Archive for: Guest Blogger

Joep Roest is a Financial Inclusion Specialist with the Pacific Financial Inclusion Programme (PFIP). PFIP is a Pacific-wide programme helping to provide sustainable financial services to low income households. It is a joint project of the UN Capital Development Fund (UNCDF) and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and has received additional funding support from the Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID) and the European Union. The programme is based at the UNDP Pacific Centre in Suva Fiji.

Papua New Guinea (PNG) is a country so complex it defies easy description. A place of such diversity it hosts 850 distinct languages for a population of about 7 million. The population figure, mind you, is only a guess as nobody really knows. The landscape is so rugged that the capital, Port Moresby has no road link to any other city. To get anywhere in PNG, you walk, fly or take a boat. As such, it was only in the 1930’s that the first Western gold miners started to penetrate the interior and “discovered” the densely populated highlands where the bulk of the population lives. The miners were a sign of things to come as PNG rides the crest of a gargantuan resource boom. Over the last few years, PNG has become notorious for its high levels of crime which is a major preoccupation of all who live and work there.

State of play in PNG

Against the backdrop of PNG’s security issues and difficult geography, a means to save, store and send money is desperately needed. Mobile money looks to be the answer and typically for PNG, things have developed in their own unique way. In the last half year three providers have launched very distinct offerings, all on the same Telepin platform. Interestingly, it is not a line-up of the usual suspects as both the postal service and an MFI have entered the fray. PNG now plays host to Post’s Mobile SMK, Nationwide Microbank’s MiCash and Digicel’s (of Haiti fame) Cellmoni, with more rumoured to be waiting in the wings.

Both Post and Digicel have opted for a virtual wallet product while Nationwide has developed a real-time linkage into their core banking system. To make matters even more interesting, both Post PNG and Nationwide Microbank have partnered with Oceanic Communications Limited (OCL) to manage their agent network. Confused yet? It gets better; OCL does most of Digicel’s airtime distribution yet does not provide agency services for Cellmoni. That is, at least, where it all stands now.

Airtime distributor

As we all know, mobile money is hard, especially in places like PNG. A successful mobile money operation has to be excellent at everything, all the time. Building and maintaining an excellent agent network may be hardest part of all. It takes tremendous investment in time, resources and energy for it to work. Unfortunately there is no quick fix or technological silver bullet that ensures success. It is a long, inglorious slog. Who wouldn’t want to farm it out?

That is where OCL comes in. As an airtime distributor they seem ideally placed to play a role. They make money by getting airtime (electronic and scratch) out to the furthest reaches of this challenging country and take cash in return. Airtime distributors are operationally minded businesses where solid processes are the cornerstone of profitability. In OCL’s case, they have established relationships with 12,000 resellers. From their interactions with these resellers, they have years of data that can help predict liquidity needs and identify resellers who are prime candidates for becoming successful agents. Admittedly, airtime distribution is a far cry from mobile money agent management, yet many of the same capabilities come into play.

The opportunity

OCL is now doing much of the hard stuff on behalf of its two partners. They manage agent recruitment and training, agent monitoring and liquidity management. This frees up the mobile money operators to concentrate on their offerings. There is also the compelling possibility that OCL could drive agent interoperability and standardization of the agent experience across partners. It would make their management of the network simpler, drive down their costs and make it easier to recruit agents. This seems especially likely, as all the current products are on the same platform. Both agents and customers stand to benefit. Agents won’t have to maintain separate balances. Customers will benefit from a broader agent network, unified customer experience and an even playing field for all competitors, ensuring competitive offerings.

Will we see OCL shape mobile money in PNG due to their central role? More generally, will third-party providers become a force for standardization and interoperability in other markets?

So far…

It seems to be working. OCL’s two partners have been able to quickly expand far beyond their brick & mortar footprint. Nine months in, customer growth is strong and accelerating. If developments so far are anything to go by, there will be a lot more to write about over the coming months.

