150514_Invoke Software_InsuranceERM_Presentation
-
Upload
anne-leslie-bini -
Category
Documents
-
view
10 -
download
0
Transcript of 150514_Invoke Software_InsuranceERM_Presentation
The impact of regulations
on data infrastructure
Anne Leslie-BiniDirector • Invoke Software
Åke MagnussonPartner at Cavendi
The impact of regulations on data infrastructure
• Building an efficient Solvency II reporting solution - the
necessary groundwork
• Case study on a completed Solvency II XBRL:
Implementation in a Swedish Life Insurance company
– Starting points
– Project timeline
– Technical architecture
– Success factors
Zoom-in on EIOPA-zone preparatory phase
9
2014 • French Regulator (ACPR) XBRL data collection exercise
XBRL data collection
Zoom-in on EIOPA-zone preparatory phase
10
2015 • XBRL usage by European NCAs
XBRL data collection
Not decided yet
Alternative data format
Zoom-in on EIOPA-zone preparatory phase
11
2016 • XBRL usage by European NCAs
XBRL data collection
Not decided yet
Alternative data format
Beyond 2016: what is at stake for you?
12
… and it is now that the final outcome will be decided.
You are embarking on an ultra-marathon…
Why is industrialised reporting no longer optional?
Exponential increaseof reporting requirements
in terms of
volume and frequency
A-Students
• In theory
– Insurers who are capable of producing all their
Pillar 3 QRTs in XBRL format using
industrialized reporting systems
• In real life
– Very few, if any, insurers are in this category,
even if it is the target future state for many.
– Impact: far-reaching re-organisation of the
entire reporting and disclosure function.
• Observations
– The insurers who plan the most for the future
are not necessarily those that are the furthest
ahead with their Pillar 3 implementations.
22
The idyllic future-state…
In-betweeners
23
• In theory
– Insurers who are capable of making a Pillar 3
submission in XBRL format.
• In real life
– Yes…but using processes that are largely
manual.
– Firms are doing their best to industrialise what
can be rationalised and streamlined.
– Impact: segregation and division of the overall
reporting task according to the legacy
landscape.
• Observations
– The most representative description of the
current operational reality.
Half-way to Heaven…
« We don’t care what people say »…
24
• In theory
– In 2014 there was no mandatory obligation to
submit Pillar 3 reports in XBRL.
• In real life
– In this category are those insurers that
submitted in some other format (typically
Excel®), or those that completely opted out of
the dry-run exercise.
– Impact: Those who chose not to comply now
find themselves spending a lot of time
explaining why to the regulator.
• Observations
– Most severely underestimate the remaining
effort required for the imminent 2015 and 2016
deadlines.
– Data alone is not sufficient to bridge the
technical gap to XBRL compliance.
Fingers crossed…
Far-sighted and steady wins the race…
25
Better test than stress!
Feedback from a successful Pillar 3 dry-run implementation:
The setting
26
The company Solvency II IT environment
• Swedbank Insurance AB
• Subsidiary of one of the
major Swedish banks
• Life insurance and risk
productcts
• Approximately 2 million
policy holders
• 150 employees
• Total assets under
management 14 billion
Euros
• A pre-study including all
pillars 2011
• Implementation 2012-
2014
• First ORSA completed
2012
• Compliant with the SII
interim requirements
• IT operations
outsourced to the
Bank:s IT –function
• One policy
administration system
• Business Warehouse
part of the IT-structure
A solution for regulatory reporting is a key component and
must be a good match with the overall solvency solution
27
FSAINTERNAL SYSTEMSEXT
DatamartInsurance
system
Accounting
Custody
Unit-Linked
External Market
Data
ABC
Solution Regulatory Reporting
QRT
Finance data
Asset data
Insurance data
MgmtReporting & analysis*
Narrative
Qualitativesupervisory disclosure
Data Warehouse
(ETL flows, Repository, Fact & Dim views)
Calculations data
Cash Flows
Spreadsheets(UDAs)Other data sources
Reporting Policy, Data Quality policy, EUC policy, Reporting processes, DQMS, Documentation
Trad
FAS Regulatory S2 actual implementation 2014
29
SG meeting
Project milestone
April May June July August
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Pre-Preparations
• Contract Sign
Inception
Specification
Implementation
Production
Project Management + Change Management
Acceptance Testing
• Scoping specification• Implementation strategy
• Functional Specification• Technical Specification
• Configuration Kits• Parameterized Software• Primary Testing
• Detailed planning• WS scheduling
• Go-Live validation
• User FunctionalTest Acceptance
• User Technical Test Acceptance
• Final Sign-off document
QRT Reports
SourceSystem
Data type
DW loading
InvokeLoading
Invoke Specific.
FSA Reporting
Mapping information according to classes,
complexity and reporting usage
30
Finance data
General Ledger
Asset data Insurance / Calculated data
ABCCalculation
Life Insurance
U/LCustody
U/LFund
Fund look through
CalculationEngine
Insurance AdminPolicy Holder
User Developed Application
BS-C1
BS-C1D Cover - A1A
Country - K1
Cover - A1Q
OF-B1Q
OF-B1A
VA-C2C
Assets – D1
Assets – D3
Assets – D4
SCR - B2A
SCR - B3A
SCR - B3B
SCR - B3C
SCR - B3D
SCR - B3F
SCR - B3G
MCR – B4A
TP - F1
TP – F2
TP – F3
RE-J1
RE-J2
Lapses/Profit
Automated loaded to DW NOT loaded to DW
Geographical import, Excel files dropped at share Invoke/FAS Server by Actuaries
Standard loading to Import share Invoke/FAS Server
Standard loading to Import share Invoke/FAS Server
Drafting, control and validation of reports with Invoke FAS Regulatory S2
Approval, sign-off and disclosure to Swedish Authority (FI) with Invoke e-Regulatory S2 Portal
RE-J3
Automated Solution Semi Automated Work
Finance Actuary
Success factors
• Leveraging existing IT-structure
• Overall well prepared Solvency II program with strong Solvency II focus
– Business value
– High commitment from senior stakeholders and clear sponsor for each pillar
and delivery
• Information Management Strategy focusing on gathering all adequate
Solvency data automatically in a generic business data warehouse based
on an information model developed for the insurance company – not only
for external reporting purposes.
• Postponement of choice of reporting solution until all information has been
gathered and the EIOPA requirements had reached a more stable state,
thus allowing standard reporting tools in the market to mature.
• Strong project management
– Pillar 1-3 knowledge as well as information management skills within the
project management and project team – no project silo
31
Different starting points, the same finishing line
• Tactical approaches become progressively strategic
– As data management becomes increasingly industrialised
– As upstream feeder systems mature and stabilise
• The ‘best’ Pillar 3 approach is one that is based on
pragmatic, forward-looking moderation supported by
agile technology
– Ambitious regarding the target future-state
– Mindful of meeting all reporting obligations along the way
– Without requiring a re-build or deviation from the critical path in
the case of inevitable regulatory change
32
Enabling sustainable Pillar 3 strategies by embedding agile reporting technology
Contact
• Partner at Cavendi.
• Worked as a management consultant and executive level advisor for
more than 30 years.
• PhD in management accounting from the Stockholm School of
Economics. Between 1996 and 2005 adjunct professor in
management control and accounting at the Stockholm School of
Economics.
• Areas of expertise: management control and performance
measurement, risk management and internal control , design and
implementation of ERP and accounting systems
34
Åke Magnusson