With PSR regulations, banks will need to intervene on potentially fraudulent payments more frequently to avoid greater losses to fraud. The challenge they face is, if you need to intervene more often, how do you justify that friction as being in the best interests of the customer? And on top of that how do you appropriately expose the 'seams' of the technology & information you are using to make your decisions in a world where you are not allowed to tell the customer everything? What does the experience look like following an intervention, particularly if it is a false positive?

My role on this 8 week project was to help answer these big questions. I rapidly prototyped whilst applying IF's trust framework to create a series of payment intervention scenarios which enabled us to test customers attitudes towards more informed interventions, and how they might respond to a payment being slowed or even blocked under various circumstances.

Our findings were then synthesised into a report presented back to senior stakeholders in both the payments and fraud teams.

A lot happened in 8 weeks – I spoke to 17 customers, dealt with a bereavement, worked up-hill against some fiery stakeholders & had to bring teams with opposing metrics together from across a major bank.

Sadly, at IF's request, I can only share details of this work during direct conversations. Contact me so we can chat.