- Joep Roest -

This is a guest blog by Ignacio Mas, an independent consultant who has written extensively on mobile money.  He is former Senior Advisor with the Financial Services for the Poor team at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and at the Technology and Business Model Innovation Program at CGAP. 

Mobile money feels right for mobile network operators (MNOs): it is an extension of the basic prepaid platform and distribution networks they already operate. Mobile money does require greater surveillance against fraud and money laundering measures, but it’s all fundamentally about secure messaging.

From a telecoms regulation point of view, mobile money is another instance of a value added service and those tend to receive a light regulatory treatment. All the specific regulations that pertain to the safety and soundness of mobile money –who can issue accounts, conditions of service, data security and privacy standards, supervisory treatment, consumer protections, etc.— should be the domain of the banking regulator.

But MNO participation in retail payments presents competitive challenges which banking and telecoms operators will need to monitor closely and perhaps address jointly. The problem is that MNOs are both component suppliers and direct competitors to banks wanting to offer mobile financial services. There is a risk that MNOs transfer market power from their core market to the emerging retail mobile payments market, in such a way as to effectively shut banks out of mobile payments. In the future, most financial services can be expected to have a mobile component, so such a situation would have severe implications for competition in the financial inclusion space more broadly.

This is quite understandably spooking many banking regulators into preventing MNOs from playing directly in the payments/banking space. That’s unfortunate, the fact is that we need to enlist MNOs to push the frontiers of financial access, while guarding against any potential abuses of market power on their side. We need to allow MNOs to contest the market without dominating it.

Authorities need to identify specifically those components of mobile communication services over which MNOs have bottleneck control and which are essential for the provision of mobile financial services. One asset MNOs control is the SIM card – a smartcard which identifies every mobile user. Access to the SIM card provides benefits in terms of security, since SIM cards may contain pre-loaded security keys which can implement end-to-end data encryption from the mobile handset all the way to the transaction authorization server. Access to the SIM card might also enhance the usability of services, since the SIM card controls the on-the-phone menu onto which mobile money can be incorporated directly.

However, there is no precedent worldwide for establishing equal access rules to SIM cards, as unbundling the SIM card might have severe implications for the security of mobile networks. In any case, the problem of proprietary control over the SIM card is mitigated if banks can build an equivalent service through other means.

MNOs also control the phone’s communications (or bearer) channel. The more common channels, such as voice, SMS (the protocol underlying text messaging) and packet-data (under various flavors such as GPRS, EDGDE, 3G or HSDPA), are broadly made available by MNOs under standard commercial offers. In this case, it should be fairly easy to establish and monitor a requirement of non-discriminatory access by banks and third-party providers of mobile money services to these channels. Since the market for these bearer services is sufficiently large and lucrative for the MNOs, we can expect MNOs not to over-price their voice and SMS services or to degrade the quality of their service specifically to lock out banks from using them to construct competing mobile money services.

The challenge is with a less common bearer service called USSD (Unstructured Supplementary Service Data), which is not widely commercialized by most operators. (You may recognize it as the service you use when you are asked to dial a sequence of numbers starting with star and ending with hash after you buy a scratch card.)  The session-based nature of USSD presents two strong advantages over SMS as a channel for mobile financial services: it lends itself to implementing network-based menus which makes it easier to use, and it entails no storage of messages anywhere which makes it more secure. It may also be more feasible than using voice in countries where voice tariffs are still expensive, or packet-data in countries where most people still use simple phones. For banks without access to the SIM card, USSD may be the only realistic option.

In this case, simply stating non-discriminatory access to the USSD service may not suffice as long as USSD is used primarily for banking services, since MNOs may price it specifically to preclude competition from emerging in mobile financial services. Therefore, the telecoms regulator ought to monitor USSD pricing to see if it bears a reasonable relationship with the price of alternative access channels such as voice and SMS. Moreover, an operator might be forced to offer USSD to other mobile financial service providers provided that: (i) the operator has an installed USSD capability (even if it is only used for the MNO’s own purposes, such as airtime top-ups), and (ii) the operator is offering its own mobile financial service through a proprietary channel (e.g. SIM-based) not available to others.

