evolution Archives - Page 2 of 3

The return of collaboration

14 January, 2015
Chris Hamilton
Payment System

As I think about payments developments in 2014, what strikes me is that the payments world is now in a phase of collaborative systemic innovation, the like of which we have not seen in 20 years. I have written about the cyclical nature of network evolution before. It’s all about network effects - ie the reality that, in payments as in other network industries, the net value of a service is proportional to the number of other people using the service. Wherever there are large network effects, an evolutionary balance must be struck continuously between service innovation based on the existing network, and systemic innovation to enhance the network itself. The former uses new technology and/or new business thinking to improve services to end users without trying to change the network itself - because this is expensive and hard to do. Service innovation tends to be competitive in nature. A good example is Square, which innovates in the merchant/customer interaction by riding the rails of the existing card schemes. The latter - systemic innovation - seeks to upgrade the underlying network so that new and better services can ultimately be delivered to end users. The current global enthusiasm for real-time payments is largely in this category - building new networks to (eventually) deliver better services. Because this needs a large number of existing participants to coordinate in upgrading their technology and operations at the same time, it is typically collaborative more than competitive, and government often has an important role to play.

Towards a sensible dialogue on cybercurrencies

3 November, 2014
Chris Hamilton
Payment System

If you work in payments, you will for sure have been part of a Bitcoin debate in the last 12 months. Until recently, such discussions usually took one of two forms: they were either pep rallies or exorcisms. Actually, the most entertaining events in my memory happened when participants turned up expecting one, and got the other. A brief terminological note: “cybercurrencies” in this context means any open protocol for the retention and transfer of value where the attribution of value, and the recognition of ownership, does not derive from or rely on a national currency. There are many ways of doing this, including open loyalty schemes, game currency platforms and algorithmic currencies, but the best known is Bitcoin.

Payments World USA

In April, I took a quick trip to Disney World...well, kind of. The annual conference of NACHA, APCA's equivalent body in the USA, was held at Disney World's home: Orlando, Florida. Around 2,200 bankers turned up to hear three days of presentations on the state of US payments - and possibly catch a few rides. I hope they had some fun amongst the work, because these are stressful times for US payment providers. Having weathered the GFC with tightened budgets, US bankers are acutely conscious of new payments system developments in other countries and pressure from the US Federal Reserve to follow suit or be left behind; but they are a long way from agreeing amongst themselves what is to be done, and who will pay. My small contribution was to outline the policy logic behind Australia's New Payments Platform (NPP) proposal as a comparative example. There was much interest.

Evolutionary cycles in the payments system

The publication of the Reserve Bank’s Conclusions for its two year Innovation Review is shaping up as the catalyst for a new round of structural evolution in the Australian payments system. Payment participants have been set a challenge: establish a better long-term payments platform. Doubtless, effective coordination of industry participants is needed to meet the challenge. Nevertheless, it will be good old-fashioned competition that delivers the new products that ultimately benefit customers. Bluntly, new payment systems only take off when schemes and participants work out how to use them to offer stuff that customers want, and will pay for.

Payments system self-governance: striking the balances

"The payments system is built on networks, which means that a certain amount of coordination and collaboration is essential for it to function and develop over time. The challenge is to encourage stakeholder collaboration that supports innovation and competition while discouraging collective or individual behaviours that are detrimental to payments system users." No one at APCA wrote this paragraph - it comes from the final report of the Canadian Government's Payments System Review. The thing is, we could have written it. It expresses APCA''s philosophy as the payment system self-regulatory body.