Perspectives On Shared Agent Networks From Emerging Economies

By Soko Directory Team / July 16, 2020 | 10:15 am



digital

When you visit an agent outlet in Kenya, you often see a number of point-of-sales devices being used by the agent. When you enquire about it, she would mention that each of these devices belongs to a different bank. Using this maze of devices, she serves a number of customers from different banks that visit her.

In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, agents are coping with reduced business and extra costs due to the curfews, social distancing and hygiene, and reduced hours of bank opening.

However, one must ponder upon how complicated it must be for her to manage transactions with each of these banks, maintain float to service the customers from different banks and keep a stock of how much she is making from these transactions.

Building and managing a robust agent network is one of the most difficult tasks for digital financial service providers. Managing distribution through a network of agents across the different areas in a country is an expensive affair.

Considering the complexities of building and managing sustainable agent networks, providers have started to collaborate to share resources on agent network management. An innovative business model that reduces the cost of managing agent networks and enhancing reach for providers is the shared agent network.

A shared agent network is an approach that allows several financial service providers to share agency banking infrastructure and technology to serve the customers. A customer of one bank can thus use an agent established by another bank or financial institution.

A shared agent network enables banks to ride on shared infrastructure to expand services to a wider geography and a larger set of customers. It helps rationalize the costs associated with establishing agents across vast operational areas. It also helps to realize the investments from setting up an agency, recruiting and training agents, and managing the agent network. These investments enhance financial inclusion on account of the spread and penetration of digital financial services.

There are two different forms of shared agent networks:

Formal shared agent networks as exhibited in Uganda (Agent Banking Company – ABC), Nigeria (Shared Agent Network Expansion Facilities – SANEF), and India (Eko India Financial Services): These are agents networks that are set up to serve several providers through a common network manager.

Informal shared agent networks as exhibited in Kenya and Pakistan: These are really just agents aggregating and offering services from a variety of providers. Clients either have to transact through one of several providers they have accounts with as is the case in Kenya. Clients can select one from many providers who they do not have to have accounts with in order to transact – as is the case in Pakistan.

Informal shared agent networks came about through organic growth of agent distribution points in ecosystems where agents are by design not expected to provide services of only one provider. Markets such as Kenya and Pakistan have had a relatively long history of providing an enabling environment for agents to avail services from different financial service providers in a competitive manner.

Individual agents in an informal shared agent network may however lack some of the advantages provided to the formally shared agents, key among them is the ability to manage several interoperable float accounts.

Despite the lack of such capacity, informal shared agent networks have flourished in early adopting markets of agent banking. In Kenya, for example, some agents provide services of up to 11 financial service providers, with separate devices, record keeping, and float management.

Formal shared agent networks are being adopted in markets where agent banking is steadily picking up through agent network management of several financial service providers offerings by third parties. These third parties are either privately owned or promoted by industry associations. Such institutions are considered to have the professional capacity to manage and expand distribution networks on behalf of FSPs while saving management costs.

There has been significant success in this model in some markets where these third parties began by managing agent networks of a single institution and gradually adding the number of institutions that they serve. Eko in India has partnerships with multiple banks where each agent outlet offers services from several banks. Formal shared agent networks sponsored by industry associations like SANEF in Nigeria and ABC in Uganda are yet to realize as much comparative success.

The Central Bank of Nigeria (Banking and Payments Systems Directorate) through the Bankers’ Committee and in collaboration with all banks, mobile money operators, and super agents in Nigeria launched Shared Agent Network Expansion Facility in 2018 that has an ambitious goal of reaching out to 50 million Nigerians by 2020 through a network of 500,000 agents. These targets have been further divided across the geopolitical zones to have equitable growth of the agent network. To enable this network, CBN has earmarked soft loan quantum to be disbursed to the providers’ selected basis for their experience, staff strength, spread, etc.

Shared agent networks help providers to reduce the cost of platform management and maintenance, agent training, and monitoring, as well as improved liquidity management – particularly in fully interoperable environments. Formal shared agent networks however need a considerable concerted effort to expand the network and equitably manage the interests of all service providers. While some markets have embraced shared agent networks, regulators in other markets prefer to hold only regulated financial institutions as accountable for agent performance, and hence are not amenable to the idea of shared agents.

