such that that the individuals matter
28:29
less. But then the flip side is that
28:33
scale is how you succeed. So if you remember the early
28:36
years of Revolute, one of the best things about them was their
28:39
support function. Because you spoke to a real
28:41
person within seconds. It was amazing.
28:44
It didn't scale. It couldn't scale.
28:46
So I think that that slightly more impersonal approach of a
28:50
Big Bang isn't because they don't care, it's because with
28:53
scale comes some automation, some, I think the, the, the, the
28:58
question marks that we need to, to think about is nobody has
29:03
solved this. Yes yet.
29:04
The challengers haven't made the business side work fully.
29:07
The, the, the incumbents haven't made the servicing side work
29:12
fully. It's, it's a work in progress.
29:14
They can definitely learn from each other.
29:16
I think we're past the window of acquisitions really because some
29:19
of the challenges have gotten too expensive.
29:21
But we're not past the window of rethinking how we do certain
29:26
things. I think we're going to see a lot
29:27
more change because the economics of some of the
29:30
challenges are not sustainable and the technological legacy,
29:36
operational risk complexity of some of the incumbents is not
29:39
sustainable. So like we're going to, I'm
29:42
going to be employed forever because like the things that
29:45
I've been talking about for the last 20 years have changed a
29:47
little bit, but not that dramatically.
29:50
And kind of bring this back down to yourself, obviously author,
29:55
exec, I mean everybody wants to to be speaking to you, right?
29:58
What inspired you to kind of get writing in the 1st place?
30:01
You mentioned about getting your story out there, but kind of
30:03
what was that deep inside you that got you going?
30:05
So I started writing out of sheer frustration.
30:09
I am a very, I'm a bit of a sponge of, of other people's
30:14
emotions. So if you had a really
30:16
frustrating day at work with all the politics and all the drama,
30:18
I would go back and I'd be like, but I, I am inherently A
30:23
Pollyanna. I like finding actionable
30:27
positive twists to everything. So I started writing for
30:30
therapy. I started and well, I had a
30:32
really frustrating day and everything went wrong and
30:34
everyone was an idiot. But why?
30:37
And what can we do differently? And, and so I started writing to
30:41
find that sanity, that positivity, but also the
30:43
commonality in the experience. And at first I would publish
30:47
here and there like secret squirrel.
30:50
I wouldn't draw attention to it. And a few years in, I was busted
30:55
by my boss and he was like, look, obviously you can't write
30:58
under the company name, but like, you're more than welcome
31:02
to do more of this and not not be our secret squirrely.
31:06
And then as I was, as I was moving to the Gulf, I had been,
31:09
you know, like a few years writing here and there.
31:12
Tania Andressian of authentic future said, well, let's, let's,
31:15
let's do this. Let's make it a weekly column.
31:17
I was like, who will want to read this?
31:20
She was like, well, you'll be surprised.
31:23
People need to feel that they're not alone.
31:26
You're not you're not the only one in this relatable, right?
31:28
And, and, and it sort of went from there because the community
31:32
of people going me too. That's the wrong phrase, but you
31:36
know what I mean. Also also here created a
31:41
dialogue that pushed me to, to broaden the scope.
31:45
And then, and then the book was the first book was Tanya again
31:48
saying, you know, it's time, it's time now to, to, to go to
31:53
the next level of, of depth and complexity on this.
31:56
And what's been the most surprising feedback that you've
31:58
received going on that that journey from the articles to the
32:02
two books that you've got now? So my favorite thing is that
32:08
people have never met before who've been reading my stuff for
32:12
years, will barrel down the the street or at a conference and
32:16
hug me going, I feel like I know you and that feels amazing.
32:21
It's a bit confusing sometimes because like, wait, have we met?
32:24
I don't think I know you, but but that that is so valuable.
32:30
That has been. I just I can't stop grinning.
32:33
It's such a beautiful thing to to have the most surprising
32:38
thing is that you will very occasionally and like I've been
32:41
writing now for but just over 10 years, you will occasionally get
32:47
messages that are so deeply unexpected.
32:50
I was saying, you know, I needed to read your piece because I
32:53
felt seen or I'm going through something else in my life.
