Blog

DFS Customer Development Opportunities in Nigeria

Customer development is a fundamental requirement for any business. In digital financial services (DFS), we can view customer development as a journey that comprises customer discovery, customer captivation, and appropriating value. Customer discovery involves finding out about potential customers, and understanding whether existing solutions are able to meet their needs. Customer captivation entails continuously sustaining the interest of the customer by ensuring a positive user experience. Appropriating value focuses on adding valued products, services, and delivery channels that can deepen early market successes to generate revenue and thus profits.

So far, in customer discovery, many financial institutions replicate solutions to drive user adoption. A few financial institutions conduct initial market research to understand the pain-points among DFS users. In customer captivation, the emphasis is on heavy marketing communication – creating awareness on the existence of different solutions. There appears to be a greater focus on the success of a transaction rather than on the user experience that drives adoption and long-term use. Providers often focus on the number of customers rather than the value per customer, which requires innovation. The adjoining diagram illustrates this:

Source: Adapted from the Open APIs in Digital Financial Services 2017 report by CGAP

Providers lose out on profitability by failing to optimise the customer value proposition that drives adoption, and in their inability to support this through the creation of appropriate mission-oriented structures. Examples of these structures include setting out autonomous DFS departments, appropriate budget allocation, operating with adequate teams, among others.

Customer Development in Nigeria

In Nigeria, Deposit Money Banks focus on raising deposits from the public to fund the corporate sector but typically do not offer a full range of products and services to the mass market. Agent banking can promote greater access to convenient and accessible transactional services throughout the country. The agent channel can be used by providers to significantly increase customer captivation and revenue per customer. At present, the primary focus of the financial institutions that have adopted agent banking is on the customer discovery phase – primarily through offering the channel for Cash-In and Cash-Out. There are few value-added services that customers use. To drive revenue per customer, Deposit Money Banks must combat the perception that they are only used for the storage of funds. This would encourage their customers to use the products and services that ride on the agent channel.

Providers must ensure that services can meet the actual needs of customers, provide an optimal user experience, and use agents as a Below-the-Line marketing channel to demonstrate the range of services available. This is essential if the aggressive Above-the-Line (in most cases) and Through-the-Line (SMS blasts) marketing communications that Deposit Money Banks typically use are to be effective.

Beyond deposits, many mass market customers’ needs are served by Microfinance Banks that provide a better user experience. But agent banking combined with customer-centric product development and appropriate partnerships with fintech companies could extend the range of personalised retail services that Deposit Money Banks offer. This would allow them to compete with the Microfinance Banks.

How Might Institutions Harness Opportunities in Customer Development in Nigeria?

One of the research focus pillars in the recently published Agent Network Accelerator Research: Nigeria Country Report 2017 by the Helix Institute of Digital Finance has been customer development. The report outlines the need for providers to use research to generate compelling value propositions beyond cash deposits and cash withdrawals. We have identified use-cases within the payments space, including social transfers, such as from donors or government, person-to-business, for instance, payment of school fees, and person-to-person funds transfer. Designing use-cases around pain-points would drive customer adoption and thereby revenue per customer.

The survey finds that providers have been doing little to promote uptake and usage. Rather, innovative agents have themselves developed mechanisms to promote uptake and usage. Typically, these mechanisms are built around digitising locally accepted cash-management practices:

a) Providing Micro-loans to Customers 

Agents offer passbooks to customers for record-keeping and use these records to provide loans to them. A good number of agents report that the act of filling up the passbooks themselves provides opportunities to interact with the customers, making them feel “special”. Agents value the customers’ body language and demeanour as additional information that is critical in the intuition-based assessment of customers for microloans – of course, in addition to the transactional patterns. The transaction sessions with customers also involve asking personal questions to unearth their financial needs. An agent reported that he would provide a higher value loan to a customer who was confident enough to share more about their personal business progress than one who provided guarded responses.

The takeaway for providers: This example shows how agents use their customer relationship and information available on the channel to reduce the risk of micro-lending. The options available to providers include lending to the agents for on-lending or adopting agents into micro-lending processes given that pure digital lending carries significant risks of non-recovery.

b) Digitising Esusu and Ajoo Using Roving Employees

Some agents employ roving staff to provide Esusu services and facilitate Ajoo services through the agent banking channel. From the Helix field interactions, agents report that considerable financial information is shared in the Ajoo meetings, and this could be helpful in product evolution to make solutions more meaningful to the daily lives of customers.

