Magic triangle in corporate banking

Recently I asked Perplexity about the discrepancies between corporate banking products and clients’ real pains and desires. Here what I’ve got:

1. Banks focus on providing standardized products, while clients desire more customised solutions
2. Clients want faster, more efficient processes and decision-making from their banks, but banks are slow to adapt
3. Clients need proactive advice on managing risks and their financial operations
4. They want seamless digital capabilities and integration with their own system
5. They also seek more transparency and clarity around fees and t&cs

This doesn’t look very insightful, but fair at the same time.

I wondered if could do the same kind of requests to our internal systems. The question was what I really want to ask and how this request can be potentially handled.

This led me to realisation that I was doing the same job each time I was thinking about the next step in our product offering. I normally appeal to my mental model ?(which presumably differs from my colleagues) of the clients. This consists of two components: what they say and what they do. What they say is gathered via direct interviews with the clients. What they do is a digital pace of clients using our systems and products. These two components I matched with the third one: our product offering, which includes the context in which it exists, i.e. macroeconomics, competitors, regulation. That is my magic triangle.

So, before I make decisions on the product offering, I triangulate what the clients say, what they do and what we have to offer to meet match their profile. AI might provide a nice platform that will help the company formalize and sync its knowledge about the clients. Besides, the experimentation with the product offering options will become more accessible. That might lead to thousands of simultaneously co-existing product options tailored to the needs of specific customer. This is exactly what the client expects, right?