 Great to be here, especially, you know, seeing David, Dennis, Mike in the flesh. We have been really good, you know, great followers. We're really inspired by the work that you're doing. And it's really great to be here and talk about this. What I'll be doing, you know, in this talk today is. First, we looked at a lot of these programs, which talk about customers, customer centricity, digital, a whole lot of things that everybody's talking about. And there are so many different ways to really tackle this. And what we thought was, see, while enterprises have been doing it, we actually looked back and said, what could be the ways to really enable this? And there are certain realities in terms of how we see this digital world evolving. I think that's the focus of the, you know, topic that we have. First, you know, I'll put the context or how we see customer centricity in this digital economy, and then we are going to set the stage for how we see FIBO coming in and then what other complementary aspects do we need? And that's where we see the banking industry architecture network, the buy-in coming in, and we see both as very complementary in achieving this. And that's what I'll quickly talk about. So just as an overview of the topic, we've been hearing a lot about customer orientation, almost every organization that we speak to. They have a program, they have had programs, they have planned programs. I think they all say that, yes, we are customer centric, but I think in the end, still we're having a lot of talk or probably the concept is still around orientation, customer, they're still not centric. I think that's one of the first topics that I'll start off. And then I think key element is when we look at a customer's journey, that is very different from how we manage life cycles of customers in organizations, especially banks and financial services. So that's a different element. How do we really envisage a customer's journey and what are the implications on banking and financial services? That's the second element. And given this context, we see the only way probably to realize this, to understand and be relevant to a customer and the customer's journey is interoperability. And we'll talk about what interoperability is, how we see it and how it will mean that organizations need to go beyond their boundaries into working with other organizations in collaboration. And that's the stage at which we see Fibo and Bayan really as key elements of achieving this customer centricity. So to put it in a context, everybody probably would be familiarized or be familiar with this concept of personalization, contextualization. And I think almost every organization, bank, financial services organization, they say, yes, we have this, but we're looking more on these elements. So it's always colored in the way the enterprise looks at it. So how can I offer to this customer in terms of what products I have? What can I offer to this customer in terms of the services that I do? But the ability of the enterprises to see the customer in their own world, that is what is not, we don't see that yet. And I think with digital, there are key elements that are really becoming important, that data is becoming more democratic. The customers, the people in their real world have access to more data. That particularly the access to the data, the fact that they can view various things like the financial products, how I can really invest my money, how I can probably make use of certain elements of money, who can I approach, those elements are becoming much more open because the customers are more connected. I think that's what is changing because that is where customers are saying, I am empowered, I need to do this, I no longer need to go to a bank. I'm actually want, I want to see, do you really understand what I say? Do you really understand me rather than I going to you for an account? I going to you for a loan, because these are all individual elements at which these enterprises and the customers intersect. But the real world of a customer is much beyond that. I think that's a key element. So just to put this into perspective, how we see evolution of customer centricity. If you really look at it, the point of departure was every line of business system had their own version of customer. You call it a customer ID and then they said, yeah, this is not really working. We need to have an integrated view. So what they did, I think most of the organizations, you may have a different view, but at least the organizations that we worked with, they said, yeah, you have all these transactional systems, but when we aggregate data, let's slap together one more. So there is one more customer identification, and that's the identity. That's the element that is enabling integration. But is that really customer orientation? Single view of a customer within an enterprise, it's post facto, right? And that's what is actually you're saying. I identify a customer using ABC in system A. I identify a customer using one, two, three in system B. And then I define another customer ID and then I integrate that because then that's just an attribute in these systems. So ability to aggregate data for a customer is that a single view of a customer? I think the state of the art, at least, in terms of the way we see it, just able to see the data for a customer is really not customer sentiment. Because to what extent is it driving? To what extent is it empowering you to take decisions? To what extent is it really enabling your agents to talk in an integrated way? I think that's where we're seeing limitations. We have achieved it, we don't really know what to do about it. That's something that we've seen. I think to that extent the dotted elements are where we're saying in effect customer centricity is about saying it's not about taking an ID and then shipping it off to