2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 4
Overview ...................................................................................................................................................... 4
Key Findings ............................................................................................................................................................... 5
Financial Services ....................................................................................................................................................... 7
Key Performance Indicators: Financial Institutions ..................................................................................... 7
Key Performance Indicators: Card Issuers ................................................................................................. 8
Factors That Drive Change in KPIs ............................................................................................................. 10
Digital FI ....................................................................................................................................... 10
Regional FI ................................................................................................................................... 11
Card Issuer ................................................................................................................................... 11
Communicating With Leadership .............................................................................................................. 11
Working With Information Security .......................................................................................................... 13
Influencing Investment Decisions ............................................................................................................. 13
Retailers .................................................................................................................................................................. 15
Key Performance Indicators ...................................................................................................................... 15
Factors That Drive Change in KPIs............................................................................................................. 16
Communicating With Leadership.............................................................................................................. 17
Mature: Multichannel Retailer ................................................................................................... 17
Developing: Marketplace Retailer .............................................................................................. 17
Working With Information Security .......................................................................................................... 18
Influencing Investment Decisions ............................................................................................................. 19
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................... 20
Recommendations .................................................................................................................................... 20

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 3

FOREWORD
This whitepaper, sponsored by RSA explores the challenges faced by fraud
practitioners in effectively communicating fraud threats and trends to senior
leadership, along with best practices in the financial services and retail industries
for securing buy-in on new initiatives and technology investments. The whitepaper
was independently produced by Javelin Strategy & Research. Javelin maintains
complete independence in its data collection, findings, and analysis.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Overview

In the financial and retail industries, effectively managing enterprise fraud risk is
ultimately a three-step process: measure, communicate, and act. For a non-
practitioner, this process can appear simple; however, in practice, getting each
step right can be a long, complex exercise of trial and error. In this report, Javelin
explores how different types of organizations in these industries go about each of
the three steps, diving into their respective challenges and motivations and
uncovering best practices and pitfalls. Optimizing the fraud management process
isn’t easy, but it can mean the difference between securing buy-in from senior
leadership and being underequipped to repel new and significant fraud threats
that threaten the profitability and reputation of the business.

The Three Stages of Business-Driven Fraud Management

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 5

KEY FINDINGS
The three KPIs that consistently matter to senior leadership are fraud losses,
expenses, and the impact on the customer. These metrics represent the baseline
for managing fraud by measuring the bottom-line impact. Communicating the
numbers and tying them to financial performance allow senior leadership to
understand the changes and enable the business units to understand the return
on investment and act on new fraud solutions. Customer impact or experience is
just as critical as the losses. Negative customer experiences will result in reduced
revenue and loss of that customer’s acquisition cost.

Loss and expense metrics are important for motivating change, but don’t
underestimate the influence of intangibles such as reputational risk. There are
few things worse than opening the morning paper and learning that your
organization had a breach or has been part of a significant fraud event. Even if the
situations are “relatively” small and manageable from a risk standpoint, the public
is highly aware of fraud and cybercrime. These events affect your customers and
the people they talk to. On a broader scale, they affect the organization’s
reputation in the market and consumers’ decision to do business with the
organization.

When setting targets, organizations look beyond their own historical

performance to the broader industry and compare peer performance. It is easy
for organizations to get caught up in their own perceptions of performance.
Engaging peer networks, seeking out research, and talking to vendors about
industry performance can highlight areas for improvement, along with early
indicators of up-and-coming risks. Industry benchmarks are the minimum
performance levels, and management’s goal should be set to outperform them
and consistently make improvements.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 6

Network-level attacks bring info security and fraud teams together. Digital
channels have become ground zero in the fight against fraud. Data breaches and
faceless, automated attacks are a relentless burden on organizations of all shapes
and sizes. This has required a much closer working relationship between
information security and fraud management. What looks like benign activity to
one group may be a significant problem when viewed holistically. Ultimately,
making the smartest decisions on new investments for mitigating these risks
requires both teams to be at the table.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 7

FINANCIAL SERVICES

Key Performance Indicators:

Financial Institutions

Confronted with an environment in which government regulations and low

interest rates have placed serious pressure on banks’ earnings, FI fraud teams are
expected now more than ever to stem losses while controlling costs. So, it is
unsurprising that when it comes to measuring KPIs, the metrics that are
communicated most to senior leadership are net fraud loss, loss avoidance,
customer impact, and operational expenses.