These actions –monitoring MNOs for potential discriminatory pricing and service quality on voice and SMS, and monitoring USSD offers to prevent undue denial of service or pricing that does not bear sufficient relationship with the pricing of other channels— fall in the first instance in the domain of the telecoms regulator, since these are purely about the channel and not higher-level financial services. Of course, the banking regulator could play a vigorous role in helping banks present their case to the telecoms regulator if they feel discriminated against, or to competition authorities if the situation warrants escalation or the telecoms regulator lacks the necessary powers to intervene.

Authorities ought to pass a clear and strong message that MNOs can play at the financial services layer if they play fairly at the communications layer. This might be expressed around a protocol or memorandum of understanding signed jointly by the banking and telecoms authorities, stating how the various authorities will work together and laying out the competition standards to which they will hold MNOs.

This regulatory vigilance will be essential until such time when everyone has a smartphone and the phone (rather than the SIM card) can perform locally all security and menu presentation services. At that point, banks will have credible options to build their own mobile financial services with minimal control by the MNOs. Banking will just be an app on your phone, which anyone can download. That competitive nirvana is now more imaginable than ever, but it is still a ways off in developing countries.

- Ignacio Mas

Pablo García Arabéhéty is an independent consultant who focuses on business model innovation in the mobile and environmental industries.  He has previously worked at the Organization of American States and the Innovation Lab at the Inter-American Development Bank.

Last December, Starbucks announced that during 2011 it processed 26 million transactions in the US through its mobile payment application. While this news was anecdotal for traditional financial service providers such as banks and credit card companies, it showed mobile network operators (MNOs) the speed with which they can be left out of the business. Their only income in this case was the data traffic generated to complete the transactions.  It is not news that the Average Revenue per User (ARPU) continues to decrease and mobile financial services are a great opportunity to reverse this trend. In mature markets such as Western Europe, the decline in ARPU has already led to a reduction of revenue. In Latin America the continued expansion of the subscriber base still enables revenue growth, but this trend will not last forever.

Source: Strategy Analytics 2012

I recently met with Tom Elliot from Strategy Analytics, a Boston-based consulting firm to discuss these issues.  Tom stressed that nowadays it is hard to find an MNO that is not developing some kind of financial service, but that nonetheless the business model is still uncertain, and what works in certain contexts is hard to replicate successfully in other markets.  Strategy Analytics’ forecasts for 2016 (see charts) do not show many signs of innovation in the industry. Their outlook is rather an inertial one where the aggregate income of the industry will flatten or decrease according to the region. These figures are more or less within the consensus of the mobile industry consulting world.  However, the promise of financial service provision is enticing for MNOs when properly implemented. M-Pesa, Safaricom’s mobile money service in Kenya, contributes 17% of total ARPU, which represents 53% of non-voice ARPU. While Kenya has its own particular market characteristics, we can use this as a best case indicator of the potential of mobile financial services. A 17% increase in ARPU in 2016 in the case of Western Europe, for example, would push income levels above those of 2007.[1]

The threat to this promise is the model à la Starbucks, where MNOs become dumb pipes. The model for obtaining significant revenues must be one in which the carriers are efficient players of the ecosystem, beyond the mere provision of connectivity to mobile phones.  Consequently, the construction of a model that avoids treating carriers as dumb pipes in the developing world requires important definitions of the core variables of the ecosystem. Depending on the definitions of these variables, very different business models can be shaped: from a scheduled savings product for house improvement targeting the unbanked, to the Starbucks model mentioned above. In each of these models, the players of the ecosystem have different roles: banks, MNOs, retailers, credit cards, etc.   In Latin America, at the time of shaping this ecosystem of mobile financial services, carriers have decided to split the risk and the investments by partnering with banks, credit card companies or both. The two most significant initiatives in the region are Wanda, a joint venture between Telefónica and Mastercard and Transfer, another JV between America Móvil and Citibank, which officially launched in Mexico this past month.

