Agent Networks In India—How Mandates Have Influenced the Landscape

There is a key difference in how the Digital Financial Services (DFS) market in India has evolved when compared to other countries. While in most countries the expansion of DFS along with agent networks has been driven by profit, the growth of DFS in India has essentially been the result of government mandates. The mandates have certainly:

  1. demonstrated India’s commitment to financial inclusion;
  2. propelled the growth of the agent network in geography and scale by pushing banks to participate in DFS thus facilitating physical access to finance; and
  3. focused product offering to account opening.

To understand the landscape of DFS in India, we must first understand these government initiatives that have shaped it. As the landscape continues to develop, it is extremely important that we understand how this prescriptive foundation is likely to influence the character of DFS’ development.

Over the years, the Government of India has facilitated financial access by promoting account opening through various programs such as the Swabhimaan scheme.  Launched in 2011, the scheme aimed to bring access to banking facilities to all villages in the country with a population of 2,000 or more by March 2012 with the target to reach 74,000 villages primarily through DFS enabled transaction agents.  The PMJDY programme launched in 2014 expanded the previous financial inclusion mandates with the target to open an additional 50,000 agent locations, and as of August 2015, 177 million accounts had been opened under the scheme.

Figure 1 Market Presence of Major Banks in India

**Agent market presence is defined as the proportion of cash-in/cash-out (CICO) agents serving each provider. Numbers here are provided on a till basis not on the outlet level. Hence, if an agent serves three providers, it is counted three times.  This method therefore discounts smaller exclusive networks. The seven providers with the highest market presence are presented in this pie chart, with the categories ‘public sector banks’ and ‘other private sector banks’ consisting of a number of banks that have a market presence of less than 4% each.

The Helix Institute’s Agent Network Accelerator (ANA) survey in India, conducted between January and March 2015, interviewed 2,682 agents across 14 states and provides supporting data on the extent to which the DFS market is led by government players. The research on market presence of DFS providers (Figure 1) illustrates that Government owned public sector banks, led by the State Bank of India, account for 79% of all agents surveyed, with an even higher presence in rural areas—88% of rural agents are linked to public sector banks. This is because the government has placed a disproportionately large emphasis on public sector banks to establish agents relative to the private sector banks, so that the big public sector banks such as SBI and BOI have a lot of agents which are concentrated in rural areas, versus the big private sector banks like ICIC and HDFC which have much lower agent market presence and are more focused on urban areas.

The ANA India research shows agents conduct a median of 13 transactions per day, which is the second lowest across all ANA research countries. However, this was primarily driven by account opening under the Government’s PMJDY programme, which was well under way and being promoted during ANA data collection. As a result the programme inflated the number of transactions. In fact, PMJDY alone accounts for 38% of reported transactions and when PMJDY figures are removed from transaction levels, agent daily transaction volumes decrease to a median of 10 a day.  Therefore, the government’s account opening programme is propping up the volume of transactions, and without it another driver will have to take its place to drive higher volumes.

Figure 2 Agent Median Daily Transactions and Monthly Profits across ANA Countries

Note: Profitability as shown in the Figure is calculated as earnings – operating expenses for all countries. In the case of India, the fixed monthly component given to agents has also been considered in this calculation. This is different from other ANA countries where commissions earned makes up the total earnings of the agent. The profits reported in India are at an outlet level as opposed to other countries where they are at a provider level.

Hence, the ANA data shows us that the number of agents in India, their reach out into rural areas, and the volumes of transactions they are doing are all largely driven by top-down government policy. The Brookings Institution’s 2015 Financial and Digital Inclusion Report and Scorecard ranks the Indian government number one is the world for the work it has done to extend this access to finance.  However, now that this initial infrastructure has been laid, the important question is: will the government have to continue pushing it, or will the private sector now pick-up where the government has left off and provide a business case for agents to continue being agents?  Further, the Government and Intermedia data show that about half the accounts opened are not active, meaning that the extension of access that the government drove still has not translated very efficiently into usage of these systems.

New important payments bank legislation has just been approved to allow a set of eleven diverse players to now try their hand at digital financial services. Their task will be to ensure that agents are busy and provide a high level of customer service to Indians seeking digital financial solutions.  Our next blog analyses the ANA data to give these payment bank licensees some practical advice as to where they should start if they are to achieve this goal.

State of Business Correspondent Industry in India – The Supply Side Story

This presentation aims to look into the supply side dynamics and present views of business correspondent network managers (BCNMs). BCNMs are responsible for the operational heavy lifting to make financial inclusion a reality. Thus, the paper highlights some of the key concerns of this critical stakeholder in the financial inclusion process, as well as their perspectives and expectations from various other stakeholders in financial inclusion space.

