|
It is a
concept that invites bemused skepticism from those who
regard banking as a profit-making pursuit that leaves no
room for the interests and welfare of the poor. A typical
comment goes: “Social banking? Isn’t that a contradiction
in terms?” The image of banks as “heartless” institutions
dates back to biblical times when money-lending was
considered a greater evil than slavery. Remember Jesus
giving a tongue- and whip-lashing to money-lenders at the
Temple?
It
persists in modern times on account of the stereotypical
story of banks foreclosing on the properties of people
driven to penury and indebtedness by force majeure; the
plight of Depression-era farmers of the American Midwest,
whose stories were mined by the likes of John Steinbeck,
comes easily to mind.
It is an
image that is stronger in countries like the Philippines,
where banks have traditionally been regarded in either of
two lights: as entities that aid in the perpetuation of
landlord rule in rural areas or as institutions that care
to serve only the financing needs of the rich who
represent low-risk and high-yielding business and
investment propositions.

The advent
of the concept and practice of social banking is as much
an indication of the growing social conscience in the
corporate sector in general and the banking industry in
particular, as it is a response to the growing preference
of business establishments to cater to the needs of
poorer, albeit more numerous, segments of the market and
population.
‘Tubong-lugaw’
For many
businesses these days, selling to the poor—the so-called
bottom of the pyramid—is turning out to be a better
proposition than selling to the moneyed, albeit smaller,
segments of the market that have traditionally been the
object of intense competition.
An Asian
Institute of Management (AIM) paper has tracked a number
of examples of such businesses, which have gone the way of
the time-tested Chinese-Filipino business approach of
tubong-lugaw, or selling low and earning high on
volume turnover, in establishing and sustaining market
presence.
Written by
AIM Prof. Tomas B. Lopez Jr., the paper cites the now
classic case of the single-use shampoo sachet that local
shampoo manufacturers had designed and marketed to capture
the more numerous lower-income-class consumers who could
not afford the costlier bottled shampoo products. It also
pointed to the case of the prepaid cellular-phone card,
which affordability has made it the most preferred telco
product for the poor majority of Filipinos, thus also
making the
Philippines
the texting capital of the world, and the local telco
industry the most lucrative in the country.
In the
area of banking, the paper also cited the case of a
multinational bank in India, which has developed a system,
using information technology and offering low interest
rates, to encourage employees of small and medium
enterprises in particular to avail themselves of financing
services. The practice has enabled the bank to develop a
market and a business in a country where it has less of
its usual high-end individual and corporate clients.
The paper
provides an argument supportive of the advocacy for and
practice of social banking as advanced particularly by the
Association of Development Financing Institutions in
Asia and the
Pacific (ADFIAP), a regional grouping of 82 state and
privately owned banks across 37 countries engaged in the
mission of “financing sustainable development.”
Headquartered in
Makati City, the ADFIAP
has for its Philippine members the following: Development
Bank of the Philippines, Land Bank of the Philippines,
Planters Development Bank, Philippine Export-Import Credit
Agency (PhilExim), RCBC Savings, Queen City Development
Bank of Iloilo and World Trade and Development Institute.
Poorest of
the poor
Social
banking or banking oriented toward the needs of the
poorest of the poor is one of the three components of the
ADFIAP’s framework for sustainable development financing.
The two other components are environmental governance or
“green” banking and financing for small and medium
enterprises, the so-called engines of economic growth in
developing countries like the Philippines.
As part of
its social-banking commitment, the ADFIAP is exerting
efforts to raise the standards of financial services for
microentrepreneurs and smaller businesses, according to
ADFIAP secretary general Octavio B. Peralta.
One
initiative in this regard is Microhouse Plus, a training
program that the ADFIAP is advocating for its member-banks
to undergo so that they’ll be able to provide house
financing at rates and packages that make them affordable
to the poor while still allowing a certain return that
would allow the service to continue on a sustained basis.
The program also aims to train banks to provide
microcredit to enable the poor to build microenterprises,
which can be their sustainable source for funds for daily
needs, as well as for repayment of their house and other
microfinancing loans. If implemented, the program is
calculated to increase the business of development banks
in terms of lending and providing services to their main
target clientele: the lower-income classes.
The
initiative is a fitting response to the call for
institutions and establishments with products and ideas to
sell to regard the poor as a lucrative or responsive
market to tap into if only they are provided with the
wherewithal, such as financing services to enable them to
access products and services, as well as be responsive to
ideas being pushed that are especially aimed at poverty
alleviation.
“The
microfinance institutions [MFIs] are one of the first
groups to get into the ‘poor’ market and have strengthened
their distribution network [or clientele reach] over the
years,” the AIM paper acknowledges. “The MFIs, however,
need to intensify product development to meet the various
growing needs of their customers while tapping their
existing channels to scale up operations and strengthening
their financial services to enable the customers to
consume.”
The paper
adds that private companies and MFIs can benefit from each
other’s experience: while the corporations can learn from
the vast network and financing schemes of the MFIs, the
latter can learn from the former’s experience in product
development and service delivery. Combining MFIs’ heartset
and the corporations’ mindset would expand the both
entities’ understanding of the value chain innovations
required by the emerging market, the paper states.
“Revolutionary marketing concepts that revolutionize
development management do not require new sets of skills
nor competencies; rather they require a change in mindset
and heartset: the poor is not just a beneficiary, but also
a customer with particular needs that can be addressed by
the for-profit companies,” the paper further explained.
Niche
market
Direct Hit
Communications (DHC), a direct marketing outfit based in
San Juan, Metro Manila, is one company that is aligned
with the AIM paper’s call for a “change in mindset on the
poor.” DHC’s business is providing ground marketing
solutions to companies wanting to raise awareness, as well
as sales, for their products in specific grassroots areas
and niche sectors, e.g., wet markets, neighborhoods, etc.
Specifically, it assists companies in “selling to the
poor,” that is, through the conduct of trade promotion
activities designed to entice grassroots consumers to buy
the products of client companies.
DHC also
taps into “naturally occurring communities” within
specific geographic areas to come up with a distribution
network through which client companies can move their
products,
But DHC
does not stop there. The company has an NGO counterpart,
called Magna Kultura Foundation, that provides grassroots
people with livelihood skills that do not only increase
their capacity to pay for the products being sold to them
but also make them good citizens responsive to calls and
initiatives for positive social change in their
communities.
“We are
not only building distribution networks. We are actually
building an ecosystem of information for societal
transformation at the grassroots level,” according to
Ricardo Miguel Aguado, concurrently managing director of
DHC and executive director of Magna Kultura Foundation.
Magna
Kultura Foundation is currently developing social
marketing programs aimed at increasing participation and
membership of government employees in public-sector union
activities and increasing the stake of grassroots
communities in tourism enterprises by providing them with
tourism-oriented livelihood skills. |