various systems. It's about all these systems really coming together and working in the context of a customer. I think that's where really the customer centricity is really coming together. And in a networked economy, you are seeing a whole lot of intermediaries coming in. There are a lot of intermediaries who are offering or aggregating data. So those intermediaries are in between how you offer wealth services to customers. Those intermediaries are in between how you offer your retail product. So it's no longer a customer coming to your bank and saying, I want a retail product. And at a different point in time, I want a wealth product. It's actually all these intermediaries who are actually coming together and saying, these are the banks, these are the options. You no longer having a direct relationship, you're having an intermediary. And I think those are the key elements of digital where we're seeing intermediaries playing a role. So that's where we're saying centricity in a networked economy. That's one element of it, probably just to give you a different perspective on it. If you look at it, the whole financial services, banks, capital markets firms, they have been interconnected in a way. To the left, we've had all these banks interconnected through the payment networks. We've had these capital markets firms integrated through your markets, your market infrastructures, et cetera. But they have always been a separate world. The financial world has always been a separate world to a customer's world. A customer's world, a real world, is where he actually has an identity as a person. He's a parent, he's a brother, he's a sister, she's a sister as a child. And I think those key elements relevant to a customer are very different from the way financial services organizations, they're all organized as a club. I think that's interesting because the only interaction that happens between these two is where financial services organizations say, you are my customer and you are identified by, let's say, you in a set of accounts, set of loans that I have. What that means to a customer? In the end, if you look at it from a customer's world, he's actually trying to buy a house, make a payment and live alone. And buying a house is what is important to him in his world. What does that mean to a financial services? It is a very narrow context. Buying a house requires a mortgage. Yes, we have a mortgage product. I think those are the key elements. We are not really talking in that world. I think that is what is changing. That is the context that we see as really changing. We have moved from where customers really came to us when we said mobility. We're actually saying the channels instead of a branch. We're actually giving branch in a particular device called a mobile. So that's becoming accessible, but it's still a branch. When you say, yes, it's an account, we're saying, yeah, we'll give a proxy, your mobile number can become a proxy, but it's still that particular mobile number linked to an account. The moment I have different accounts, I still need to link them. So it's all these, the artifacts, the financial services, artifacts are still playing a role in the customer's world. The customer still has to deal with accounts. The customer still has to deal with mortgage products, specific APRs, etc. But at the end of the day, he's actually saying to really make sense of it. He really needs that guidance of that particular institution because it's only the institution which knows the specifics of those products. So we're still having customers really trying to understand and make sense of this financial world and financial world is actually saying, you really need to talk our language. And I think that is what is changing in digital. The financial world needs to or is looking at talking the customer's language. And that's where a huge shift is happening. The shift of control, the shift of information. I think that's really the key from where we see the customer center city really evolving. And of course, there's a whole lot of talk. Some people might say, you know, it's very futuristic. But we see this as coming. There's a lot of talk around IOTs, the immersion, the very fact that the mobiles and the devices and social, there are a lot of aggregation of information. But these are really big minds of information. I think I was in a session where Sue was talking about a very interesting case where somebody calls up and then they have the whole information about that guy, he calls up for a pizza and they say, you have these health issues. You have this recent problem, so it will probably charge you a bit more. We'll probably charge you a bit differently. And we have, by the way, we have these products, other products, etc. So the aggregation is definitely a problem. If you don't view it as in a context. So if you really look at it, a customer's world today, it's really about usage of all these devices. They're generating a lot of events. And banks are now trying to understand these events in terms of saying, how is it relevant to us? What can we do about it? How can we react to it? It's almost like saying, rather than waiting for a customer to come to me and say, I have this need, can I infer it from the data that is available? That is really the key. I think that is where the promise of all this social, IOT, the mobile, etc. and having to understand the data is. So really, it's about understanding their world, understanding their journey elements, not really waiting for them to actually click or waiting for them to say, I need this. So even before they see it, even before they say it, we are actually saying that banks are trying to understand what can we really do? What are they going to do? I think from that perspective, a customer's journey is clearly beyond a concept of a customer and concept of a firm. Really. If you