Bank credit application assessment and approval coordination system
Bank employees check credit application information and route it to the responsible assessors. Approved terms are returned to the existing lending system.
Application assessors do not always see the same documents and approved financing terms. Checks are repeated, and the contract team may receive an outdated application version.
How the solution works
- The application and the requested funding conditions are linked to the data and financial documents of the verified client.
- The valuation process used by the bank presents the result of an analysis of a valid policy, approved model or expert with its version.
- An authorized decider accepts the terms, waiver or required supplement.
- A changed basis or condition receives a scheduled re-examination.
- The approved funding conditions are passed on to the contract preparation process along with the outstanding payout conditions.
Key challenges
- Credit decision process fragmented
Solution capabilities
Application details
The customer, amount, purpose and financing terms have a clearly identified original submission and subsequent revision history.
Financial information for assessment
Income, liabilities and cash flow data include their reporting period, source and verification status. The assessor can see what information is still needed.
Policy and model
The applied rule, model version and data available during assessment are retained with the decision.
Decision review and approval
An authorised employee or committee approves the decision and its rationale. Any departure from standard terms is recorded separately with the required approval.
Financing terms approval
Employees can see whether financing has final approval or whether documents or other conditions remain outstanding. The contract is prepared from the approved decision.
Handover to contract preparation
The contract preparation system receives the approved financing terms and confirms acceptance. The lending decision and actual disbursement are recorded separately.
Business context
- Credit decision process fragmented
- Application assessors do not always see the same documents and approved financing terms. Checks are repeated, and the contract team may receive an outdated application version.
- A clearer course of application helps the client plan the transaction
- The customer waiting for funding often combines the purchase with the seller and other partners. When the bank sees missing data and pending valuations, it is possible to explain the course of the application more precisely. This reduces the number and uncertainty of repeated requests to a solution without creating a promise to provide credit.
Core features
- Application details
- Financial information for assessment
- Policy and model
- Decision review and approval
- Financing terms approval
- Handover to contract preparation
Key integrations
- Client's source of knowledge
- Client data and the results of relevant identity checks are allowed for evaluation.
- Financial and credit data
- The financial fact used in the decision, its time and quality.
- Policy and Model Management
- A version of the rules and model and usage limits are allowed.
- Contracts and the Basic Banking System
- Accepted funding terms, status of execution and actual activation.
Potential impact (%)
The ranges indicate an illustrative relative change in the metric under the stated assumptions. Results depend on the starting position and actual use of the solution. Percentages for different metrics must not be added together.
Time spent verifying application information
16–42%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 40-70% of information searches and repeated cross-checks can be addressed. That share is assumed to fall by 40-60%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable workload and the resulting change.
Measure active time spent clarifying data and decisions for comparable groups of applications.
Incorrect terms passed on for execution
12–42%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 30-60% of errors can be addressed through the data and rule checks described. That share is assumed to fall by 40-70%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable share and the resulting change.
Count handovers corrected because an approved change in terms had not been passed on.
Credit applications lost because processing took too long
3–12%Decreasing
The sample scenario affects 15-30% of the indicator associated with the problem being described. This proportion is assumed to be reduced by 20-40%. Company data checks both the scope and the change achieved.
Assess applications withdrawn by customers because of processing delays separately from applications rejected under lending criteria.
Conditional calculation scenarios. The assumptions have not been validated against client measurements.
When this solution is relevant
- Several employees assess credit applications, and changes to financing terms do not always reach the contract team in time.
- During an audit or subsequent review, it is difficult to reconstruct the data, assessment model and terms on which the lending decision was based.
Project scope and implementation
The project complements the bank's crediting system in use with the functions of application verification, matching and transfer of approved conditions. First of all, the existing capabilities and integration of the system are assessed. Credit policy, risk models and employee credentials are determined by the bank; development of a new risk model is not included within the scope of this decision.
Further development options
- Variations in Additional Credit Products and Conditions
- Relationship of the decision basis to subsequent portfolio monitoring without changing the previous history of the decision