Produktivitätsverlust durch manuelle Aufbereitung von Einlegerdaten für FCS/Prudential Reporting

Definition

APRA’s depositor protection framework for the Financial Claims Scheme requires ADIs to be able to identify each unique depositor and produce an aggregated single customer view, as well as full FCS data, within 48 hours.[1] APRA’s prudential and reporting standards further obligate ADIs to submit regular, detailed prudential and statistical returns.[8] In many institutions, legacy systems and siloed deposit platforms mean that compiling a complete and accurate single customer view and prudential dataset requires manual extraction from multiple source systems, spreadsheet-based cleansing and reconciliation, and manual validation. LOGIC: A typical mid‑size ADI may need a small team (e.g., 3–5 FTEs at AU$120,000–AU$160,000 fully loaded each) spending 20–40% of their time on ongoing FCS readiness testing and prudential reporting data preparation, equating conservatively to AU$240,000–AU$480,000 per year in capacity tied up in low‑value manual processing rather than analysis, risk management or product improvement.[1][8]

Why This Matters

The Pitch: Savings institutions in Australia 🇦🇺 waste etwa AU$240,000–AU$480,000 pro Jahr an hochqualifizierter Arbeitszeit auf manuelle FCS-Readiness und APRA-Reporting-Aufbereitung. Automatisierung von Datenintegration, SCV-Erstellung und Validierung gewinnt diese Kapazität zurück.

Affected Stakeholders

Regulatory Reporting Manager, Data Governance Lead, Risk Analytics Teams, Finance/Controlling, IT/Data Engineering

Related Business Risks