Source: Strategy Analytics 2012

The uncertain viability of the different business models explains much of the reasoning behind this decision. However, these partnerships have direct implications when defining the basic variables mentioned above, which need to be negotiated and agreed with the partners.  Banks for example, can be very good partners for cash management and identification of customers, but not so effective for other tasks. A report published this year by the World Bank, puts Latin American banks among the most expensive in the world. Expensive partners might be reluctant to embark in low margin/high volume business models. Experience shows that banks have yet to reach out with a value proposition to the 50% or 60% of unbanked households in Latin America.  On the other hand, credit card companies can be great allies for mobile payments and short-term loans, but their record in offering other financial products such as savings products is lean.

There is still little evidence in LAC to establish the conditions under which these associations can be functional to the carriers’ need to supplement their declining ARPU.  But already some points are clear. Carriers are those with the most to gain (and to lose) in this bet on mobile financial services. Their partners do not have as much at stake. Some results that would be catastrophic for MNOs, such as the Starbucks model, would leave their partners relatively well positioned.  In an industry with the current volumes exhibited in Latin America, there is ample space for a wide array of players to explore the business opportunity to provide mobile financial services for the base of the pyramid, which will hopefully result in a more tailored provision of services to those who most need it.

 

---

[1] Strategy Analytics 2012

Nick Hughes and Gautam Ivatury are two of the founding members of Signal Point Partners, a company created in 2009 to build innovative mobile services in emerging markets. Nick was previously at Vodafone, where he started M-PESA, taking it from a concept to a multi-million-dollar business in five years. Gautam’s previous role was leading the technology program at CGAP, where he focused on branchless and mobile banking.

When we launched Jipange KuSave – a mobile-only savings product – in Kenya in early 2010, our goal was to out-compete the mattress. Back then, Safaricom’s M-PESA service was in hyper-growth phase and ramping up to become the de facto national retail payment system. But even more exciting was M-PESA’s potential as a pervasive and low-cost delivery channel for a wider set of financial services.

With this in mind, we decided to attempt for savings what M-PESA had done for money transfers – get millions of Kenyans to abandon informal mechanisms and instead become our paying customers. But if Kenyans were going to save with us instead of the mattress, we’d need to solve two challenges.

First, a ‘traditional’ bank-type savings proposition would never work. Poor people have never abandoned the convenience and enforced discipline of informal savings services for a couple of percent interest.  In Jipange, the combination of micro-loans and savings in a structured program met several customer needs, notably the need for cash when cash flow is low (liquidity) and steady progress towards a lump sum (a savings goal).

Second, our costs would need to be radically low. As ING Direct had shown, “pure” mass-market savings plays can make money, but only at high volumes and low margins. And that was in developed markets with larger account balances. For us to succeed, we would need to “throw out the rulebook” and design from scratch the most efficient and lowest-cost processes to manage relationships and transactions.

With our two “first principles” in mind, we gathered the essential ammunition for an attack on the mattress:  a radical product design, drawing heavily from Stuart Rutherford’s work; a set of web-based processes to run the product solely via M-PESA (limited physical contact with customers); a stellar project lead to manage implementation; and passionate, risk-seeking funders in CGAP and FSD Trust Kenya.

Interested readers may find it useful to read more about our product development and trials here in MIT Innovations. Also, this evaluation produced by FSD Kenya. In short, the Jipange KuSave product gave customers small amounts of credit at zero interest, while placing a portion of the credit into a “forced” savings account. As customers repaid the credit at whatever speed and in whatever amounts they wished, they became eligible for a bigger zero-interest loan. By borrowing multiple times and being forced to save a portion of each loan, they gradually accumulated savings.

The short version of our battle report is this:

1. Customers are hungry for better ways to save. They deal with cash flow complexity everyday and use a range of high cost / high risk methods to achieve liquidity. Some product designers would consider blending credit and savings as too complex – that was not our experience.  Clear, structured program, yes – but too difficult for customers to grasp, no.