FIs measure their net fraud loss and loss avoidance (prevented and recovered)
across channels, including ATM, online, mobile RDC, call center, and branch, and
by product such as ACH, check, debit card, and wire. The net fraud loss KPI can be
further delineated into the specific types of fraud occurring in each channel, such
as account takeover (ATO), and with each product, including counterfeit card, lost/
stolen card, card not present (CNP), check forgery, counterfeiting, alteration, and
kiting.

Among the most expensive and insidious forms of fraud, ATO is on the rise with
losses jumping 61% from 2015 to 2016.1 As a result, measuring the overall rate of
completed ATO is not enough for some FIs. One digital FI in particular also
measures ATO by uncompleted attempts and profile takeovers. A profile takeover
is when the account is accessed but money movement is not attempted. Detecting
these events can help FIs stop fraud before losses can occur. On the flip side,
measuring and examining ATO attempts that were not completed provide insights
on areas where the FI is having some success — helping to justify previous
investments and process changes.

Operational expenses are typically reported in a similar manner as fraud losses,

but measuring the impact of fraud on the customer experience may require a
more nuanced approach. The risk profile for each product, channel, or even

1
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/identity-fraud-hits-record-number-americans-2016-n715756

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 8

customer segment can differ significantly, requiring fraud management costs to be

measured individually. And while the impact on customer experience could
include measuring false-positive rates for POS and CNP transactions and holds on
deposits, FIs may also monitor verification of documentation during onboarding,
inbound call abandonment rates, and remediation time on cases.

Understanding how their industry peers are performing can be extremely useful
for fraud teams seeking additional investment or touting the effectiveness of their
efforts. But while some FIs leverage industry benchmarks to determine where
they stand relative to their peers, there is a lack of reliable information on certain
types of fraud. This is due to the diverse nature of FIs where different approaches
to managing lines of business can affect the way that fraud is tracked. For
example, one FI may place a counterfeit check ATM deposit in the ATM fraud
bucket, while another one would place it in the check fraud bucket — with other
FIs placing it somewhere in between.

Key Performance Indicators:

Card Issuers

Existing-card fraud is a major component of consumer financial fraud and, its

incidence rate has jumped over the last twelve months. 2 As the stewards of
consumers’ existing-card accounts, payment card issuers are on the frontlines of
fraud protection in a highly active zone. Yet preventing and detecting fraud are
not the only priorities card issuers face. There is also a delicate balance to strike
between minimizing fraud losses and avoiding adverse effects on the customer
experience. As such, card issuers’ KPIs consist not only of fraud losses and
operational expenses related to fraud prevention, but also the impact of customer
controls and decline rates on the customer experience.

Card issuers lean heavily on historical customer data to identify fraud risk
indicators and build algorithms to flag transactions. To ensure accurate models,
issuers measure fraud events and losses extremely closely, tracking changes in

2
http://www.pymnts.com/news/security-and-risk/2017/identity-fraud-numbers-rose-16-percent-in-2016/

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 9

fraud losses in basis points. While these models adapt over time and adjust to long
-term fraud trends, issuers are occasionally faced with sudden and potentially
devastating “flash fraud” events in which criminals uncover and capitalize on a
specific vulnerability. In these instances, issuers are able to introduce new rules to
their algorithms to immediately begin flagging attacks of that specific nature.

