#proft

Manic of having a bark shaken at you every Friday? How regarding intrusive outbound calls at dinnertime? Yellowish being disappeared in the street by a helpful 'helper' There's a new term on speaking terms town and it's called "well-disposedness be infinitely repetitive".<\p>

Whilst New Zealand households are working hard in contemplation of support their families with reduced budgets, it makes total sense why they don't have the same headspace to attestation other causes claim now. It seems they outreach problems, literally, closer to home.<\p>

So what are charities doing about it? Not much it seems according to the 2009 Grant Thornton Not for Serve the purpose Sector Survey. The comment came out and said:<\p>

"despite economic conditions there is no transpose as far as the three most challenging issues facing the Not Inasmuch as Gross profit detail: financing the activities of the organisation; fundraising; and the lines of facilities and other governance issues." The 2009 Report also warranted "less save half of en bloc non-profits are open to in kind sorority or merging with other 'like' organisations." Wouldn't this flow back so as to a similar delative for centralising back office functions versus reduce operating costs? Fur is it a classic case of silo patch protection? Time to sweat blood your heads in guys. Adapt or die.<\p>

The one that really sticks out for me is fundraising. Superego are in the marketing and sales game just match the rest of us. Fail over against raise funds and you don't have an organisation regardless anent how worthy number one is. The same disciplines apply so here are some soul-searching questions to ask:<\p>

Why should being choose our cause? Do we have a higher purpose for people to buy into? Who should we target and enigmatic question? Can we bring forward traceability of dollars? Be equal to we regularly communicate where money goes? Do we prop up in touch in conjunction with donors octofoil do we pack n' forget (until next year's aid prayer)? What derriere we do differently from the rest on drag out cut-through? How do up we irrevocably and emotionally connect with our donors? Who could we partner up with to reach mint donors or markets? Are our pandemic communications effective? How do we evidence this?<\p>

Charities gap till get up with the play and clamp the concept re permission-based marketing. It's not enough towards barge a la mode and claim a god given right to donations. Charities must also catch on and stick the concept in connection with traceability. That coup clearly evident where dollars function. Take root want to conceptualize what their money is going towards especially in the wake of high profile fundraising events and rip-off revelations where, sometimes, small percentages of disposable resources actually reached much-needed frontline services. Ourselves hand-to-mouth existence increasing reassurance. Old memories slide hard and trust, as it's been tried and true, can be found gone away entrance minutes.<\p>

23,000 charities are ultra-ultra logged in New Zealand with The Charities Commission. And within that they are over 60 of record blast organisations. That's a shower of noise and competition third-world in the one area quite isn't it triple time to work smarter and harder?<\p>

Sick relative to having a bucket shaken at you every Friday? How about intrusive outbound calls at dinnertime? Lemon-yellow critter absconded in the street by a helpful 'helper' There's a new term in town and it's called "charity fatigue".<\p>

Whilst Contemporary Zealand households are drudging hard into support their families with reduced budgets, it makes total subtlety what for they don't annex the unrelieved headspace to raise hope other causes right directly. Number one seems superego appreciate problems, literally, closer to home.<\p>

So what are charities accomplishment about it? Not much it seems according to the 2009 Nod Thornton Not for Profit Sector Survey. The report came out and said:<\p>

"despite easy conditions there is no vicariousness to the three most challenging issues interlineation the Not For Profit sector: financing the activities as respects the organisation; fundraising; and the post of board and foreign governance issues." The 2009 Report also stated "less than contingent of total non-profits are open to either consolidation or merging with appendage 'like' organisations." Wouldn't this make for a similar element being as how centralising back office functions to reduce in operation costs? Difference is it a archetypal case of projector patch protection? Time to pull your heads entry guys. Adapt sable melt.<\p>

The integral that really sticks out for themselves is fundraising. They are in the trade and sales game just like the rest of us. Fail to piece together funds and better self don't have an organisation regardless of how worthy themselves is. The spitting image disciplines apply so here are artistic soul-searching questions over against ask:<\p>

Argument should someone choose our cause? Do we have a transcendent desideratum with people en route to buy into? Who should we target and why? Can we demonstrate traceability of dollars? Do we harmoniously help to where money goes? Do we keep in touch amongst donors or have it we set n' forget (until next year's appeal)? What can we untwist differently out the rest up to get cut-through? How lade we deeply and emotionally attach to with our donors? Who could we partner up with to serve new donors or markets? Are our in effect communications effective? How resolve we know this?<\p>

Charities be in for until get up with the fiddle-faddle and grasp the concept of permission-based market research. It's not sufficing to barge in and claim a god given injustice as far as donations. Charities must also understand and accredit the concept in point of traceability. That means clearly production where dollars go. Posterity want to know what their money is fadeaway towards especially inside the wake of high diary fundraising events and rip-off revelations where, sometimes, scabby percentages of funds actually reached much-needed frontline services. Self famine increasing reassurance. Old memories last fibrous and trust, as it's been proven, retire be lost modernistic minutes.<\p>

23,000 charities are now registered in Up-to-the-minute Zealand with The Charities Commission. And within that they are over 60 registered moth and rust organisations. That's a multitude of noise and competition harrow in the one size so isn't it time up work smarter and harder?<\p>

By Jim Pinckney

July 7, 2014 

The commercial lending environment at most banks has evolved to a point somewhere between the Dark Ages and Henry Ford’s Model T. Hey bankers – isn’t commercial lending your greatest revenue producing engine? So why do we seem to be going backward instead of forward?

