The case for more product innovation in mobile money and branchless banking

by Toru Mino : Friday, October 14, 2011

This is the first post in a five-part series about product innovation in branchless banking.

The promise of branchless banking is increased access to finance for the poor and new revenues for providers of all stripes. That’s not happening yet.

CGAP counted 22 branchless banking services with more than 1 million registered users; we also counted more than 70 others which have not reached that threshold (as of Q1 2011). That’s about a 1 in 4 “hit rate”. If we look at services which have launched since 2007 (i.e. since M-PESA got everyone excited) and acquired more than 250,000 active users (a better indicator of traction in the market than registrations), success rate drops to 1 in 15. Not so hot.

This might just be the growing pains of firms still figuring out how to operate in this new space at the intersect of several industries (mobile, banking). Some providers have fallen into regulatory ruts, some are finding it hard to build robust agent networks, while still others are struggling to make technology platforms stable (often wrestling with vendors who provided them in the first place). In short, there is a lot of worthwhile work going on laying the rails for branchless banking.

But all this supply-side effort seems to have crowded out the demand-side question of whether consumers actually want the products on offer. Why are we so certain that a liquid wallet with P2P and bill pay functionality is the “killer app”? Partially because people saw it succeed in Kenya (though nowhere else yet). Partially because most telcos don’t want to take the lead on more complex financial services, and they’ve convinced themselves they don’t have to. And partially because it seems the question is just not getting asked.

Despite this, the data seems to beg the question: With nearly 100 live branchless banking implementations worldwide but so few gaining traction with consumers, could the product be the problem?

Some higher income clients can be captured by convenience and the cool factor of easier money movement. But the mass market of low-income, unbanked consumers is different.  The microfinance sector has known for some time that these consumers have a range of financial service needs which are deeply felt but often poorly met (even by the microfinance industry itself). CGAP has called for more attention to consumer wants and deeper thinking about converting the inactive to active. There are certainly some innovative products out there. These include Mobile Venture Kenya’s adaptation to mobile phones of Stuart Rutherford’s P9 product, which blurs the lines between credit and savings. We’re also intrigued by the airtime-based life insurance with MicroEnsure and Tigo in Ghana.

Unfortunately we don’t see enough of this happening. There are three main reasons:

1. Firms are firing on all cylinders just to get a basic offering to market. It can be an all-consuming process. But why kill yourself pushing to launch without devoting adequate thinking to whether your offering will be attractive to clients?

2. Many managers struggle to source meaningful insights about consumers.  This is especially true for new products (where traditional focus groups or quick-hit surveys may not surface underlying needs) or for companies moving across sectors (either MNOs into financial services or banks extending their customer base to the bottom of the pyramid). Managers need better tools to understand consumers and convert insights into product ideas.

3. Existing product development processes often make launching new products a high-stakes game for the manager pushing it. New products often aren’t really tested until commercial launch, by which time it is costly to make changes. Many firms would benefit from a rapid prototyping process that puts product concepts to the test early and often in the hands of real consumers. Building out new products would be much less risky and expensive.

CGAP’s Technology and Business Model Innovation Program is partnering with at least 3 providers to launch Product Labs that demonstrate new ways of understanding clients, testing ideas and designing breakthrough products. This blog series will say more about what the Labs will look like, explain what we’ve learned about product innovation in other industries, and in the final post have a guest blogger announce the first Product Lab.

- Sarah Fathallah, Toru Mino, Mark Pickens

Comments: Comments and trackbacks are open.

13 Comments RSS 2.0

  1. October 14th, 2011 at 8:30 am, Jim ()

    Your perspective on the lack of success for these services makes lots of sense, and it is the same experience felt in many products that lack effective user participation in the design and development process. I’d highly recommend inclusion of Human Centered Design methodologies to the development process, and in fact it might be possible to partner with IDEO.ORG since introduction of these techniques to eliminate poverty is their core mission and IDEO is one of the best in the business.

