The core search process gets a lot of attention, and rightfully so with the core data processor often being the largest expense for the credit union after payroll.
While there are a variety of ways to conduct a successful core search, there are three common mistakes that can significantly impact the end result. Let’s discuss these critical missteps:
Not Identifying Your Current True Cost Of Core…
The first is failing to identify the credit union’s current true core cost, which is defined as all of the line items and services that are needed to run the core. Depending on your current core’s approach, this may be only a handful of items or it could be several line items, allocations, usage fees, and more. Before engaging with new cores, add up your current true core cost, check any home banking charges, mobile app fees, add-on loan services, charges for usage, additional workstation costs, etc. Having your true core cost will allow you to accurately compare core solution costs when you get to the proposal stage.
Failure To Create A Proper Core Search Team…
The second common mistake is the failure to create a core search team and project lead. With many moving parts and informational needs required throughout a core search, it’s key here to have both a lead and a team. Credit unions can miss important timelines and windows if they don’t have a properly structed team in place to stay on schedule. Assigning only a single individual to manage your search limits the credit union’s overall input. It can also significantly delay this time-sensitive process in the event the core search lead needs to step away from the project for a period of time.
Making A Decision Before Reviewing A Sample Contract…
The third mistake credit unions often make is deciding on their new partner before reviewing a sample contract from their top two or three finalists. Reviewing only the proposals before making a final decision can lead to potentially surprising costs revealed in the contract.
Additional line items, such as allotments, usage fees, monthly charges, accelerators, and yearly increases, may not be apparent in the proposals, but very much add to the total cost of the solution over the length of the agreement. Reviewing the finalists’ sample contracts also sheds light on how they conduct business in ways that may not have come up during your due diligence.
For additional insights and complimentary resources, such as calculators for True Cost of Core SM, editable Core Comparators, and the Core Search RoadmapSM identifying common processes and milestones, please visit www.cuinterface.com or email firstname.lastname@example.org with your request.