2. Silicon Valley-style discipline and lean startup principles are keys to success. This starts and ends with customers. We quickly acquired a first trial cohort and modified and iterated the ‘offer’ on the back of real evidence from users.

3. A brand-new, mobile-oriented deposit-taking institution has the best chance of beating the mattress. This is perhaps the most difficult stumbling block on the way to scale. Only a regulated institution can take deposits — but hungry, highly innovative regulated institutions are rare beasts.

Chrissy Martin is a Senior Project Manager at MEDA, a non-profit organization that is partnering with Mobile Transactions on product development and agent network expansion, with a specific focus on reaching rural clients through services designed for the agricultural market.  Azalea Carisch is a Rural Microfinance Intern with MEDA who is currently based in Lusaka supporting Mobile Transactions on agent network monitoring and compliance. 

Mobile Transactions Zambia - courtesy of Chrissy Martin

Until recently, Mobile Transactions could have been considered the best kept secret in Africa.  Operating in Zambia on a shoe-string budget, they have been developing their own unique business model for electronic financial services slowly and with little media attention.  Now, as of February 2012, this small company has secured investments from three big investors, Omidyar Network, ACCION Frontier Investments, and Sarona Asset Management. All three are banking on the fact that Mobile Transactions’ experience and innovative approach to serving a range of consumers situates them to fill crucial gaps in the mobile money transactions and payments market in Africa.

Mobile Transactions offers services to both individuals and institutional customers.  For individuals, they offer both mobile wallet peer-to-peer transfers and over-the-counter money transfers through their agent network (a mobile wallet with a stored value is available but not compulsory.)  For institutions, they are providing e-voucher services to donors, governments and private corporations (including Dunavant, FAO and WFP).   They are also testing a variety of bulk payments products, including microfinance loan payments and utility payments.    Finally, they are working with Zambian Breweries on supplier payments, often referred to as business-to-business (B2B) payments.   These products are at a variety of different stages, with money transfers and e-vouchers reaching the most customers so far.  This product mix is extensive, but is not in and of itself enough to distinguish Mobile Transactions from the many other mobile payments start-ups.  So the question is what makes Mobile Transactions different?

• Mobile Transactions is an independent operator:  Readers of the CGAP Technology blog know that the market has developed past a simple MNO-led or bank-led model. Increasingly, the market is facilitating new business models which do not partner exclusively with any one mobile network operator or commercial bank.  Mobile Transactions is one of these independent companies, due in part to the regulatory environment, which allowed them to become an independent, certified financial transactions company.  This allows them to think creatively about their technology and go beyond the mobile phone when developing services. For example, the e-voucher service mentioned previously can by delivered to end-users either through a mobile wallet or via paper scratch-cards.  Paper-scratch cards are printed with a unique transaction code that is linked to the recipient’s identity and is redeemable at certain retailers.  The paper-based distribution method works better in rural communities in Zambia, where many people do not have a mobile phone but everyone trusts and understands scratch-cards, which are extensively used for mobile airtime top-up.  A mobile phone company, on the other hand, is interested in promoting their core business, airtime, and would not have an incentive to offer a service that does not require the end-user to make a transaction via a mobile phone.  Of course, there are drawbacks to the independent model, mainly the lack of an existing capital base, brand recognition, or distribution network, all of which are crucial to any branchless banking business.  Yet, Mobile Transactions has managed to find alternative solutions to provide quality service for people and institutions needing to move cash within Zambia.