think about it, banking and financial services, capital markets, they have always been an information arbitrage models just because I don't know what's the best way for my money. I actually deposit the money with you and then you give me a rate because I don't know who else to lend it to or get a better return for my money. And banks are saying, we have this, don't worry about it. We have this whole model. We know about a whole lot of people. We can actually do this wedding for you. And that's the whole information arbitrage. That's for banking. Capital markets also do the same thing. When you're connecting buyers and sellers, where the capital markets firms, the market infrastructure is actually saying, yes, we have an understanding of this market. We know these players. We will let it, but we will keep both these sides differently. Banks and capital markets firms, the models are different, but they're all centered around information arbitrage. Now, the customer needs, I think, with the information becoming more open, these models are definitely under question. Saying, for example, when you're looking at crowdsourcing, crowdfunding, whole lot of things, they're completely changing the way customers really approach, the customers really satisfy their financial needs without necessarily going to a bank, without necessarily going to a financial services firm. So this is really changing. Now, what does it mean for a financial services firm? To be integrated in a customer's world, we really need to look at it differently from an aggregation of products and services. It's no longer about saying that we have defined this product because it's an arbitrage between your savings and your loans. We actually need to really look at what is that customer really looking at. The customer wants to buy something. How can I facilitate that? So it's not about offering a customer a savings account. What is that customer doing in his life? What does he really need for his money? He just needs his money to be safeguarded till he needs it at a later point in time. But we're saying it'll be a combination of savings and you probably can do an investment. There are a whole lot of complexities there. I think that is definitely going to change. I think that we're slowly seeing that in terms of customers' preference for alternate channels of funding, etc. So in short, what we're looking at is from a customer's centricity, the key element, the key message is we are going beyond organizations. The organization boundaries are different. We are no longer looking at organizations as a set of having a clear boundary, having a set of different products and saying, this is the clear boundary I have. The boundaries are becoming fuzzier. And when we say the boundaries are becoming fuzzier, it's in terms of the scope of the services and it's also about the data. It's no longer about the data that I control within my organization. I have to ingest data beyond my organization. So that way, both from the way organizations are looking at structuring the services, defining their scope and ingesting data, which is under their control, which is within their organization and outside their control, which is ingesting data from your social mobility, etc. All these need to be integrated irrespective of how I define my organization. So that's why this is beyond an organization. And it's not just about one particular customer. It's about looking at a customer in his world and looking at a customer as a network. So he's a customer, he's a parent, he's related to a set of his spouse, he has children, he works for an employer. All these are important elements rather than looking at him as one customer and having that record and then dealing with that record. So we have all these reactive models. I think that is also key element that is changing. So for that, I think from an operability perspective, that's where we see a very important relevance of the context. We're saying, how do we really understand data? Because it's not just about data, how we really represent within our organization. It's about how we ingest data, which is out there. So that understanding the context, that's where we are really excited about FIBO and the efforts of FIBO in terms of saying data is becoming very impersonal. It's no longer organization specific. You don't talk about account at Bank A. You don't talk about account at Bank B. It's an account and interpretation of that cannot depend upon a particular organization. I think the impersonal nature of data, that's what is really interesting to set the context. I think beyond that, when we have set the context, how do we really address that need? I think many of these we have seen very interesting thing about the UPI. You must have heard of the UPI in India. It's about the universal payment. How do we really enable universal payment? How do we really ensure that customers don't really depend on a particular bank? We don't really have to depend upon the way a particular bank functions because I go to Bank A, Bank A asks me certain set of documents. I go to Bank A to transfer. It has a very different way. I go to Bank B, it has a different way. And I need to really understand, if I have a relationship with two or three banks, I really need to understand each and every bank. Though the bank says, I have done a whole lot to make it easier for you. It's still me. It's still Bank of America. It's still a HDFC bank or it's still one of those European banks, but it's still a bank. And I think that's what is changing. We're saying it's becoming impersonal. It's no longer saying, I as a Bank A have these processes. I as a Bank have process, period. It's a bank and a set of processes. So I think that's where the complementary element of interoperability, which is impersonal nature in terms of how I offer my services. That is where Bayan is