Reconsider Instant Messaging in Finance
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
RECONSIDER INSTANT MESSAGING IN FINANCE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CONTENTS Now is the time for the finance industry to reconsider instant messaging (IM) and see it as Executive Summary 1 a tool to put efficiency and revenue back at the forefront of their communication. The Challenge 2 Many firms have a policy prohibiting using IM as Anatomy of a Multivendor IM System 4 a collaboration and sales tool despite potential losses in efficiencies and opportunities. Risks & Costs of Multivendor IM 6 Systems w, complexity, and above all compliance risk are often cited as the reasons firms avoid using The Messaging Solution for Finance 7 IM. However, recent industry innovations can eliminate or dramatically reduce these concerns. The Global Relay Message Advantage 8 This white paper outlines the challenges around Primary Benefits to the Finance 9 adopting IM, and then details how Global Industry Relay’s compliant IM service overcomes all previous barriers. Conclusion 10 1 Copyright © 1999 – 2020 Global Relay. All Rights Reserved. 1 Reconsider Instant Messaging In Finance THE CHALLENGE The finance industry has always embraced • MARKET DATA PROVIDERS: technologies that improve the transactional Marketed specifically via market data platforms. speed of business. Fast, reliable, and secure Bloomberg® and Thomson Reuters, the communication is essential for collaborating with largest players in this category, offer expensive coworkers or counterparties. messaging systems tied to their market data terminal. Since its inception in the 1990s, instant messaging has provided many industries with a platform for Over the years, closed communities rapid, convenient, real-time communication that representing the major asset classes and surpasses email. markets formed around these instant messaging systems Within the finance industry, three types of IM systems are commonly used: • ENTERPRISE COLLABORATION: For the enterprise, but not specifically for • PUBLIC IM: finance, these systems include Slack, Microsoft Also known as consumer messaging, systems Teams, IBM Sametime, and Cisco Jabber. such as AIM, Yahoo!, MSN (now discontinued), LinkedIn, and Twitter have been used among financial firms. However, with the increased popularity of enterprise collaboration systems, fewer and fewer firms depend on public IM. Cost, reliability, complexity, and above all compliance risk are often cited as “ the reasons firms avoid using” IM. Copyright © 1999 – 2020 Global Relay. All Rights Reserved. 2 Reconsider Instant Messaging In Finance Despite its utility, many financial firms have a • Most IM systems lack counterparty policy against the use of IM because of a number authentication, making it impossible to validate of limitations and risks: that counterparties are who they claim `to be COST • The cost of many IM systems can prohibit firms Consumer messaging systems do not offer the from putting all employees on them reliability, security, or compliance functionality that firms require. Market data providers and enterprise collaboration systems are typically COMPLIANCE more reliable, but also lack integrated compliance Today, financial firms are expected to comply and security features and are expensive. with long-established regulations such as those of the SEC, FINRA, CFTC, GDPR, and FCA, as For example, if a sell-side firm wants to talk to a well as newly enacted rules like the EU Markets in buy-side firm via the Bloomberg community, it has Financial Instruments Directive II (MiFID II). to pay hefty monthly fees per employee for this type of terminal access. Regulators are levying increasingly exorbitant fines throughout the industry in an effort to create Many enterprise collaboration systems also greater trade transparency, prevent market abuse, charge considerable monthly fees to provide and protect investor interest. firms with a copy of their IM communications for regulatory supervision. In addition, there are costs Legacy IM systems were never designed to have to 3rd party proxy, archiving, e-Discovery, audit, their communications captured to the standards and supervision tools. required to satisfy U.S., UK, and/or European recordkeeping and supervision regulations. COMMUNITY For various reasons – cost, security, vendor, Consequently, to address this design deficit, an technical limitations – different IM systems have IM system must “bolt-on” features to capture been adopted over time. As a result of using its data and make it available to regulatory disparate systems, financial communities are supervisors, resulting in a complex and risky unable to engage in crossindustry collaboration. multivendor IM system. For example, Microsoft Teams, IBM Sametime, In this scenario, firms must pay for their IM data and Cisco Jabber are typically restricted to to be delivered to an archiving vendor; however, internal communications, making external there is inherent risk of data fidelity loss in both communication difficult. the capture and delivery processes involved, particularly with public IM and enterprise Cross-industry collaboration is additionally collaboration systems. limited because: • Public IM lacks a community directory to find others 2 Copyright © 1999 – 2020 Global Relay. All Rights Reserved. 