The takeaway for providers: Develop field-based applications to digitise the Esusu or Ajoo processes, thereby improving the agent business-case and enhancing agent loyalty, and through their actions increase the transaction volumes and deposits mobilised. Digital tools, such as tablets and smartphones that offer other intuitive interfaces could be used during these sessions to improve the interactions and ensure prompt data collection.

c) Facilitating Remote Transactions 

Due to a lack of service reliability and limited access to liquidity experienced by agents, they have developed networks to aid in facilitating transactions remotely. This means that whenever a customer visits an agent who is unable to conduct transactions for any reason, another agent in the network conducts the transaction on that agent’s behalf. For example, a customer wants to deposit NGN 5,000 walks to an agent in his locality – agent A. Unfortunately, due to network issues, the service is unavailable and agent A is unable to conduct the transaction. Agent A then reaches out to agent B – who is in a different locality through a call. Agent A provides the customer’s transaction details and agent B immediately conducts the transaction on his behalf. This is also practiced whenever there are liquidity management issues, and in both cases, the agents reconcile through their network. These agent practises follow the principles of Hawala1 .

The takeaway for providers: Providers could design products that facilitate remote transactions and the reconciliation between agents in such a way as to provide transparency on the underlying transaction to conform to Anti Money Laundering/Combating the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) requirements, and to ensure consumer protection. These mechanisms could enhance services delivery, especially in rural areas where access to agent rebalancing points is a challenge.

Where is the Prize?

Providers must create value for agents and customers if they are to benefit from increased transactions and deposits. Providers would be able to increase usage through digitising local use-cases and by enhancing the user experience. This is the key takeaway from M-PESA’s ‘Send money home’ campaign – it mirrors existing local financial practices. In this way, providers can maximise value per customers and ultimately be able to appropriate value, which is pivotal for DFS business sustainability.

[1]Hawala is a popular and informal value transfer system based not on the movement of cash, or on telegraph or computer network wire transfers between banks, but instead on the performance and honour of a huge network of money brokers known as “hawaladars”.

David Cracknell in Conversation with CGTN on Mobile Money and Digital Credit in Africa

David Cracknell, Global Technical Director, MicroSave in conversation with CGTN Africa on Mobile Money and Digital Credit in Africa. Catch full coverage here.

Fuel Subsidy Reform: Experiences from India & Learnings from Other Countries

Watch this short video depicting India’s journey in Direct Benefit Transfer. The video summarises the progress of LPG subsidy reform & its impact through schemes like PAHAL, ‘Give It Up’ campaign and Ujjwala. Further, talking about the learning for other countries.

DBT in Fertilizer – Independent Assessment Report

MicroSave conducted an assessment of fertilizer subsidy, the second-largest subsidy after food that GoI provides, in 14 districts across India. This report captures the key findings and actionable solutions for its smooth implementation.

 

Is India Ready to Phase-out Subsidised Kerosene?

 

Kerosene is a distillate petroleum product that serves as a primary source of fuel for lighting and also used to start the wood or cow dung-fired stoves used for cooking by poor and marginal households in India. Subsidised kerosene is distributed to eligible beneficiaries through a network of agent-appointed Fair Price Shops (FPSs). The price of subsidised kerosene and entitlement varies between INR 16–18 (USD 0.25–0.28) and 1.5–6 litres per household respectively. The subsidy budget for kerosene is at INR 8,000 crore (USD 1.23 billion). This is far less than the food subsidy at INR 145,338 crore (USD 22.36 billion). The government manages both food and kerosene subsidy at the same scale by managing the distribution through FPSs. Hence, it is administratively and economically difficult to manage this important yet comparatively small subsidy programme at a scale similar to the food subsidy.

Moreover, critics of the kerosene subsidy argue that kerosene is a heavily polluting fuel and 41% of the kerosene being subsidised for domestic purposes is diverted for commercial use. Now, the Government of India has asked oil marketing companies (OMCs) to keep raising the prices of subsidised kerosene by INR 0.25 (USD 0.004) every fortnight until the subsidy is eliminated, or until further orders. While the arguments against kerosene are not without merit, the decision to (or hope to) rationalise its use by increasing price or phase out kerosene needs careful examination.

