Profile

Location

London

Member since

2010

Fiona Hamilton

Vice President Europe & Asia at Volante Technologies Inc.

Message Posts: 0 Comments: 6

Bio I run the EMEA region for Volante Technologies Inc. who are a leader in the provision of data and message integration solutions. Career History I have worked in Wholesale Financial IT for the past 25 years since leaving University. 23 of those have been spent in financial messaging in development, support, consultancy, project management, pre-sales and business ownership. I worked for BIS Banking Systems (Misys as is now), TCA, ABS, was a d

Fiona is Commenting on

20022 joke of the day

Very sadly I score a 1. I really must get out more :-)

02 Oct 2014 Reply Read article

Standards Forum 2014 - A reflection.

Couldn't agree more Steve on all your points, but then that is hardly surprising from a fellow Standards geek :-)

08 Apr 2014 Reply Read article

A business case for SWIFT

Bob, I know it sounds very traditional, but good old fashioned Business Analysis, tied to a sound vision of what the organization wants to achieve in the way of improved services/SLAs, differentiation against competitors, cost reduction and increased bottom line, is the basic answer. Once you have decided on those things then the Business Analyst, provided you have one or more with the requisite broad knowledge of the standards and delivery landscape, should be able to provide recommendations on the most appropriate way forward. As I said it is good old fashioned gap analysis driven from business requirements/desires. I really don't think corporate planning should be dictated by the standards that are out there or the networks that can transport or validate them. In the end as my previous post stated, one of the advantages from a selfish point of view is that if there isn't an ISO 20022 compliant message out there that fits your purpose you can always create your own message or variant of one that exists and still claim to be supporting the standard (which technically you are)! The key to this approach is having an appropriate environment that enables this choice of appropriate data structure per function and delivery channel. There may be differences in real time vs non time critical, totally secure vs secure as it needs to be; adoption of a global standard vs leveraging extensions to create commercial differentiation. Whatever you do don't let your internal infrastructure limit your choices. You might say "of course she would say that" but just because I work for a vendor that has particular interest in this area doesn't necessarily mean that it isn't so. :-)

14 Nov 2012 Reply Read article

A business case for SWIFT

As Bob and Gary know I am somewhat pedantic so I should point out that not all ISO 20022 messages are SWIFT MX or indeed vice versa. Other organizations other than SWIFT have submitted messages which are not represented in the MX message set. Also the version and variant numbers often differ between messages present in both. Just to confuse things SWIFT also have Solutions such as Clearing, Funds, etc that also sometimes have ISO 20022 compliant messages which are neither published as an ISO 20022 standard nor are the present in the SWIFT UHB MX specifications. So as at Q1 this year there were two hundred and something messages published on ISO 20022 website but over 500 different messages and or schema versions/variants published between ISO 20022, SWIFT MX and SWIFT Solutions. For those of you with insomnia I can provide you with the detailed comparison spreadsheet if you contact me! As a message standard it is becoming anything but; a victim of its own built in extensibility. But then we often forget that ISO 20022 is a methodology and data dictionary; for an actual message to be compliant they don't even have to be XML structures. So perhaps the issue of over which network messages get transmitted and in SWIFT's case validated in certain services, is less of an issue than it would seem if there isn't agreement on the standards themselves.

14 Nov 2012 Reply Read article