3 Reconsider Instant Messaging In Finance ANATOMY OF A MULTIVENDOR IM SYSTEM A typical multivendor IM system consists of the Converting IM conversations to a standard following four components: suitable for regulatory supervision requires sophisticated conversion tools that ensure all 1. IM CLIENT: conversation data and metadata is properly IM systems provide real-time, text-based processed and converted into messages in message exchange, but do not offer the an archive. compliance functionality that financial firms require. IM systems can be grouped into these A comprehensive reconciliation methodology major categories: is also required to ensure the quality, accuracy, › Public IM and completeness of all archived data. › Market data providers › Enterprise collaboration Few IM vendors possess this sophistication. 2. IM GATEWAY: 4. RECORDKEEPING AND COMPLIANCE An IM gateway extracts messages from the IM PLATFORM (“ARCHIVE”): system and delivers them to a database. Unlike IM systems and IM gateways, archives are not commoditized products. Archives Simply routing messages to a database will not capture, store, and preserve messages, satisfy regulatory requirements because: where they can be searched on, supervised, and retrieved for use by business functions › Messages must be captured and preserved for including: a specified retention term. › Compliance supervision › Messages must be searchable and retrievable. › Audit, litigation, and investigation › Duplicate copies must be stored in separate › Infosec locations to protect against destruction or loss. › GDPR › Human resources As a result, firms require an archive. Firms conduct a long and comprehensive due 3. DATA CONVERTER: diligence process before selecting an archiving Conversations contained within an IM system service provider. There are numerous archiving must be stored in some manner (often a service providers, but very few specialize in database) and converted into a format suitable compliance archiving for the finance industry. for recordkeeping in an archive. Conversion may be performed by the IM system vendor, who sends conversations in an email format to an archiving vendor; otherwise, a third party or archiving vendor can perform the conversion. Copyright © 1999 – 2020 Global Relay. All Rights Reserved. 4 Reconsider Instant Messaging In Finance MULTIVENDOR INTERACTION How multivendor components interact varies depending on the vendor, but they generally work as follows: CONSUMER IM COMPLIANCE IM Client Proxy Server Data Conversion Archive Vendor 1 Vendor 2 Vendor 3 Vendor 4 Having no infrastructure to support regulatory supervision, the IM system must rely on a Proxy Server from another vendor to capture IM conversations and route them to a database. A third vendor captures the proxy database information and constructs messages that can be archived with a fourth vendor. MARKET DATA PROVIDER IM COMPLIANCE IM Client IM Log Files Data Conversion Archive Vendor 1 Vendor 2 Vendor 3 Most market data systems make XML log files of conversations available for a separate vendor who downloads the XML log files and constructs messages that can be archived by a third vendor. ENTERPRISE COLLABORATION IM COMPLIANCE IM Client API Data Conversion Archive Data Conversion (email) Vendor 2 Vendor 3 Vendor 1 Many enterprise collaboration systems make IM conversations available to customers via Application Programming Interface (API) or by sending them pre-converted messages. Depending on the method used, a separate vendor downloads the data via API and constructs messages that can be archived with a third vendor. 4 Copyright © 1999 – 2020 Global Relay. All Rights Reserved. 5 Reconsider Instant Messaging In Finance RISKS & COSTS OF MULTIVENDOR IM SYSTEMS COMPATIBILITY The biggest risk with a multivendor IM system is a Therefore, only limited IM information may be small change in any of its components can lead to provided, which can be insufficient to accurately data loss and regulatory compliance issues. reconstruct conversations between counterparties. When working in tandem to capture IM EXPENSE conversations, even the smallest change to one Firms implementing a multivendor IM system vendor’s solution can break the multivendor often deal with the unenviable situation of limited IM system’s interdependence and the entire