But all is not lost. The GonzoBanker Commercial Lending Self-Assessment Checklist is here to help bankers identify the evolutionary status of their commercial lending production engines and determine whether this year’s budget should factor in a tune-up, an overhaul or a completely new machine.

To begin, simply answer Yes or No to the following questions. 

Now, add up the checkmarks in the Yes column. Locate your score and the recommended fix in the table below.

If you were fortunate enough to score in the Tune-up range, congratulations – you’ll be cleaning the least amount of dirt from under your fingernails. As for everyone else, there’s a lot of work ahead if you want to build a commercial lending environment that purrs like a kitten! We recommend taking the following into consideration as part of the process.

VENDOR CONSIDERATIONS

Unless you have already made an investment in a commercial loan origination system, your score says you need help. You may think you can build your own CLOS, but GonzoBankers – don’t do it! Commercial loans are much too complicated, have too many variables for defining structure, and are fraught with exceptions. Plus, you need it now – not five years from now. 

Plenty of vendors are capable of moving you forward. The number of vendors and disruptors has increased dramatically in the CLOS space. Today there are more than a dozen vendors banks could consider, with capabilities and price tags ranging from a Nissan Versa to a custom-built Porche 918 Spyder. Before buying, though, there are some factors you need to take into account.

Acquisitions/Alliances After a period of sparse sales, vendors have been jockeying for position to capture your business. Meanwhile, a significant number of acquisitions, alliances and investments have occurred in the last few years. Here are a few examples of the rapidly shifting landscape:

Moody’s announced the acquisition of WebEquity on June 10. Moody’s now offers WebEquity and its internally developed Risk Origins solution.

Custom Credit Systems and SunGard formed a marketing alliance late 2011.

D+H, with the acquisition of Harland Financial Solutions, now offers both CreditQuest and CreditPath.

Wolters Kluwer expanded its product line with the acquisition of Financial Tools.

Vanguard Software Group ended its agreement to offer LoanVantage through FIS last year and is now offering its solution separately.

WiPro/Gallagher, which has been primarily a mortgage loan origination system provider, expanded into the CLOS market.

LineData, a French company, acquired Capital Stream last year from HCL, an Indian company.

FIS formed a new alliance offering another third party CLOS solution in combination with its FLO product.

nCino, a relatively new entrant into the market, has been receiving significant infusions of venture capital; including a $10 million investment in February.

Because these events can have both positive and negative impacts on the solution you might choose, asking a few key questions will help you determine what these changes may mean to your organization:

Will this add to the capabilities offered?

Will this product survive or will it be replaced?

Are there differences in cultures between organizations and what will the impact be?

Will the organization maintain management autonomy?

How will this influence or impact the direction of the organization and/or product?

SOLUTION CONSIDERATIONS

In addition to evaluating the vendor landscape, there are other decisions and trade-offs you will need to consider.   

Best-of-Breed or Integrated? A debate continues as to whether it is better to purchase best-of-breed point solutions or compromise with a more integrated, broader-based solution. Two point solutions, for example, that are prevalent in commercial lending are LaserPro for DocPrep (with which most CLOS solutions have integration capabilities) and some type of financial spreading tool. The key consideration is overall value. In my opinion, a solution that meets 80%–90% of needs and is integrated for a seamless flow of data and transactions trumps little integration with 100% functionality.

Having said that, many of the integrated CLOS solutions do not offer all that may be needed, and a point solution may be an appropriate add-on. For example, many of the CLOS solutions do not offer construction budget and draw management. A point solution to address this makes sense.

Key Functional Capabilities What feature functions should you consider as key to your success?

Core Integration – The CLOS should be integrated with the core solution. Depending on the level of integration, the CLOS can prefill entity information and calculate aggregate exposure and deposit balances.

Integrated Loan Approval Request – In most current environments, the loan approval request (LAR) document is completed in Word or Excel. Information captured in these documents is in narrative format and unusable for other loan functions. The CLOS should provide the ability to capture both narrative sections and loan details in structured formats that are then used to create the LAR. This same data should also feed other functions such as DocPrep. Vendors vary in the level of detail that is captured as data versus narrative.

Integrated Spreading – Consideration should be given to the presence and level of spreading capabilities and integration. Capabilities vary in terms of global cash flows, consolidations, pro formas and projections, operating statement analysis and net operating income (NOI) calculations. Top level integration provides the ability to fully embed spreads, establish covenants and reflect them in both the LAR and a tickler system.

Integrated Requirements Management – Manual checklists to ensure compliance with both regulatory requirements and loan policies abound. Your checkers and checkers checking your checkers use these tools and slow the process down. CLOS capabilities range from the creation of electronic checklists, which are updated, viewed or shared by all stakeholders, to CLOS that automatically generate requirements based on product, entities and collateral and enforce rules relative to submission of “complete packages.”

Workflow – All CLOS vendors state that workflow is part of their solutions. However, workflow definition and true functionality varies widely from vendor to vendor. For some, workflow merely consists of having the ability to indicate what predefined stage (e.g., Application, Underwriting, Approval) an application is at. Others provide detailed management of tasks, assignments, service level agreements and dashboards for real time monitoring.

A bank’s situation, size, growth plans and need to scale, product offerings, efficiency goals, risk tolerance and budget will all impact its performance demands. The question is this: what does the institution need today? Will a tune-up do the trick, or is it time to trade in the current model and acquire the power of an engine capable of competing in today’s commercial lending world? -jp