The paradox of digital payments
2 February 2016
At Celent we run a couple of Banking research panels - one on Branch transformation and another on Digital - where any US-based bank or credit union can participate in surveys we administer on a regular basis. Last week we published the report
with findings of our survey we conducted in November 2015 on Digital Payments. 42 institutions participated and answered our questions on:
- How important are digital payments in the context of other priorities?
- What has been the industry’s experience with digital payments?
- Where is the industry in its EMV migration journey?
The survey results highlighted the paradox of digital payments:
- Nearly everyone thinks that digital payments are important, but only 13% view it as strategic priority, aim to lead and invest accordingly. 63% aim to be fast followers and another 23% only invest to stay on par with peers.
- 71% of participants agree that financial institutions (FIs) should offer branded digital payments (e.g. own digital wallet), but they are more likely to participate in third party wallets, such as Apple Pay, Android Pay and others, than to invest into their own HCE wallets - 46% have no plans for HCE.
So, what should the FIs do in digital payments? Accept that "payments are disappearing" and focus on ensuring that their payment credentials are available for customers to use wherever they want them or fight back with their own branded wallets? Does it have to be an "either/ or" choice? Can they/ should they do both? What are your thoughts? P.S. Our panels are open to any FI in the US - Celent clients and non-clients - and we share the results report with all respondents. If you’re a banker and would like to participate in future Digital Panels, please contact email@example.com.