Developing and managing these systems take sizable investment and support
staff. Operational costs can be steep for maintaining these systems, but some
issuers are working to minimize operational costs in other areas. For example,
they are eliminating fraud analysts who contact customers directly when fraud is
suspected. In their place, they are automating customer contact through SMS
alerts or push notification alerts. Thus, issuers not only minimize costs, but they
also receive higher response rates (and quicker responses). They also benefit by
more accurately identifying fraud and avoiding false positives.

Issuers differ from FIs in that they do not have the advantage of stickiness in the
services they provide customers. While FIs build deep relationships with
customers through cross-selling, and benefit from those relationships through
multiple revenue sources, issuers’ relationships with customers are often
transitory. Most consumers carry multiple cards, and while they may prefer one
over the others, this preference is highly shakable and a card’s top-of-wallet status
can be threatened by a single fraud event or inconvenient decline.

The vulnerability of consumers’ card usage to fraud and false positives has several
consequences. When a consumer stops using a card altogether, the issuer loses all
future interest and interchange fees on that card. This long-term proposition
underlines the imperative to reduce friction in the customer experience, even at
some cost. To better gauge their top-of-wallet vulnerability, issuers may track the
customer impact of transaction declines using the net promoter score.
Additionally, issuers will often consider the amount of interchange on a suspicious
purchase when weighing the decision to decline or not, balancing what they risk
to lose from fraud against the expected loss from the purchase or customer
relationship.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 10

While businesses and payments going digital comes with risks, it also provides
ample opportunity for the parties involved in a payment to share information for
increased accuracy in fraud detection. In addition to card usage data and
fraudulent purchase attempts, issuers leverage the digital channel to identify
suspicious activity, including account takeovers. Much like FIs, payment card
issuers often monitor their customers’ online and mobile account access in order
to track failed login attempts and interdiction rates. It is also increasingly
important as consumers move card credentials into third-party wallets (e.g., Apple
Pay), which issuers monitor pass/fail rates for enrollment, along with fraud
volume related to mobile wallet transactions.

Factors That Drive Change in KPIs

The financial sector has pioneered the adoption of big data as a strategic tool for
security and operations. However, once systems for collection and measurement
are established they can become resistant to change, and the importance of
flexibility cannot be understated in a changing fraud environment. Players in the
financial market shared some of their experiences developing new metrics when
new trends emerged or existing metrics became stale:

Digital FI:
 An executive saw an opportunity to better understand customers’
experience with fraud controls and identify pain points, an issue that
touched on both operational risk and customer experience.
 Both departments came on board during a joint meeting, where the
executive suggested collecting the following data:
 The number of holds on transactions that result in returns or
abandoned purchases
 The overall card decline rate
 Pass/fail rates on online account logins
 Service level in the call center
 As a result of these metrics, a new KPI was developed that allows the FI a
more intimate understanding of how fraud and declines affect business.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 11

Regional FI:
 Quarterly meetings are held to review the performance of existing fraud
metrics.
 Any meeting attendee can suggest changes to the metrics.

 Ownership of new metrics lies with a single person who defines, creates, and
implements the metrics, as well as measuring their performance.
 It is important to have this formal space for suggesting new metrics, but a
more flexible system would have a continually open avenue to revise and
update metrics.

Card Issuer:
 Card issuers face some of the most slippery and rapidly changing fraud
attacks, and small changes in trends that elude existing metrics can quickly
add up to millions of dollars in losses.
 In the fraud environment for issuers, it is important that measurements are
frequent as they are accurate.
 One card issuer moved from monthly to daily reporting across the account
life cycle, statistically comparing daily reports to rolling 30-, 60-, and 90-day
metrics.
 This issuer also records suspicious login data to get an early read on when
there is an attack or process issue.

Communicating With Leadership

As fraud reporting has risen to the boardrooms of FIs and card issuers, there is
more formality in the reporting process and awareness of the impact to business.
FIs and card issuers both report on a monthly and quarterly basis.