coming. If you're not familiar with Bayan, I think the banking industry, architecture network, I don't know how many of you have heard it. But we're really excited about that particular element because it's about saying the way you structure, the way you scope your services, what you offer to your customers. It's no longer an exercise that you do by yourself. It's something that is collaborative. Lots of these banks realize this problem saying we spend a lot of time in plugging vendor products because the way they look at definitions of services is different from the way we look at it. We spend anywhere between six to 18 months. We spend two or three cycles, we spend millions of dollars. So all these banks came together and said, let's not do it. We don't have to do, all of us don't need to do this every time. Let's ensure that we have a standard in terms of how we scope. And that's a big, big leap. They tried to do SOA, but I think SOA didn't really get to a level where they could interoperate. Everybody said SOA was specific within an organization. They really didn't share that in terms of the scoping. I think that's where it's changing with Bayan. It's saying how we scope, how we define our services, that needs to be standardized across. I think that's where, if you understand the context that FIBO is trying to standardize, make it impersonal. If you look at the way I structure my services, my business capabilities, that becomes impersonal. If these two come together, it's no longer about a particular bank. It's no longer about the services of a particular bank or a particular financial institution, it's about a service. And then the whole paradigm shifts to saying, this particular institution does it this way to the customer saying, I want it done, who can get it done? So it's almost like a bidding war, literally. I think that's where we are truly becoming customer centric. We are not expecting the customer to align with a particular set of processes of a bank, we're expecting the banks and the whole network to align to a customer. And that key element of enabling that is becoming impersonal. You're no longer saying that I as a bank work this way. You're no longer saying that I as a bank have these set of services. I think these two are very exciting elements of customer centricity in terms of saying, I understand what you want to do. And you want a particular product. I may not be able to have to define it, but I'll be able to collaborate. I think that's where new revenue streams are also possible for banks. And I think a lot of these conversations that we are having with banks, they're saying today, so many new things are coming. So many new players are coming. We're absolutely no idea how we are going to operate. One year down the line, we are really worried about what kinds of services we could offer at a reasonable price point. What is that price point defined by? That price point is defined by the cost that I have to maintain my own infrastructure, cause that I have to define and manage my own set of services. And my peers there, they also manage the same thing. And they do it differently. Of course, it's a great job for vendors and consultants. But in the end, banks have that huge cost base with all these new firms coming in, new intermediaries coming in, new startups coming in. They're saying our cost base is not really reflecting the ability to really become relevant or be relevant. And that's because our cost bases are all based on my way of doing things. It's no longer my way of doing things. It's about a way of doing things, which I agree with my peers. So that consistency in terms of how I define my data, how I define my information, how I manage my knowledge, and how I structure my services in terms of any organizational landscape that we look at, they have arbitrary level of complexity, arbitrary. And that really varies. There's no consistency. It's just that the only thing that is common probably is they're all complex. They don't talk the same way. When does define products, it takes a huge time for them to align. And that's also within a particular line of business. So this is what is changing the impersonal nature of my landscape. How do I really move from where I am in terms of my own data dictionaries, my own way of working? I think many of the times the interesting thing about banks is we're saying our transactional systems, we cannot change it. But maybe post facto for aggregating data, when somebody asks me for AML report, I'll be able to use this. So that's a huge step. That's an interesting step. That's a necessary step. But really that is not helping them align their systems because they are going to repeat, keep on continuing their investments in their own systems, they're not able to really reduce or probably address their cost base. So what's the other way of really looking at it? We're having conversations with some of these banks where they're saying. Can I really do anything about this particular system now? I have the option of either continuing it, replacing it with a product. And what should I do about it? Because I don't even know if this particular business line is relevant to me anymore. Many of these financial services firms, they're saying blockchain is coming. Is my line of business relevant? I do a whole lot of things on corporate actions. My whole revenue is coming from these corporate actions with blockchain and the flattening of information hierarchies. Will my revenue source be preserved and what do I do about this huge system? So there's an interesting, lots of uncertainties that financial institutions are facing. I think all these at the root of it is preserving the way they work and then probably looking at aggregating data as a post-facto thing. That is what I think is a key element which is influencing their continued set of problems, their continued