• Mobile Transactions relies on independently owned and operated agents: Mobile Transactions’ original market-entry strategy looked much like M-Pesa in Kenya, which meant that they recruited and trained existing retail outlets to grow their agent network as quickly as possible.  However, they quickly saw that this strategy was not sufficient to drive customer acquisition.  The retail outlets weren’t motivated to act as sales people for a company with little brand recognition or to push a new product that few Zambians understood.   As a result, Mobile Transactions decided to recruit, train, and set-up their own “Champion Agents”.  Champion agents operate in much the same way as franchises do: each store is independently owned and operated by a trained individual who receives marketing and commercial support from MTZ.  This model has driven brand recognition and has provided Mobile Transactions with a backbone of core agents who are devoted entirely to selling their products and services.  Although this model is much more expensive than the retail agent model and therefore results in slower agent network growth, the benefits are accrued in the quality of the network, the customer-facing entity of any branchless banking operation.

• Mobile Transactions’ products are derived from a service-led approach. Mobile Transactions does not experience the low activity rates of many other mobile money operators.  Most other operators offer one product, the mobile wallet, and then build value-added services on top in order to drive higher customer use of the m-wallet.  Mobile Transactions, on the other hand, provides a variety of services (business to business payments, payments to farmers or microfinance loan payments) that respond to a specific customer need, and these services may leverage the mobile wallet, a paper-voucher, or simply an agent-based transaction (for example, the scratch card voucher mentioned previously.)  The commonality is in the central Mobile Transactions IT platform, where each type of transaction is processed regardless of the delivery channel. The challenge of this approach is scale, which is reliant on the agent network and the agents’ ability to adapt quickly to new services and to serve multiple customers segments.  As they deal with these challenges, Mobile Transactions is continually growing services through a learning-based approach to product development that allows it to develop services based on Zambia’s market realities, rather than success from other markets.

Mobile Transactions’ model is not without its challenges, as any member of the company’s small and dedicated staff will tell you.  However, the experience of this independent operator with a service-led approach challenges many of the commonly held assumptions about mobile money implementation, and their patience is starting to pay off.  Our guess is that it won’t be a secret for much longer.

To commemorate the 2nd anniversary of the Haitian earthquake, we are running a few blogs on the mobile money industry that has developed in Haiti over the past two years. The consulting firm Dalberg has recently completed three pieces of research on the Haitian market as part of Haiti Mobile Money Initiative (HMMI). You can read their Haiti mobile money case study here and their research on the NGO experience of plugging into mobile money here.  

Today they release the third piece of research on the payments market, specifically on the topic of market segmentation. Our guest authors are Vicky Hausman, Yana Watson, Matt Shakhovskoy and Lorenzo Bernasconi from Dalberg.

With a year of operations under their belts, providers of mobile money services in Haiti are looking to move from a push for rapid expansion to a strategic pursuit of profitable markets. The industry’s kick-start came from a $10 million prize pool supplied by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Now as the prize mechanism nears its completion, the focus is shifting to sustainability based on supply and demand. For providers of mobile money services, we believe that a successful strategy will depend in large part on market segmentation.

The Haitian economy, though poor, is dynamic and resilient, and mobile money could fit into it in many different ways.  Establishing possible uses through research and then offering a mix of services to suit distinct groups of customers will be key to the industry’s long-term viability. Studying and prioritizing these groups through segmentation will help companies to collect the highest return on their investment.

Segmentation is particularly important in nascent industries like mobile money, since identifying early adopters and low-hanging fruit can create opportunities to grow quickly and achieve economies of scale. While it isn’t an easy process, especially in a country where data on markets are hard to come by, it can insure against wasted effort and unprofitable investments. We recommend starting by estimating the size of different segments, then prioritizing them based on the costs and rewards to serve them, and finally planning a strategy to capture the segments that present the highest returns.

To see how we prioritized the segments in Haiti and to read a profile of one of the most promising – the agricultural value chain – see our report here.

Over the past week, the world has been commemorating the 2nd anniversary of the Haiti earthquake. Today and tomorrow we will have two guest blog posts on the mobile money sector that has emerged over the last two years in Haiti. Today’s post is written by two colleagues at USAID. 

Charley Johnson is a Presidential Management Fellow at USAID. Priya Jaisinghani is a Senior Advisor to the Administrator and Director of the Mobile Solutions team.  Prior to her work at USAID, Priya helped launch the Gates Foundation’s work in financial services from 2005-2009.  