32:57
I've had I wrote a piece about the, the immigrant experience
33:01
from where I sit and I had a lot of people reaching out privately
33:04
going, thank you for saying words I needed to say or I
33:09
needed to have. But I had one person years ago
33:12
who it was like it was a piece about API governance.
33:16
It wasn't. Some of my pieces are about
33:18
leadership or about some are really dry API governance, but
33:22
there was a, a turn of phrase in there and, and I got a message
33:26
from a chap on LinkedIn saying I was contemplating suicide.
33:31
And the, this turn of phrase made me think about things and
33:36
like, you sort of saved my life. And I was like, I can't carry
33:39
that. That's a lot.
33:40
I mean, I, I, I said to them at the time and, and I believe it.
33:44
They're like when, when you're ready, the, the lesson finds a
33:47
student and you would be in an, in an empty room and you would
33:49
find that inspiration. So I will take no credit at all,
33:53
but it is a very powerful reminder that we put stuff out
33:56
there and the law of unintended consequences is is very, very
34:01
strong. And when you when you write as
34:06
chaotically as I do, because I don't really follow a
34:09
particularly formal structure, it resonates with people in
34:12
really unexpected ways. And that's.
34:14
Do you think, do you think every leader should be writing,
34:17
sharing their ideas out loud or or argument secrets girl to
34:20
themselves to kind of get that through that?
34:23
So I have had a very intense debate back and forth with
34:28
someone recently about that because I think it's it's
34:32
difficult to say. There is a thing that everyone
34:35
should do. And I have friends who are among
34:38
the smartest people I know. If you ask them to write, they
34:41
will never express a full thought again.
34:46
I think every leader should give themselves space to formulate
34:53
their thoughts in a way that works for them.
34:57
So one of my very good friends needs what he calls an
35:00
accountability buddy. He does his best thinking in
35:04
dialogue and when somebody's pushing him to get to the next
35:09
step. But then we'll call him two
35:11
weeks later and say, did you do the thing?
35:14
Writing works for me, but it might not work for everyone.
35:18
So I think it's, I know that there is a feeling out there
35:22
that like, unless you've written a book, are you even an
35:25
important thinker in the space? Yes, you are.
35:27
You absolutely are. It doesn't matter what form of
35:34
what canvas works for you. Every leader should allow
35:37
themselves space for thoughts to play out, not in the constant
35:42
grind of a meeting. But what that looks like, I
35:47
don't know. And it doesn't matter.
35:48
And he might not have an output. Like one of the one of the
35:51
people I interviewed for my my second book was saying that he
35:55
goes on very long bike rides to think through things.
35:59
And when he gets to the other end, he he sits in a clearing
36:03
and makes a bunch of phone calls to put things into action.
36:08
And that's his way of processing thoughts.
36:10
It doesn't matter what it is. Leaders should allow themselves
36:12
space though, and we don't do that.
36:14
We do all of our thinking while doing something else in the
36:17
background. Writing is great because you
36:19
can't do it while doing anything else.
36:21
But if it doesn't work for you, what you need to do is replicate
36:25
the mechanism, not the activity. I think there's a lot of ghost
36:29
writing that goes on as well. And I, my preference would be
36:32
that, you know, can lead the horse to water and they, you can
36:35
add, you know, marketing team, PR team, whatever can find those
36:38
voices. And it doesn't have to be the
36:39
CEO, but that, you know, that top level of execs find the ones
36:43
that are comfortable with it. And, but they will produce their
36:45
own content. Because I think it it it comes
36:47
across very clearly in certain larger orgs sometimes when it's
36:49
being ghostwritten to me personally.
36:51
Somebody called me recently and asked me who's doing my writing
36:54
and and if I could recommend my ghostwriter.
36:56
And I was like, how very dare you, How dare.
36:59
Hey you. First of all, have you not met
37:00
me? I sound exactly how I write.
37:03
I've always been asking you for how do you have the time?
37:06
Oh, I hate that you. Just like just fine time well.
37:09
But but no, it's more than that. I get asked that a lot and it's
37:12
pet peeve. You do it at the expense of
37:15
something else. Yeah, that's true.
37:17
And and that's the only truth of it.