set of systems. I think that's what is really changing. And quickly, this particular slide is essentially reiterating what I was talking about saying as the ownership of information, how I want it served, what is it about, that is shifting to a customer. The customer is actually demanding, he's actually dictating that. So when organizations need to align to that, they're saying, I have to invest in a whole lot of translation things. I'm doing a whole lot of things where I'm offering or rolling out mobile services, I'm doing a whole lot of things where I'm actually collaborating and probably bringing new sets of services. But in effect, they're all doing the same one common thing, which is adding another translation layer, adding another channel, but still preserving their way of working, not collaborating enough in terms of saying, am I doing the same way as other organizations? Because it's no longer the fact that the customer is only interacting with me. It's no longer about one payment. But today, I think some of the conversations are saying, you know what, the audit tape was something that I thought of as a burden. But if you really look at it, that particular data is very interesting for me. If I understand where something is coming and where something is going, I really can reposition myself because today I'm stuck in the kinds of products and services I'm offering, how can I really be relevant to understanding and making sure that that particular flow when something when a broker gets a particular order, it goes down and there's a set of executing broker and then it goes down. I'm really trying to understand how I can really play a role there. So it's opening up a very different perspective where compliance was a parallel set of activities. Now it's becoming more integrated to somebody saying, can I really get some benefit out of it? And that is changing because I no longer want to see compliance as a cost base. I want to see that as a new revenue source and not just because my revenue sources are secure, my revenue sources are no longer secure. Every conversation almost is saying, none of my revenue sources are secure. Most of my trading revenues are falling. I don't know my deposits, my deposits are falling. Whether you talk to a retail bank, whether you talk to a wealth management firm, whether you're talking to a trading firm, they're saying, it's all shifting and we are absolutely having no sense. That is because we're still looking at it as a set of products and services. I think that's where it's interesting, the whole concept of being able to understand, integrate data beyond your organization and realizing that to be relevant to a particular customer, it's going beyond your organizational boundaries, it's being able to collaborate. And for that collaboration, I need to speak the same language, not just in terms of data, in terms of services too. I think that's where both FIBO and BIAN, we see we're actually having a set of cases that we're working on. I'm not able to show that yet because it's still work in progress. But we see that as key, we're really working out in some of the cases that we're seeing, though they are just kind of play models for now. But we are using that to have conversations with the institutions saying, is this our imagination context that you can relate to? And they're saying, yes, maybe. I'm not able to really appreciate that at the moment, but maybe I can really look at it probably in the next few months or probably in the next 18 to 20 months. So that's interesting. To just summarize this, I think key elements that we talked about. Enabling, I think FIBO from its ontology perspective, it's actually enabling the shift where we are saying the terminologies that we typically associate with financial institutions, accounts, investments, securities, payments. These are all financial networks. It's like the language that we use in a club, the financial services club. But how do we really translate that into something that means something to a customer in his own world as a person? It's about ownership. It's about transfer. It's about affordability. It's actually looking at, can I own something? I just want to experience something. But for all that, I need to understand what this payment is, what this instrument is, what these specifics are. I think that translation is a key element. And I think FIBO is key for enabling that particular translation. And then when we move on to services, the key thing that we are seeing, I think many of these regulatory initiatives, when Europe is talking about the PSD2 where they're saying open API, we're actually looking at opening up and I think the API world will probably see a more uptake in terms of how services are used and become open. I think that way another transition is happening where we're saying account opening at Bank A, account opening at Bank B, account services, KYC, they are no longer specific to a bank. They're becoming consistent in terms of how you define it, what is in it, how you execute it, it's up to you. But the way it looks to a customer, the way it looks to an outside person, it's consistent and that gives a flexibility to a bank saying, is KYC really a core of my business? Do I really need to do it or can I have it off to a utility? You already see that. Some of the banks are actually setting up a utility saying, this is not core to me, but it's not possible for me to do today because I'm not structured that way. I think that's where Bayan is coming in terms of helping, structuring of your system so that all those non-core ones can really be hived off, so you become more cost efficient. I think that's the way FIBO and Bayan really are exciting initiatives. We are really invested in it, we're inspired by it and we hope to have some more use cases for validation with the FIBO team as well as Bayan team.