Two years after the earthquake, Haiti is rebuilding not just brick by brick, but click by click.

The earthquake left behind a government in rubble, an economy in shambles, and a people living in makeshift camps, coping with enormous loss. Against this backdrop, the possibility of progress lives not just in the resilient spirit of the Haitian people, but also in the simple power of their mobile phones.

In June 2010, USAID and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation launched the Haiti Mobile Money Initiative (HMMI). This program leveraged the private sector and the ubiquity of mobile phones to bring financial services to Haitians, 90% of whom didn’t have access to a bank account before the earthquake destroyed nearly one-third of the country’s bank branches, ATMs, and money transfer stations. Put simply, mobile money gives Haitians access to banking without building a single bank.

It worked.  In January 2011, one year after the earthquake, HMMI awarded Digicel and its partner bank, Scotiabank, a “First to Market” Award of $2.5 million for “Tcho Tcho Mobile.” Five months ago, HMMI awarded mobile operator Voila and their bank partner, Unibank, $1.5 million for “T-Cash.” While verification is still underway, data reported by the industry indicate that there are nearly 800,000 registered users.  Moreover, there are over 800 agent locations now available to serve clients. In a country where there are fewer than two bank branches per 100,000 people, this represents a near doubling of accessible financial services.

These numbers are significant, but what do they mean for the people of Haiti? Why should we care about the growth of mobile money in Haiti and the rest of the developing world?

Read the rest of this page »

Today we post a guest blog by Ignacio Mas and David Porteous, both of whom need no introduction. But just in case…Ignacio is an independent consultant, associated with Bankable Frontier Associates. He is former Senior Advisor with the Financial Services for the Poor team at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and at the Technology and Business Model Innovation Program at CGAP. David is Managing Director of Bankable Frontier Associates.

Sarah Rotman blogged recently about yet another breathless announcement about the imminent arrival of the cashless society. She said and we agree that “cashless seems a bit naïve; cash lite seems more realistic although still a big challenge.” The very first part of the challenge is actually to visualize what a “cash lite” world looks like. Is it simply an ill-defined way station on the road to cashlessness, or is there a meaningful state or goal that goes with it?

We think the latter, and for us the defining characteristic is not the amount of cash (let cash do what it will!), but the availability of alternatives for the bulk of the population. It’s freedom from cash, not absence of cash. We have coined a word which encapsulates key elements of a cash lite society: LiFi (see baptismal paper here). Like WiFi, which provides retail connectivity at the edge of the internet cloud, LiFi is about connecting people to an electronic payments grid which provides Liquidity with Fidelity. WiFi is open, general-purpose broadband; LiFi is secure, special-purpose narrowband.

A LiFi world is therefore one in which every person has an electronic store of value which they can easily use to make and receive payments in real time. Just like in places with reliable on-grid electricity, we can turn on a light on-demand, knowing that it will work and that the cost of flicking the switch will be small in relation to the benefits.

Because there is no precedent for cashlessness by fiat and cash can be counted on to still be an option for a long time to come, the key challenge of LiFi is getting people to trust and want to use the LiFi payment mechanism…because it is robust, because it is safe and because it is useful. All these attributes take time to demonstrate to the satisfaction of risk- (and change-) averse users. A LiFi approach recognizes that in two ways.

Read the rest of this page »

Our discussions on branchless banking on this blog do not often touch on the role of microfinance institutions (MFIs). The main actors in this space seem to be mobile network operators, commercial banks, larger microfinance banks and technology companies. We have done a bit of thinking on microfinance and mobile banking, notably in this Focus Note and at this Virtual Conference.

In our last post of the year, we bring the discussion squarely back to the role technology can play for MFIs. Our guest author is Leo Tobias, Grameen Foundation’s Technology Program Manager of the Solutions for the Poorest Microsavings Initiative. 