Regular reporting serves a dual purpose in maintaining a close relationship

between fraud teams and the boardroom. First and foremost, it ensures that
leadership is appropriately informed of significant new developments, whether
these are the continuation of previously observed trends or new schemes that are
stressing existing controls. Second, it ensures that leadership is kept informed
when business is progressing normally, expanding communication with leadership
beyond funding requests or times when antifraud measures are under notable
stress.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 12

 Start at the top: One digital FI sends the monthly report on fraud losses and
current trends to the operational risk committee, which includes the head of
fraud, head of compliance, general counsel, and president. The quarterly
report is sent to the board, and the head of fraud addresses the board when
events are significant. There is also a board risk committee, which the head
of fraud will engage when something happens outside the FI’s risk tolerance.
 Start with the experts, and then communicate upward: Another regional FI
has monthly meetings between the enterprise fraud council and the
operational risk council, with the outcomes sent to senior leadership. The
fraud management leader also meets quarterly with business line leaders to
present the scorecards for their products.

While regular updates for senior leadership are indispensable, when a significant
fraud event has been detected or is unfolding, there is a need for immediate
communication with the senior leadership. Like with periodic fraud reporting, it is
important to have formal processes for determining which fraud events are
escalated to leadership and the channels to use for escalation.

 24 hour or less reporting: One card issuer has a formal policy to report a
fraud event within 24 hours when it meets certain criteria. This can be
challenging because the totality of the situation may not be clear in that time
frame. The message is communicated through the fraud management
organization to the executives. The situation is assessed based on customer
impact, PR impact, as well as fraud losses.
 Internal fraud hotline: Another FI uses an internal hotline for employees to
report recently identified or rapidly unfolding fraud issues. The information is
immediately routed to the business line leader to weigh the risk and
exposure. While less useful for communication with senior leadership, these
kinds of internal hotlines can be used to gather information from employees
in areas such as the call center that see new fraud schemes firsthand and
may be able to provide early indications of new schemes or tactics.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 13

Working With Information Security

As FIs and issuers go digital, so do the criminals. With more and more fraud
coming through data compromises and network-level attacks, fraud teams
leverage their information security colleagues to more quickly react to threats and
better protect their customers.
As with interacting with senior leadership, integrating data from information
security teams through regular communication is essential. One issuer’s
information security team publishes a daily update of cyber events from the prior
day. Statistics are provided on the number and types of incidents, along with
highlights by region and any cyber news that hit the wires. The information
security team also provides monthly briefings and an annual report.

A digital FI’s information security team and fraud team have monthly metric
reviews from both sides of the house. Network-level attacks are shared as part of
the cyber threat operations update. Day-to-day communications are strengthened
with team members participating on each other’s teams to understand how
network-level attacks affect customers and result in fraud. When the information
security team has an inquiry on a fraud event, it knows exactly whom to contact
on the fraud team for assistance.

Influencing Investment Decisions

Typically viewed as a cost center instead of a profit center, the fraud team faces
significant challenges securing funding from senior leadership for new solutions
and initiatives. Success requires a Lingua Franca, or common language, which can
be used to deliver the most persuasive message. For FIs and issuers, this starts
with the four common KPIs, which then are tailored and supplemented to meet
the unique needs of their organization.

 Develop a formal reporting process. Institutionalizing the process of

escalating fraud reporting and funding requests to upper management can
ensure that buy-in across core stakeholders is accomplished. One fraud team

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 14

at a digital FI described its process. First, it worked with the CFO to examine
the process of collecting and reporting fraud loss information. The CFO’s
involvement and buy-in are critical. Then the team looked at the net fraud
losses and anticipated what not implementing a solution could cost. The
team used this effectively when analyzing its EMV rollout investment.
 Reduce metrics to their simplest component. Developing even a
rudimentary return on investment (ROI) calculator can help in reducing an
array of stats to a single figure that can be used in pitching new fraud
investment. A major card issuer uses this type of tool to determine fraud
investment feasibility. The calculator looks at the value of fraud application
avoidance, zero-balance closures, revenue on declines, and more to reach a
net save calculation, which is then divided by the operational costs.