  • October 14th, 2011 at 10:46 am, Zimbabwe Mobile Banking Services Launch Chart a New Era « Near Field Communication (NFC) / Smart mCommerce ()

    [...] The case for more product innovation in mobile money a&#1…By Sarah Fatallah, Toru Mino, Mark PickensThis might just be the growing pains of firms still figuring out how to operate in this new space at the intersect of several industries (mobile, banking). Some providers have fallen into regulatory ruts, some are finding it hard to build robust agent …CGAP Technology Blog [...]

  • October 14th, 2011 at 11:14 am, Mark Pickens ()

    Interesting you should mention that, Jim. One of the directions we’re investigating is how a design thinking approach can lead to deeper consumer insights than traditional market research and faster, more effective testing of product concepts. Stay tuned!

  • October 14th, 2011 at 12:32 pm, Jesse Fripp ()

    Thanks once again to the CGAP team for highlighting this critical point. Over a 20 year history of partnering with more than 250 development finance institutions, SBI’s own experience reinforces the “client is king/queen” reality. The alternative delivery channels revolution just demands this continued focus in new ways, given the latitude for product/service innovation opportunity available through the new technology platforms. Incorporating rigorous quantitative market research and demand segmentation into ADC design is a critical complement to more qualitative approaches like focus groups and intercept surveys, in our experience. Product pilots through ADCs are an excellent way to go, given the combination of relatively inexpensive roll-out, and ability to tightly target and monitor uptake and feedback from the marketplace. Perhaps the CGAP team could consider developing/hosting an “ADC product/innovation wiki” or equivalent, so that innovation and successes/failures can be more broadly and effectively captured and shared across the growing range of ADC implementers?

  • October 15th, 2011 at 2:15 am, The case for more product innovation in mobile money and branchless banking | Banking Innovation | Scoop.it ()

    [...] The case for more product innovation in mobile money and branchless banking Mobile banking, microfinance, technology and access to finance – the CGAP Technology Program, co-funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, seeks innovative technology approaches that will make finance more accessible. Source: technology.cgap.org [...]

  • October 15th, 2011 at 6:22 am, Miguel Jóia Santos ()

    How can we get more information about the product Lab? I am interested in defining the Microfinance risk profile in Mozambique and build an automated credit scoring model. This development will be supported by intensive training of loan officers in the field.

  • October 17th, 2011 at 4:32 pm, Sarah Fathallah » The case for more product innovation in mobile money and branchless banking ()

    [...] post in a five-part series about product innovation in branchless banking, originally posted on the CGAP Technology blog and co-authored with Mark Pickens and Toru [...]

  • October 19th, 2011 at 8:47 am, Francis ()

    Good article.

    Rings very true.

    Uganda’s MM market is pretty hot and growing right now.

    SCYFY Tech is very interested in the lab. Keep us posted.

  • October 20th, 2011 at 9:41 am, Sarah Fathallah » Faster horses or better insights? ()

    [...] on product innovation in branchless banking, originally posted on the CGAP Technology Blog. In the first we described how developing products beyond payments is one part of driving scale for providers, [...]

  • October 21st, 2011 at 12:12 pm, Richard ()

    My question is what kind of market research approaches CGAP thinks are better than the usual surveys, or do you mean more of that?

  • October 27th, 2011 at 12:07 pm, Sarah Fathallah » What can we learn from selling soap? ()

    [...] product innovation in branchless banking, originally posted on the CGAP Technology blog. Read the first and second posts. This post includes a detailed presentation of CGAP’s analysis of 23 firms [...]

  • October 28th, 2011 at 7:04 am, Mark ()

    Richard, Stay tuned to the 3rd and 4th blog posts in the series where we will talk about the kinds of more observational and prototype-driven approaches to understanding what clients want. That’s not to say surveys don’t still play a role, but it’s not uncommon to get different insights from asking what clients want (surveys) vs. watching what they actually do (more observational techniques).

  • January 17th, 2012 at 3:29 pm, syed jan ()

    I am interested in studying the acceptance and use of the products that bb offers in Pakistan because we have not seen the growth that we were expecting in the beginning. It might be for many reasons but the one that is relevent to this discussion is that users opinions must be taken both from the design and use perspective. Please guide me if possible on what issues are worth researching if we are studying user behaviour of bb acceptance from the Pakistan perspective and whether that would be a good idea.
    Thanks

  • Leave a Reply