As a first step towards improving the management of the existing kerosene distribution system, the Government of India encouraged states to adopt Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT) in kerosene. This draws on the recent success of DBT in liquefied petroleum gas (LPG). Jharkhand was the only state that agreed to pilot-test the scheme, which was carried out in four districts – Chatra, Hazaribagh, Khunti, and Jamtara.

DBT in kerosene is a conditional cash transfer programme under which beneficiaries buy kerosene at a non-subsidised price from an FPS, using biometric authentication. The government then transfers an amount equal to their expenditure on subsidy directly into the bank account of eligible beneficiaries.  For instance, in Jharkhand, non-subsidised kerosene is available at approximately INR 28 (USD 0.43) per litre at FPSs. The government transfers a subsidy amount of INR 10 (USD 0.15) per litre to the bank account of eligible beneficiaries who have made a purchase.

Another option, which perhaps seems more likely, is to completely phase out subsidised kerosene. This has been done in Haryana and Delhi. This note analyses the feasibility of alternative options to replace kerosene for lighting and cooking.

Alternatives for Lighting: The first alternative for lighting is electrification. While most of rural India is classified as “electrified”, this does not paint a true picture of the on-the-ground reality. According to a National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) survey, 26.5% of rural households still use kerosene as their primary source for lighting. The dependence on kerosene for lighting is very high in the rural parts of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh at 73.5% and 58.5% respectively. A village is considered electrified if the basic infrastructure to access electricity has been set up, and 10% of households have access to the electricity grid. Thus, 90% of households may not even have access to electricity in an “electrified” village.

A term called “intensive electrification” has been coined to define access to electricity in a better way. A village is considered “intensively electrified” when access to electricity is provided to 100% of households72% of villages in India are “intensively electrified” as compared to the 98.7% villages that are “electrified”. We must understand that even for households that are connected to the grid in an intensively electrified village, power cuts at critical hours are common – for instance, between 7 pm and 10 pm, when children study or dinner is being prepared. It seems electricity is a long way from meeting the lighting needs of rural households.

The new Saubhagya scheme is a step in the right direction. It aims to provide electricity connections to over 40 million households in rural and urban areas by December 2018. However, this will only solve the problem of access. The problem of availability and reliability of electricity may still remain because of the weak financial situation of electricity distribution companies and the high costs they face to supply to rural areas.

The second alternative for lighting is solar lamps. As a solution for lighting, solar lamps suffer from two problems. The first is the initial cost barrier. An INR 1,200 (USD 18) solar lamp is not something that many can afford. The second is the problem of maintenance, as service is not easily available nearby if and when an issue arises. Even if solar lamps are provided with easy financing options, one or two sources of light are insufficient for a rural household where children are studying, women are cooking, men socialising, and someone needs to visit the washroom. So poor households will need several solar lamps to meet these diverse needs effectively.

Thus, it seems that even if a rural household is connected to the grid or has solar lamps, people may still have to depend on kerosene to fulfil many of their lighting needs. The situation may not improve unless access, availability and reliability of the grid supply improves or the cost barrier and maintenance issues of solar power are addressed.

Alternatives for Cooking: Another use of kerosene is for cooking purposes. According to the NSSO survey 2011-12, less than 1% of households in rural areas use kerosene as cooking fuel. Kerosene is used only to ignite cooking fuels, such as firewood and dung-cake. In addition, only 5.7% of urban households use kerosene as primary cooking fuel. The alternative for cooking is LPG stoves. The Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MoPNG), Government of India, has been doing a commendable job to break the initial access barrier through its Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY). We believe that as the scheme evolves to provide universal access, kerosene will no longer be needed for cooking. However, the government should ensure PMUY access before phasing out kerosene subsidy in order to avoid causing inconvenience to people who rely on the fuel.

Households also use kerosene to run irrigation pumps. However, using subsidised kerosene to run irrigation pumps is against the spirit of the subsidy. Yet an increase in the price of kerosene or phasing out kerosene from the market is sure to have an adverse effect on the agricultural sector. A discussion of the impacts is beyond the scope of this paper but it is something policymakers may want to consider.

Conclusion: It is evident that kerosene is far from losing its status as an essential commodity in rural India. While phasing out kerosene is possible, and should be done, the government needs to ensure that the plan to do so is communicated well in advance. It should also make facilities and infrastructure available to beneficiaries to enable an easier shift to alternatives. Otherwise, the government risks pushing a very vulnerable section of society back into the age of darkness.