 Build in flexibility where possible. One regional FI maintains separate funds

for investments to address potential fraud events. While this approach
spares the fraud team from having to escalate every challenging fraud
scheme, it also requires supervision to ensure that these funds are
appropriately applied to new schemes that cannot be addressed with
existing resources.

For card issuers and FIs alike, fraud teams need to fight for resources, especially as
the fraud management teams and investments are viewed as costs. Creating KPIs
that senior management understand makes it easier for everyone to have a
positive impact on the bottom line.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 15

RETAILERS

Key Performance Indicators

Retailers are under tremendous strain from rising CNP fraud. Card networks place
the liability for CNP fraud on merchants, motivating them to invest heavily in fraud
prevention technology and operational teams. Retailers also face cyber threats to
their networks as criminals attempt to compromise customers’ account
credentials and payment data. Not surprisingly, retailers measure, communicate,
and act on almost the same KPIs as FIs and card issuers. All things considered,
retailers and issuers are different sides of the same coin.

For retailers, fraud loss is typically measured as a percentage of sales across all of
the channels where they conduct business, including the physical store, website,
telephone, and the hybrid “buy online, pick up in store.” The fraud loss
performance is compared with the budgeted plan for each channel. Marketplace
retailers, including Amazon, Bonanza, eBay, Etsy, Newegg, and Rakuten, rely on
sales commissions for promoting products, which makes not only dollars lost to
fraud but also lost sales commissions useful metrics for assessing the impact of
fraud on their businesses.

Retailers rely heavily on customer experience, knowing that there is a fine line
between a repeat customer and an abandoned cart. Reviewing customer
challenge rates for online transactions can uncover fraud and customer
experience issues. In addition, marketplace retailers are likely to track defect
rates, where a transaction goes bad and a buyer reports a negative experience as
this could indicate a latent fraud issue with the seller.

Monitoring websites for unusual behavior is table stakes in the digital world. In
particular, retailers may monitor the website sign-in failure rate to identify activity
at sign-in or registration that is indicative of a volumetric fraud attack. The mass
compromise of login credentials at sites such as LinkedIn and Yahoo are providing
criminals with the tools they need to identify vulnerable e-commerce accounts.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 16

Criminals take lists of stolen credentials and leverage automated scripts that will
attempt each user name and password at an online retailer’s site in the hopes that
a portion can provide access to customers’ accounts.

Fraud management is not naturally a core element of a retailer’s business.

Instead, retailers are focused on creating a positive customer experience and
building customer loyalty around their brand. That said, finding the right metrics
requires insightful fraud staff and a leadership team that empowers them,
knowing that ineffective fraud management can undermine the very elements
that are central to the success of their business.

Factors That Drive Change in KPIs

As with all metrics, what gets measured gets done. The more confidence senior
leadership has in its fraud management metrics, the more likely it can be
influenced by them — buying into positive performance and respecting
challenges, ultimately leading to the support that fraud teams need.

The most important attribute of a KPI for merchants is that it reduces the array of
fraud data that analysts monitor daily to a single point that can be understood and
acted on by leadership that does not require the same level of detailed
understanding as the fraud team. This necessitates using financial metrics that
easily grab attention, such as fraud as a percentage of sales.

