BankThink

The Pitfalls of Heavy-Handed Leadership; Last Call for Summer Reads

  • A recap of the informed opinions (and the discussions they generated) on BankThink this week.

    June 28
  • A recap of the informed opinions (and the discussions they generated) on BankThink this week.

    June 21
  • Liberty Deserved? A number of the comments on AmericanBanker.com and BankThink this week were strikingly sympathetic to digital currency issuer Liberty Reserve, which was indicted for alleged money laundering, and its customers. These readers were outraged that the authorities came down so hard on the Costa Rican outfit after serving megabank HSBC with a mere fine for similar money laundering charges. They were also skeptical of the government's explanations of its stance on virtual currencies and fearful for Bitcoin entrepreneurs and users who feel increasingly threatened by government encroachment. Commenting on American Banker Washington Bureau Chief Rob Blackwell's Q&A with Financial Crimes Enforcement Network Director Jennifer Shasky Calvery, one reader questioned her description of Liberty Reserve as the biggest money laundering operation ever. "Did you ask about her selective memory? HSBC's 'pervasively polluted' culture involved more money than Liberty Reserve, for instance." Another commenter saw ulterior motives in the prosecution: "The action against LR [had] nothing to do with money laundering. It was to undermine the growth of Bitcoin which [the government] considers more of a threat than the much greater money laundering by the likes of HSBC (which has more blood on its hands than a 1,000 LRs)." Our own "Monetary Future" columnist, digital currency expert Jon Matonis, noted that Liberty Reserve has been around since 2001, and wondered why the U.S. waited so long to prosecute the company. "Why are their 'crimes' of providing a neutral value transfer service more egregious than they were before?" But at least one reader found the government's position eminently reasonable, writing, "money transmitters need to identify people they transfer money for, and to report suspicious activity...we will either remain serious about money laundering/terrorist financing issues, or we can revert back to our pre-Sept 11 head-in-the-sand mentality." In his own column, Matonis talked to a venture capital fund dedicated to Bitcoin startups that's hired former Treasury officials as advisors, underscoring the increasing importance of compliance smarts to such businesses.

    May 31

Reputational Issues:  Peter G. Weinstock of Hunton & Williams LLP jump-started a lively discussion when he suggested examiners are increasingly using reputation risk "as a catch-all to challenge any banking businesses that are disfavored." Several readers were quick to agree with this assessment. "These are indeed scary times for all of us," one reader wrote. "Reputation risk has become a catch-all and can be applied to stop banks from lending to any industry policymakers [do] not like." But other readers felt examiners were simply trying to send a different message. "’When you fly with the crows, you get shot with the crows’ may be what the regulators are saying," one commented. Meanwhile, public relations consultant Harvey Radin argued that banks need to act quickly to improve their bad reputation after reviewing American Banker’s 2013 Survey of Bank Reputations. "One suggestion is to bring revenue streams into better harmony with support for commerce and enterprise," he writes. "Gearing pricing and fees to tangible improvements in goods and services or to new services might be a viable option."

Is Heavy-Handed Leadership Hampering Big Banks? Jean-Marc Laouchez, managing director of financial services at Hay Group, also got a discussion going by suggesting that heavy-handed leadership was stifling big banks’ performance. "No one is going to put a hand up with a radical new business model or push back on dangerous suggestions if they fear ridicule – or worse," he writes. One reader agreed that coercive leadership styles were likely to have a negative impact on an institution. "Directive and coercive tactics may be good in a fire but on the general organizational playground, they are still referred to as bullying," this reader commented. Another commenter added, "It is just as likely that the high reliance on incentive compensation is a major source of the banking leadership issue. Incentive compensation often becomes the way managers manage instead of really interacting with their people."

Holiday Week Potpourri: Karen Gordon of Zoot Enterprises Inc. argued that the industry shouldn’t put millions into further educating consumers about credit scores. "Pay your bills on time, check for errors on your report occasionally, keep your oldest line of credit open when possible and don't apply for multiple lines of credit you don't need," she writes. "It's really pretty straightforward." Meanwhile, Alex J. Pollock of the American Enterprise Institute argued the new Corker-Warner housing finance bill only barely improves on the GSE model. "A more fundamental approach is to demand that the financial actors internalize and capitalize the risks themselves," he wrote. "This is known as a private market." 

Last Call for Recommendations! We’re still looking for a few good banking books to include in our forthcoming 2013 Summer Reading List for Commercial Bankers. Email your favorites (with a short explanation of why you are recommending them) to BankThink Deputy Editor Jeanine Skowronski at Jeanine.skowronski@sourcemedia.com

Got an informed opinion on the business of banking? Submit to BankThink. Full submissions guidelines are available here.

For reprint and licensing requests for this article, click here.
Law and regulation Consumer banking
MORE FROM AMERICAN BANKER