Accelerated by the pandemic, the way your clients and intermediaries wish to interact, partner, and buy has digitally changed. Asset Managers have responded by re-imagining their organizational selling models. The evolving external, internal, hybrid wholesaler strategy is a prime example. It is imperative that the Asset Manager’s distribution architecture – the underlying technology, data, and analytics – helps to fuel that change. To do so, our industry needs to overcome its historical ROI challenges when it comes to its distribution architecture spend.
Not too long ago, a typical operational outsourcing project went something like this:
When Sergio Romo was converted from a lifelong relief pitcher to an "opener" in 2018, this forever changed the face of baseball, and this change was fueled by data. In Part 1 we covered why your Distribution Intelligence (DI) team needs a seat at the distribution strategy table and why getting buy-in from the implementors who will exercise new approaches in the field is as important as deriving the idea itself. As DI continues to evolve, we dive deeper into how DI can play a vital role in bending your cost curve, and how to effectively implement it across your organization.
In today’s highly competitive market, Fund Treasury departments are being asked to execute the seemingly impossible task of meaningfully bending the cost curve of their operations, while balancing ever-increasing regulatory requirements, business risks, and product complexities. To meet these challenges, Olmstead believes that fund oversight must transform from a traditional process-based operating environment to a data-centric, risk oriented control model.
If you are like me, you have solicited multiple bids for a home improvement project where cost has often started out as the leading driver for selecting a contractor. However, as the project progresses you quickly realize there is more to a project than simply the price. As construction delays pile up, phone calls go unreturned and your frustration grows, buyer’s remorse may set in. While cost is important, there are other required attributes such as reliability, responsiveness, quality, creative solutioning, and meeting agreed upon deadlines when selecting the right partner. The same is true in selecting a custody and fund accounting business partner.
The multi-affiliate operating model is increasingly under review as asset managers seek synergies from their infrastructure to bolster their margins. Whether firms have intentionally structured a multi-affiliate business model or possibly find themselves running multiple platforms due to acquisitions, these redundant platforms are obvious targets to drive organizational agility while improving margins. Some of the initiatives intended to rationalize the models have been announced publicly and their stories highlight the need to have a clearly defined roadmap, buy-in across the impacted entities, and measurable goals defining success.
In a quest for differentiation, investment managers are now more than ever focusing on sales, marketing and client servicing functions in hopes of enhancing sales results and elevating their clients’ experience. To enable and empower the market facing personnel, internal positions like Head of Distribution Intelligence are becoming commonplace, while the technology spend on solutions across the client engagement spectrum is amped up.
Highlighted by the recent activity of acquisitions, service providers are investing significant resources in developing their capabilities to provide investment managers with an end-to-end platform to support their operating model. The goal being a comprehensive, integrated technology solution with a single version of the truth that can be leveraged to support a manager’s needs across the increasingly blurred lines of the front, middle, and back office. Assessing this evolving landscape is integral in establishing the operating model that will best support an investment manager’s growth strategies.