Consistent use of the same metric allows senior leadership to view it as a

barometer of the current state of fraud management compared with historical
data. Layering in industry benchmarks can also prove effective in spurring senior
leadership to act, as it could give them a competitive edge over their peers.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 17

Communicating With Leadership

Retailers’ processes for collecting and communicating KPIs will be at varying stages
of maturity. The goal for retailers should be to provide senior leadership with
easily understood, timely fraud data that allows them to make well-informed
business decisions. Achieving the optimal state requires senior leadership’s focus,
time, and faith in the value of these processes. Discussions with a multichannel
retailer and a marketplace retailer illustrate two varying levels of maturity:

Mature: Multichannel Retailer

 Leverage their fraud analytics teams to pull out the fraud trends by store and
by product.
 Dig deeper into the data to tease out more underlying details where
necessary. That level of detail is not shared with the executives, only a
general description of what is being seen and the remediation steps being
taken.
 Have more resources to make capital investments in analytics and data
mining. This gives them an advantage over smaller retailers in analyzing and
preventing fraud losses and covering the losses that get through.
Communicate weekly with their executives about fraud events.
 More serious fraud events are escalated immediately.
 All retailers are challenged in rapidly identifying fraud because of the
charge-back process, which can take up to 60 days. Private-label
transaction frauds are shared more rapidly.
 When severe fraud events occur, the retailer will initiate communication
through conference calls, email notifications with the losses thus far, overall
exposure, and the underlying driver.

Developing: Marketplace Retailer

 KPIs continue to evolve:

 Simplifying reporting for leadership in general

 Adjusting for changing fraud trends
 Developing new metrics that are deemed more important by
leadership.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 18

 Hold monthly meetings to review fraud KPIs. However, there are challenges
when there is executive turnover in the fraud department.
 Underinvestment in fraud management and the inherent delay from
chargebacks contribute to a reactive environment. A fraud event is usually
followed by a flood of communication from customers, which makes its way
to leadership then back to the fraud team. From there a rapid response
workflow is developed and put into place.

Working With Information Security

Compared to FIs and issuers, large retailer fraud teams tend to work closely with
their peers in information security to identify and manage security events that
contribute to fraud. For some retailers, cooperation takes the form of a monthly
meeting, where information is exchanged on things like chatter on underground
forums that could provide clues about new fraud targets and schemes.

A clear opportunity for cooperation is in leveraging information security to

monitor for post-breach activity and subsequently to identify at-risk logins. An
example provided by a multichannel retailer involved identifying dormant
customer accounts with Yahoo email addresses after the Yahoo breach, which in
turn resulted in additional monitoring of these accounts along with closer scrutiny
during transactions. As an alternative, the information security team of a
marketplace retailer monitored for potentially breached customer logins detected
on the dark web and shared them with the fraud team for additional fraud
monitoring. With such a significant reliance on the online channel, partnership
between fraud and information security teams is a vital element of a successful
fraud management program for retailers.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 19

Influencing Investment Decisions

For merchants with exposure to online and mobile channels, fraud as a

percentage of sales in these channels can be a significant inducement to invest in
fraud prevention solutions. From a fraud loss liability perspective, most of their
risk is in these channels and that risk is only growing.

Retailers tend to view fraud as a cost of doing business, especially as fraud may
not be detected until months after it has occurred. If fraud losses are within
tolerance, then the focus remains on selling and serving their customers.
Significant changes to a retailer’s budgeted fraud plan, on the other hand, may
motivate research to determine if other retailers are experiencing a similar trend.
The results of this research can lead to engagement with vendors, staring with a
request for proposals, followed by a pilot and an analysis to determine the
systemic impact of the solution before full implementation. There are many
providers in the online fraud space, and this process allows the retailer to cut
through the noise to find solutions that provide the best return on investment
(ROI).

But even among retailers that conduct business in the same channels, there can
be unique considerations that motivate investment in certain solutions.
Marketplace retailers have more at risk than traditional online merchants, as they
can be held responsible for both the cost of lost merchandise and the seller’s fees.
With such a wide array of merchandise, these retailers are attractive fraud targets.
At the same time, they may eschew onerous fraud controls as they compete with
a diverse array of retailers, meaning they cannot risk creating an unpleasant
experience as the customer could easily go elsewhere. According to one executive,
this has left them without strong authentication at login, resulting in an outsized
risk of suffering credential-stuffing attacks using traditional usernames and
passwords. The potential for fraud losses and reputational damage has made the
sign-in failure rate a critical KPI for this retailer and has led to investments to
protect customers’ logins without a sufficiently clear ROI.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 20