This presentation is based on a survey conducted by MicroSave in 2014, with fourteen leading BCNMs. The survey included gathering information on a variety of key outreach, transaction and activity metrics and a questionnaire to elicit qualitative aspects of BC operations. The questionnaire had four main components – (i) background and services offered, (ii) technology details, (iii) business management, and (iv) commissions and incentives.

Transformation of Microfinance Institutions to Small Finance Banks: Differentiating Men from the Boys!

MFIs transforming into Small Finance Banks will face capital restructuring challenges. SFBs will have to depend on their customers’ deposits, shareholders’ equity along with ‘refinance’ facilities from bulk lenders. In this Note we discuss how SFBs can build a first class retail institution, focussed on low-income clients. It is safe to conclude that transformation of MFIs to SFBs is challenging – particularly since MFIs have only extended credit to date. In order to transform from “credit only” to “deposit mobilising” institutions,   they will have to work on many areas. Some of these areas are 1. Brand repositioning 2. Investment in human capital, and 3. Complimenting savings with payments.

Transformation of Microfinance Institutions into Small Finance Banks: Will it be a Roller Coaster?

“In 2013, Dr. Nachiket Mor committee recommended differential licensing in the form of two categories: i) Payments Bank, and ii) Small Finance Bank (SFB) to further financial inclusion in India. There are various perceived challenges when MFI have to transform from their existing credit led structure to full service small finance bank. Challenges are largely perceived in capital restructuring following RBI guideline to reduce the bank loan exposure to three – four times of their net owned fund and replace it with deposits mobilised from the customer. Challenges become momentous considering arrival of payment bank tapping the same market segment.

In this Note, we discuss various challenges that MFIs may face while transforming to small finance bank and plausible solution in the subsequent note.”

Designing an Effective User Interface for USSD: Part2

In the first part of this blog series Designing an effective user interface for USSD”, we presented a comparative analysis of various access channels used for accessing mobile money services. This blog presents the behavioural insights from the user perspective based on the recent research conducted by MicroSave with a leading MNO in five geographies. The research aimed to gauge the experience of semi-literate mobile money users who access their mobile wallets using USSD channel. These insights will hopefully help providers simplify and re-design user interfaces, especially for users like Suraj.

WHERE ARE WE

The insights detailed below emerged from MicroSave’s field research specifically focussed on USSD based user interfaces.

a. Users are “number literate”

Numeracy is prevalent even among less/un-educated respondents. Most users often learnt the navigation flow by using only “numbers”. For instance, users quite comfortably used the short code *400*2*1* for self-prepaid recharge. Even new users, after a guided session, were able to memorise short codes/ numeric strings (like *100*1*1*2#) for completing their transactions. The preference for memorisation avoids the need to navigate multiple screens, thereby helping the users to locate the required option instantaneously and reducing transaction time.

b. Users suffer from a “tyranny of choice”

Like most of us, the respondents also face the paradox of choice. The user group often got confused while locating required service from various options on the main menu. This means that the “long list” type of menu is not suited for these users. In the USSD menu of one of the MNOs, instead of one option like Send Money, there are multiple options such as “Send Money to bank” and “Send Money to Money Wallet” which often confused users.

c. Users are “text averse”

Most users are not comfortable reading wordy options such as “Send to other mobile”, “Send money to any bank account” and “प्रीपेड रिचार्ज दूसरों के लिए” (Hindi for prepaid recharge for others). In the absence of additional help or detailed explanations (lack of which is a major limitation of USSD), these phrases look ambiguous to the respondents. Such phrases and sentences fail to solicit the required input from users.

d. Users do not prefer “unrelated” clubbing

The respondents often do not understand the sub-menu options displayed under a main menu option. This confusion is often due to presence of sub-menu options, which instead of being clubbed with “similar/complementary” main menu option, are present under “different/unrelated option”. For instance, on USSD main menu of an MNO “Agent locator” (a sub-menu option) is clubbed with “My account” (a main menu option). The users, however, perceived that “My account” option would display their profile details, mini statement, change/forgot password options etc.

Such unrelated clubbing of options also obstructs the discoverability of required mobile money services while navigating the mobile money menu. For instance, in the utility bill payments option, clubbing two different types of payments such as one-time payments (for example, charity) and recurring payments (such as DTH recharge) often leads to confusion.

e. Users often get confused with some “terms”

The present USSD menu is laden with complex terms and banking jargon such as merchant, beneficiary etc., which are not well understood by the users. This hampers navigation, since users are less likely to discover services buried among a bunch of unfamiliar terms. Interpretation of certain banking terms in Hindi (which are quite complex as well) such as आदाता (Receiver), लाभार्थी (Beneficiary) etc. is often more difficult.

