RESOLVED! 50% reduction of false positives and 200% improvement in alert processing times

Resolution just successfully completed its umpteenth mandate to optimize the name filtering process and we wanted to share the result of these experiences acquired over time because we believe that other organizations could benefit from it.

50% reduction of false positives!

Yes, it is possible. Even within organizations that have a mature process and believe they have put everything in place to optimize their methods.  We can claim this because these are the results we achieve every time.  Here are a few avenues that explain these results:

• The organizations do not worry about the content of commercial lists or source of client data.
• The inclusion and exclusion rules, if any, were developed in the context of doing better and casting a wide net, and not by taking into account the local regulatory requirements and risk appetite.

200% improvement in alert processing times!

It is hard to believe, but this is what has been observed through our mandates. While all the organizations had adopted documented processes, we observed that:

• Little effort is put into automating decisions taken manually which are yet entirely repeatable mechanically.
• Criteria used to compare an alert and a client are not always displayed for the user, even when data is available.
• The order in which criteria must be examined is important since it helps conclude more rapidly.
• Texts accompanying the conclusions are laborious and often require that the information on the client and alert be copied and pasted. Knowing that the reasons for closing alerts rely on the information we already know, it is useful to develop a complete yet simplified documentation method.

Optimizing is profitable!  Do the math.

Regardless of the level of maturity of your organization in terms of the name filtering process, do the math and use your resources wisely.

Meet the Author