For Finextra's free daily newsletter, breaking news and flashes and weekly job board.
Even though I don't agree with several of your comments, I appreciate your raising them. Debate and discussion is always important and I love to stir the pot, so thanks for pushing into this space. I'd like to comment on a few things as a corporate user of
First of all, I think it's wrong to be worried about SWIFT as the Registration Authority of the ISO20022 standards. Their role in this is one of coordination and managing the overhead of having an ISO standard. There is a solid core of FI's, corporates, and
a few vendors who are the ones really owning and driving the standard. If SWIFT relinquish their role as the ISO "owner," who will pick it up? My organization is in no position to do it and I'm sure most of the other corporates would feel the same way. - I
believe most of us are involved in this initiative "in our spare time" and unable to manage the documentation, process modeling, and publication work required by ISO. In fact, I wouldn't want any of us corporates worrying about that. We should be focused on
adding value to the content, not dealing with logistics. SWIFT have an entire part of their organization devoted to the stewardship of standards, which makes them the perfect candidate for the role, and I've seen no evidence of them abusing this position for
their own gain. The only other alternative I can think of would be for one of the banks to take it over, which creates more of a proprietary risk to the standard than SWIFT ownership.
Secondly, it's always been clear to me that the spirit of the ISO20022 standards has been and continues to be openness. ISO20022 is not, as you suggest, a device for SWIFT to get more fee-based revenue from corporates. In fact, there is nothing that requires
use of SWIFT's product or services when one adopts ISO20022. Any bank supporting ISO20022 should accept messages over FTP, HTTP, AS/2, proprietary channels, web-based upload, etc as well as SWIFT FileAct. At the end of the day, it's just bits and bytes. It's
the work to standardize what those bits and bytes contain and how it's interpreted that matters, and that is a very collaborative effort.
Again, Gary, thanks for mixing things up. I hope there's some good discussion to follow...
I am really trying to refect what so many people have been telling me for years about SWIFT. There is a general uncomfort about SWIFT beeing the ISO Agent and the network supplier. I beleive SWIFT should divorce the two. SWIFT could be a conduit for ISO
by including other commercial networks onto a Global council. As a non profit making organisation this should not be a concern for SWIFT and allow the standards to be really run for the benefit of all
SWIFT should then run their network that i think should be privatised putting it on the same commercial footing as the rest of the networks
As you say ISO20022 is able to be carried over any network and hopefully this will be the case
SWIFT has lost revenue recently i am reliably informed and are looking at replacing those losses and like any other network has to keep increasing its users and traffic. Its my and others contention they are batting at two ends of the wicket and they need
to split the ISO responsibilities and network
19 Sep 2007