WHERE WE’VE TO GO

a. “Geography” specific main menu

While a broad range of mobile money services are offered, the services which see aggressive adoption by users varies from location to location. The use-case differs substantially among users in rural and urban areas. In rural areas, for instance, users prefer mobile wallets for DTH recharge; whereas in urban areas, bill payments have seen widespread uptake. Send Money, similarly is preferred in urban areas and Withdraw Money is more common in rural areas.

USSD menus should be redesigned by considering geography specific needs. Subsequently, various main menu options should be prioritised. Users will not only find the USSD menus more appealing, relevant and tailor-made, but will also avoid navigating less/un-important options.

b. “Limited” unbundled main menu

Mostusers prefer an explicit ‘unbundled menu’ with limited number of options. Needless to say, “re-designed menu” must consider the small screen size limitation of widely used basic and feature phones; as these users otherwise may not prefer scrolling multiple (vertical) options. Such a menu should host geography specific, “basic” and “frequently used” services. Overall, an unbundled menu must be designed to simplify the “discoverability” of useful mobile money services.

c. Nesting  only “complementary” options

The sub-menu options should be aligned and clubbed under “relevant” and “complementary” main menu options. Related service features/options should be housed under one “umbrella” term; which is easy to understand. Such bundling will significantly improve the interpretation, awareness and usability of sub-options. For example, an option such as “Agent Locator” can be clubbed with a main menu option such as ‘Send Money’, as the location of the outlet (for P2P transfer) at cash-out geography is of prime importance to the sender.

d. “Customised” menu based on usage history

Usage behaviour of the mobile money users can be leveraged to explore the possibility of a “dynamic” main menu. This feature presents an option to derive a “new” USSD menu depending on users’ transactions behaviour. The main menu options, can get automaticallyprioritised and present a “re-designed” and “customised” menu to its users. Providers, of course, will find it technologically challenging to design such a dynamic menu as the follow-up sub-menu options are dependent on user’s inputs.

e. Using “familiar” terms

Most of the respondents, both illiterate and semi-literate using mobile phones and money transfer services, were familiar with certain English terms used commonly in banking and telecom industry. Words such as sender, receiver, recharge, balance, cash-in etc. are self-explanatory and easily understood. These terms can be used to “simplify” the interpretation of mobile money services, thereby limiting the degree of mediation required.

In addition to the suggested changes, the providers may further “create” and “promote” simple and easy to use numeric strings for some of the frequently used mobile money services such as prepaid recharge, DTH recharge, send money etc.

Navigation in itself, of course, does not necessarily offer a standalone solution for simplifying user’s experience. However, the design of USSD menu certainly influences adoption and degree of usage of mobile money. The need to design an easy and intuitive USSD menu, hence cannot be undermined.

 

Designing an Effective User Interface for USSD: Part 1

Suraj is an illiterate migrant from Muzzafarpur (Bihar) who works at a construction site in Delhi. He has recently opened a mobile wallet with a leading mobile network operator (MNO) in India. When we met him, his primary concern was – “How would I use my (mobile money) account, when I don’t even know where to find the required service?”

Users like Suraj represent the target customer group for mobile wallet service providers. One of the common attributes of this user group is the inability to use mobile money services on their own. This necessitates mediation from a family member or an agent to conduct a transaction. The most quoted reason for facilitation is the difficulty faced in “locating” various service offerings.

The user interface (UI) plays a vital role in facilitating usability and enhancing user experience. Globally, mobile money service providers offer different access channels such as mobile application, internet, unstructured supplementary service data (USSD), interactive voice response (IVR) and SIM toolkit (STK).  MicroSave came up with a comparative analysis of some of the commonly used access channels, please see the image below for details.

The choice of a particular access channel is dependent on various factors such as technology requirements, handset capabilities, cost of use, security concerns, ease of use etc.

In a developing country like India, most mobile phone users still own basic and feature phones. USSD, which is cost effective for the MNOs and is accessible from all types of phones, is, at present the best available option to reach the mass market. This view is also supported by the fact that USSD is used by most large scale deployments across the world.

COMMON TYPES OF USSD MENU

USSD menus can be broadly categorised as bundled and unbundled. Generally, a bundled menu, with limited options in main menu, requires more navigation for exploring sub-menu options (see figure 2).

An unbundled menu, on the other hand, has a detailed/long list of options in the main menu itself. Here, the extent of navigation is reduced as there are limited sub-menu options. While navigating through the USSD user interface of various mobile money providers, it can be seen that both the types of menus (with varying degree) are prevalent in India.

In the second part of this blog series “Designing an effective user interface for USSD”, we highlight insights into the behavioural aspects of users when using mobile money services via USSD.