We believe that as digital financial services mature, providers should compete on products rather than channels. Some providers argue that opening up the entire agent network may bring certain disadvantages such as customers not receiving proper and professional service.

An approach for providers to create the differentiation amongst the agents would be a focus on two differentiated levels of agents, a sales agent, and a service agent. The few exclusive sales agents may focus on product sales, account opening, customer on-boarding, and large-value transactions. These would then be complemented by large numbers of shared service agents servicing a range of providers by conducting small cash in or cash-out transactions.

By Doreen Ahimbisibwe, Edward Obiko, and Anup Singh of MicroSave Consulting-MSC





About Soko Directory Team

Soko Directory is a Financial and Markets digital portal that tracks brands, listed firms on the NSE, SMEs and trend setters in the markets eco-system.Find us on Facebook: facebook.com/SokoDirectory and on Twitter: twitter.com/SokoDirectory

View other posts by Soko Directory Team


More Articles From This Author







Trending Stories










Other Related Articles










SOKO DIRECTORY & FINANCIAL GUIDE



ARCHIVES

2020
  • January 2020 (272)
  • February 2020 (310)
  • March 2020 (390)
  • April 2020 (321)
  • May 2020 (336)
  • June 2020 (329)
  • July 2020 (335)
  • August 2020 (97)
  • 2019
  • January 2019 (253)
  • February 2019 (216)
  • March 2019 (285)
  • April 2019 (254)
  • May 2019 (272)
  • June 2019 (251)
  • July 2019 (338)
  • August 2019 (293)
  • September 2019 (306)
  • October 2019 (313)
  • November 2019 (362)
  • December 2019 (320)
  • 2018
  • January 2018 (291)
  • February 2018 (219)
  • March 2018 (278)
  • April 2018 (225)
  • May 2018 (238)
  • June 2018 (178)
  • July 2018 (256)
  • August 2018 (249)
  • September 2018 (256)
  • October 2018 (287)
  • November 2018 (284)
  • December 2018 (185)
  • 2017
  • January 2017 (183)
  • February 2017 (194)
  • March 2017 (207)
  • April 2017 (104)
  • May 2017 (169)
  • June 2017 (205)
  • July 2017 (190)
  • August 2017 (195)
  • September 2017 (186)
  • October 2017 (235)
  • November 2017 (253)
  • December 2017 (266)
  • 2016
  • January 2016 (165)
  • February 2016 (165)
  • March 2016 (190)
  • April 2016 (143)
  • May 2016 (245)
  • June 2016 (182)
  • July 2016 (271)
  • August 2016 (248)
  • September 2016 (234)
  • October 2016 (191)
  • November 2016 (243)
  • December 2016 (153)
  • 2015
  • January 2015 (1)
  • February 2015 (4)
  • March 2015 (166)
  • April 2015 (108)
  • May 2015 (116)
  • June 2015 (120)
  • July 2015 (148)
  • August 2015 (157)
  • September 2015 (188)
  • October 2015 (169)
  • November 2015 (173)
  • December 2015 (207)
  • 2014
  • March 2014 (2)
  • 2013
  • March 2013 (10)
  • June 2013 (1)
  • 2012
  • March 2012 (7)
  • April 2012 (15)
  • May 2012 (1)
  • July 2012 (1)
  • August 2012 (4)
  • October 2012 (2)
  • November 2012 (2)
  • December 2012 (1)
  • 2011
    2010
    2009
    2008
    2007
    2006
    2005
    2004
    2003
    2002
    2001
    2000
    1999
    1998
    1997
    1996
    1995
    1994
    1993
    1992
    1991
    1990
    1989
    1988
    1987
    1986
    1985
    1984
    1983
    1982
    1981
    1980
    1979
    1978
    1977
    1976
    1975
    1974
    1973
    1972
    1971
    1970
    1969
    1968
    1967
    1966
    1965
    1964
    1963
    1962
    1961
    1960
    1959
    1958
    1957
    1956
    1955
    1954
    1953
    1952
    1951
    1950