Mobile banking: Identity as collateral

by Jan Chipchase : Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Simply proving who you are can present a problem for migrant workers. In many factory and manual laboring jobs the employer takes the worker’s identity card as a form of collateral to be returned at the end of the contract and/or when a replacement is found.

Without an identity card it can be difficult to sign up for a pre-paid mobile phone account – just how difficult varies from market to market, and the extent to which know your customer (KYC) requirements are enforced or indeed are enforceable. Accessing regular banking branches to withdraw or deposit money can also be problematic without an identity card since the task requires prior interaction with the employer.

In cultures with a high level of graft the police are more likely to use physical ownership of an identity card as a leverage point to exhort fines/bribes – as a risk-aversion strategy photocopies or laminated facsimiles are likely to be carried. In contexts where identity information is frequently asked – some people carry multiple photocopies. In these environments migrants make easy pickings and can fall under suspicion with the police for the simple reason that they are not local. For many migrants obtaining a locally recognized identity card, either through formal or illegal means is a job in itself.

How do the services we offer differ in a world where personal identity is collateral?

-Jan Chipchase

Comments: Comments and trackbacks are open.

One Comment RSS 2.0

  1. May 22nd, 2010 at 8:31 am, Scott Stefanski ()

    Jan,
    This is an interesting take on the question of identity that is generally not getting enough attention. Typically I hear about how does service provisioning need to change due to identification limitations (i.e. using voice print authentication in lieu of a card for accessing an account via mobile).
    Proportionality seems to be the buzzword in this arena, and I think can apply just as well to how services might be modified as well as how they might be accessed. The gist is that assurances behind identification need not be bullet-proof in order to improve some (emphasis on the word some) level of access and services. If I can extend personal assurances (willingness of someone in my social network to vouch for me) beyond current relationships, might I be able to reduce risks for some transactions? Simularly, and direct to your question, might we consider various levels of service commensuate with levels of assurance? Already there are examples of ‘simple’ savings accounts with low maximum balance thresholds that allow an individual to begin saving without having to prove identity with 100% level of assurances or guarantee. Would be happy to share more on this if you’re interested….stefanski@bazaarstrategies.com
    Congrats on Frog move.

Leave a Reply