CONCLUSION
Optimizing fraud management is predicated on effective communication with
senior leadership. To achieve this end, FI and retailer fraud teams need to develop
an understanding of what leadership deems to be important, translating that into
metrics and communication practices that resonate. As fraud continues to evolve,
the ability to relay how fraud is affecting the business is critical for securing
funding for fraud prevention tools to preserve customer loyalty and company
profitability before significant damage is done.

Recommendations

Use metrics that can be easily understood without a background in fraud. The
KPIs favored by executives include losses, expenses, and customer impact. The
biggest trick is determining what each of these buckets consists of and keeping
track of each line item behind the numbers. For example, do expenses include
time spent by customer service or information security to research and resolve
fraud issues? When the bottom-line numbers change, you’ll need to explain the
reasons for the changes. Having this underlying data enables the fraud team to
manage changes in their business. The underlying data can be used to put
together effective business cases for investments to reduce fraud and
demonstrate ongoing fraud solution performance (or lack thereof).

Put a formal process in place for communicating sudden, major events. Don’t
wait for the quarterly review to notify leadership of a problem. The leadership
team likely has an escalation process in place for other business issues — follow
that process as closely as possible. This may include a weekly meeting where high-
priority issues are discussed with the right people. Work with the leadership team
to understand the types and severity of events they want to be notified about.
Each organization will be different in their expectations, so start by leaning toward
providing more information and then pare back until the proper balance is
achieved.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 21

Don’t just report on what is happening; come to the table with a plan to
remediate. The fraud management team owns the fraud problems. Be prepared
for the discussion with senior leadership by coming to the table with two or three
ways to deal with the problem and the consequences of each option.

Work hand in hand with information security to identify which metrics are
leading indicators of potential fraud risk. Daily contact between the groups is a
must. It is also worthwhile to cross-pollinate analysts across teams so they know
whom to call for different types of questions and indicator sharing. Combining the
information security team’s technical knowledge with the fraud team’s view of
criminals’ behavior is invaluable.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100
 22

ABOUT JAVELIN
Javelin Strategy & Research, a Greenwich Associates LLC company, is a research-based advisory firm that advises
its clients to make smarter business decisions in a digital financial world. Our analysts offer unbiased, actionable
insights and unearth opportunities that help financial institutions, government entities, payment companies,
merchants, and other technology providers sustainably increase profits.

Authors: Al Pascual, Senior Vice President, Research Director and Head of Fraud & Security
Kyle Marchini, Analyst, Fraud & Security
Mike Urban, Senior Adviser
Sarah Miller, Senior Analyst – Custom Research & Operations

ABOUT RSA
RSA offers business-driven security solutions that uniquely link business context with security incidents to help
organizations manage risk and protect what matters most. RSA solutions are designed to effectively detect and
respond to advanced attacks; manage user identities and access; and reduce business risk, fraud, and cybercrime.
RSA protects millions of users around the world, and helps 94% of the Fortune 500 companies thrive in an
uncertain, high risk world. For more information, go to www.rsa.com.

METHODOLOGY
In support of this study, Javelin Strategy & Research interviewed executives across two industries: financial
services and retail. Within financial services, which included digital, regional and card issuing FIs, all institutions
were within the top 25 in deposits or number of credit cards in circulation. Among retailers interviewed, which
included multi-channel and marketplace retailers, 2016 annual revenue was at least $1 billion.

© 2017 GA Javelin LLC is a Greenwich Associates LLC company. All rights reserved. No portion of these
materials may be copied, reproduced, distributed or transmitted, electronically or otherwise, to external
parties or publicly without the permission of Greenwich Associates, LLC. GA Javelin may also have rights in
certain other marks used in these materials.

javelinstrategy.com
925.225.9100