Cashpor Officer processing loan payments on mobile

Grameen Foundation’s Microsavings Initiative is a three-year project funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. It was launched in November 2009 with a goal of reaching 1.45 million new savers across 3 MFIs in the Philippines, India and Ethiopia.

Offering voluntary savings is demanding. Financial institutions compete with the alternatives that exist to formal savings accounts (home, relatives, neighbors, etc.). A common theme in our savings market research is the customer’s desire to have easy and convenient access to their funds. To deliver on those desires, our MFI partners face common technology challenges.

Here are two major challenges:

1. Front End Technologies 

To meet customer demands, financial institutions must develop delivery channels that offer accessibility and close proximity to the end client.

Selecting the right technology is an important first step. The 3 MFIs are at various stages of investigating or implementing mobile technology. In India, CASHPOR (CASHPOR Micro Credit) incorporated mobile in both their credit and savings processes. In the Philippines, CARD Bank (Center for Agricultural and Rural Development) implemented an SMS system for an on-demand savings deposit pickup service. The use of mobile phones is clearly a powerful venue for bringing the transaction closer to customers. However, it is not the only technology to be considered.

In Ethiopia, ACSI (Amhara Credit and Saving Institution) is planning to use cards (most likely smart cards) and POS devices as their first front end technology implementation. With only approximately 14% mobile penetration in the country, all indicators point to the fact that the majority of the rural poor will not have access to mobile phones in the next couple of years. In the Philippines, the majority of microfinance customers are in provinces classified as “urban” or “semi-urban”. In many of these areas, ATM machines are accessible. CARD Bank chose to provide access to the national and international network of ATMs as a feature of its voluntary savings product in addition to the use of mobile phones.

Integrating all the sophisticated technology requires the help of external providers who can bring a wide array of specialized expertise to the organization.  However, managing relationships with outside technical providers can be new and difficult since most of the technical needs of MFIs had previously been met by in-house expertise.

The MFIs are ultimately responsible for the relationship with their customers.  The MFIs therefore have to provide the training and support needed to make sure members are comfortable with and trust the technology. A component of our holistic program has been to recognize this need and to develop educational programs to introduce not only the savings products but the technology associated with them.

2. Core Infrastructure Upgrades

Read the rest of this page »

Chrissy Martin is currently a Senior Consultant at MEDA. Previously, she worked for 12 months as the Product Manager for Digicel in Haiti, which has rolled out a mobile money service called TchoTcho Mobile. Through both Digicel and MEDA, Chrissy has worked with several NGOs that are interested in mobile money services to make payments to beneficiaries of cash-for-work programs. She outlines some of practical challenges that have to be overcome to make this a reality.

Mobile Money in Haiti

There are many reasons to be excited about mobile phones as a way to distribute cash transfers, such as government payments or NGO cash-for-work programs. First, cash transfers are often sent to groups of people in multiple locations, and it can be easier to reach them via mobile than to bring them together in one place. It is also easier to track payments if they are sent electronically, which can reduce corruption and increase confidence that the right amount of money ends up with the right individuals. A third possible benefit is that relying on a network of mobile money agents who already handle cash will increase security over creating new systems for transporting cash. This was the situation in Haiti, where cash-for-work payments were made on-site at camps, which created a security risk for the bank employees who had to stand with and distribute large amounts of cash in crowded, outdoor locations. For these reasons – the potential to have a more convenient, secure, and traceable method to distribute payments – mobile cash transfers have been attempted in multiple countries from Pakistan to Niger.

Unfortunately, implementation on the ground often proves to be far more difficult than it seems at first glance. The first and most obvious challenge: not everyone has a mobile phone, let alone an account linked to their phone which can accept fund transfers. Despite all of the justified excitement over the rapid growth of mobile phones worldwide, in any given developing country a large minority of people may still not own a phone, and these people are likely the marginalized populations that are often targeted by social cash transfers. In this case, an organization (NGO or government entity) planning to implement such a program has a few choices:

Read the rest of this page »