37:19
And when people go, where do you get the time?
37:21
The implicit thing is what? That That you're you're not
37:26
working as hard as them, or that you know you do to the expense
37:29
of something else. Sleep, exercise, time with
37:32
family, time with friends. It is a choice you make and you
37:36
sacrifice something. There is no other way.
37:38
There are no shortcuts in life. Yeah.
37:40
So a couple of quick fire questions for you then just I
37:43
think we could talk for hours with you, to be honest.
37:45
So, so insightful. Is there a future first and
37:49
foremost where legacy banks and challenges converge, or will the
37:52
divide get sharper? I don't know is the answer to
37:59
that depends what day you catch me on.
38:01
There are days when I think that we're going to have full
38:04
unbundling and the idea of that full service, full stack
38:08
universal organization will will not be profitable anymore
38:13
because of changing regulation. And then I think, well, that
38:16
will happen, but I don't know that I will be alive to see it.
38:20
And actually the next decade or so will be what you describe.
38:23
Because the reality is the, the, the big engine in any
38:28
organization is all your profitable going concern.
38:31
Doesn't matter if you're sputtering here and and losing a
38:36
bit of momentum there. If you're an overall profitable
38:40
going concern, then there's absolutely no reason or
38:43
imperative for fundamental change.
38:46
And so the the answer is short to medium term, I think we will
38:50
see that divide grow, but we will from the challenger side,
38:53
we will need to be much more honest with ourselves about the
38:59
business side of things. What role will regulation play
39:03
over the kind of next 5-10 years do you think?
39:05
Huge because the reality is if you look at if you look at a map
39:08
of the world and the hot spots where we've had successful
39:12
challengers, there are places where the regulator chose to
39:15
create an environment where capital addict requirements were
39:19
different. There were there were sort of
39:20
ways of having training wheels on from from a regulatory
39:24
perspective and there was support.
39:25
So the intent to even have them at all was a regulatory
39:28
decision. And, and so the regulator will
39:32
actually, I personally believe and hope will lean in a lot more
39:37
because the reality is with everything that's going on,
39:41
consumer protection is a much more complicated notion than it
39:45
used to be. And I mean, we haven't touched
39:46
an AI, which I'm kind of grateful for because.
39:48
It's what everyone's talking. About We thought we'd take a
39:50
break from AI to. The yes, but the reality is you
39:53
have emerging regulation around around that that will actually
39:57
change quite a lot of the dynamics of what we do.
40:00
So the regulator will will determine we're not
40:05
deterministic about outcomes, right?
40:07
But because the regulators are a lot savvier about the art of the
40:10
possible, the regulation will push.
40:13
And let's face it, we're sitting in Europe having this
40:16
conversation. Most of the real innovation
40:19
we've had was because the regulatory, the made made it
40:22
possible, made it mandatory. Perfect.
40:25
No great answers to to both of those.
40:27
So the final section which we've we've obviously forewarned you
40:31
about is the the hopefully becoming a little bit more
40:34
famous shelf of shame. Yeah, we want you to nominate
40:37
something. It can be banking, fintech,
40:39
business in general put forward and we'll vote on whether it it
40:42
makes the shelf or not. Pink credit cards.
40:46
I hate them pink credit cards I. Find the idea of cards for
40:50
ladies that are pink and I usually advertise on
40:54
international Women's Day so 1950s so pointless, so
41:01
patronising I have a credit card that I.
41:05
Can. There's quite a few of them
41:07
actually. There's quite a few of them.
41:09
Allow me the ability to personalise my card.
41:12
I have leader rights on my Aleka card.
41:14
I quite like that. Allow me to personalise it but
41:18
don't. No, no pink, no pink.
41:20
It's a gimmick. All gimmicks.
41:21
Pinks. Pink upsets me in particular,
41:24
she says, sitting there in all black.
41:26
But but gimmicks in general annoy me and pink can't annoy me
41:30
the most. I think we can put that on
41:32
there. I.
41:32
Agree with you. Yeah, absolutely perfect.
41:34
Well, thank you so much for your time, leader.
41:36
You've been incredible. And we'll see you again soon on
41:39
the Payment Share podcast. Thank you for having me.