WM Market Reports
Why Wealth Managers Can’t Just “Live With” Legacy Any More

(For an overview of our new report on Technology Traps, see here.)
One phrase dominates the discussion as wealth managers accelerate
their digitisation in a bid to capture vital client experience
and efficiency gains: legacy issues. It has, in fact, for years
and still all but the newest firms - or those that have made bold
modernisation moves - are struggling with legacy technology to
some extent.
Yet change is in the air, according to SS&C Advent’s Stig
Olsen, who sees attention now really turning to the question,
“What do we do to really solve this issue definitively?” For a
growing band of firms, putting real change off is no longer an
option.
Impetus is coming from a dawning realisation of the true cost of
legacy technology, it having a deleterious impact on so many
areas of performance. Crucially, outmoded technology is a serious
barrier to developing the leading client offerings firms need to
compete. The fact that relationships increasingly play out in the
digital sphere has dramatically raised clients’ data expectations
and this, Olsen observes, is where legacy technology is making
many firms fall down.
He explains: “Clients want access to ever more data that’s
flawlessly correct, and they want it in real-time. Accuracy and
speed both need to be in sync, but unfortunately legacy systems
often stand in the way.
“Delivering data from your core systems faster than competitors
is no advantage if it’s often wrong; similarly, delivering
correct data painfully slowly leaves you far behind the premium
offerings out there.”
The realities of real-time data
Moving from batch to real-time data has made clear to many firms
just how difficult data extraction can be when working off a
patchwork of legacy and bolt-on systems (possibly from an array
of vendors). In a sector marked by a frenetic pace of change
across regulation, M&A and technology, this is of course very
often the case.
Just as significantly, demand for real-time data means that
manual interventions can no long provide cover for systemic
flaws. “Previously, inefficient processes or legacy technology
could be hidden by having a team of 50 people working behind the
scenes to generate monthly client reports,” Olsen says. “But now
the expectation is for instant access to portfolio information,
you can’t hide anymore.”
On top of this is the requirement to slash the burden on staff so
they can focus on higher-value tasks, rather than be mired in
manual workarounds as operational costs continue to bite – a need
that will be particularly pronounced where compensation and
competition for talent are rising.
Unlocking opportunities
Olsen further notes that only by resolving legacy issues can the
industry unlock the opportunities for self-service it should
pursue. “The sector is recognising that some elements of
self-service might be foundational to delivering a great client
experience by modern standards,” he says. “Moving select
processes from the back-office to self-service can result in
smoother, better service as well as compelling efficiencies, and
so be a big win-win.”
The quest for true interoperability and efficient dataflows
between multiple systems means APIs (Application Programming
Interfaces) have become a crucial area of development, and
adoption is expected to rocket in the next five years as the
industry targets greater personalisation and automation. “However
rich your data, it won’t help your clients if it’s inaccessible,”
Olsen explains. “The availability of APIs - and therefore how
efficiently you can get data out of your systems - dictates how
achievable a premium offering is.”
As he emphasises, automation in client reporting
is a case in point, with advisors still often battling
spreadsheets and a mix of systems that don’t “talk” to each other
to create and validate static reports; whereas real-time,
client-configurable access to immaculate portfolio information is
increasingly “table stakes”.
Correspondingly, Olsen cautions that all automation efforts need
to be built on rock-solid data foundations - lest manual work
merely shifts focus, rather than being removed. “If you reduce
manual input but have to spend that saved time on quality control
and reconciling data, then you’ve gained nothing,” he points
out.
Possible plans of attack
So, given their need to stem spiralling operational costs,
deliver a far better experience for both clients and advisors,
and reduce the regulatory (and reputational) risks of serving
erroneous data, wealth managers are certainly not lacking
motivation to kill off legacy issues. More vexed is the question
of how to move off of legacy systems most intelligently, so that
upheaval and expenditure are contained.
Olsen points to three main paths: component outsourcing,
developing a parallel technology platform and migrating to a
single-vendor strategy. Which to choose is a nuanced decision,
with much depending on where a firm stands on its digitisation
journey and what its priorities are.
-- Component outsourcing
Opting to outsource activities like reconciliations effectively
outsources the task of keeping up to speed with the most
efficient technology, making this a compelling option for firms
choosing to focus exclusively on core competencies or those with
more limited resources. The luxury of almost not needing to think
about underlying technology has clear across-the-board appeal,
however.
Yet alignment on service expectations is absolutely crucial to
successful outsourcing relationships, cautions Olsen. “Focus on
the service you are buying in the round, rather than the
technology used to deliver that service,” he says.
-- Parallel platforms
Developing a parallel platform is far more radical – and
effortful – path, but one Olsen increasingly sees pursued in the
Nordics. Bravely, these firms are seizing on the need for
technology overhauls as an opportunity for much wider reform,
sweeping away legacy issues in their broadest sense.
He elaborates: “These firms are saying ‘Let’s just set everything
up in parallel from scratch, correctly and with the new
technology required, and then migrate everything over.’ For them,
it’s about changing organisational and cultural elements that
rest on the technology stack too. Radical technology change
can make it easier to ask ‘Is there a better, more efficient way
to do things for our organisation and client base, instead of
just twisting and tweaking what we’ve always done?’”
Tangible results in six months
Although “greenfield” development may deliver the ide- al set-up
long term, Olsen concedes that it is a daunting prospect which
may consume more resources and time than firms have to spare. As
a result, he sees single-vendor technology strategies finding
increasing favour as a way to effect dramatic change with as
little operational drama as possible.
“If you can find a provider with the competence, technology and
capabilities to take on your entire business, then working with
one vendor can slash the cost, risk and time spent on projects,”
he says. “It is possible to achieve a lot and deliver some very
tangible results in six months or even less if you choose the
right partner.”
And time is certainly of the essence. “We could be looking at
profit margins falling to a painful extent, and all the while
clients’ expectations and competition will continue to track up,”
Olsen argues. “Wealth managers need to deliver more value for the
same costs, getting more out of their systems and personnel. This
in turn is putting big pressure on vendors to develop efficient
solutions and change programmes underpinned by that
principle.”
Building the business case
Acknowledging the shared ambitions – and challenges – that should
be inspiring wealth managers to throw off the shackles of legacy
technology, what then differentiates the leaders from the
laggards? For Olsen, this is a question of perspective and
preparedness.
“Where management teams understand legacy issues cannot be
allowed to linger on, they are jumping on to take a professional,
structured approach to solving them now before revenues start to
slip,” he says. “They will be able to make changes the right way
and at their own pace.”
In worrying contrast are those that seem to be deferring
definitive change almost indefinitely, until such point that
irreparable damage may have been done. But although it may be
extremely tempting to put off significant technology change,
Olsen warns that we are entering an age where legacy weaknesses
will be swiftly punished.
He sums up: “Disappointing on client experience could lead to
gradual losses, but more likely, lots of revenue irrevocably gone
almost in a flash. Doing everything you need to be competitive
and efficient then will be too late.
“Your solution will never be better than the weakest link in your
technology, and wherever you have an inefficiency or something
that’s not working that will always negatively impact what you
offer clients and how profitably you can operate. A lot of firms
can’t live with legacy much more.”
This forms part of this publication’s latest research report,
“Technology Traps Wealth Managers Must Avoid”. Download your free
copy by completing the form below.