Improving the understanding of business units of the ITRS reporting of the bank: An integrative action research paper

• Main Author: Florendo, John Veyl A.
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Animo Repository 2020
• Subjects: Information storage and retrieval systems—Foreign exchange; Banks and banking—Records and correspondence; Management Information Systems
• Online Access: https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etd_masteral/6228; https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/context/etd_masteral/article/13282/viewcontent/FLORENDO_JohnVeyl_11789336_IMPROVING_THE_UNDERSTANDING_OF_BUSINESS_UNITS_ON_THE_ITRS_REPORT_Redacted.pdf
• Institution: De La Salle University

In this Action Research, we focused on addressing the Regulatory Reporting Department’s (RRD) issue of lumping unclassified transactions in accomplishing the FX Form 1 report of the Bank. This practice is found unsustainable to the new reporting standards, International Transactions Reporting System (ITRS). The general causes that contributed to the existence of the issue were identified based on Ernest & Young LLP’s (2018) five key themes in regulatory reporting, which are People, Process and Controls, Governance, Technology and Data, and Performance Management. Among these general causes, we only focused on items that our Department has a sphere of influence which are: (1) BUs involved in the regulatory reporting supply chain were providing insufficient and incorrect reports to RRD under People; and (2) our Department lacked internal controls activities to assess the compliance of business units’ (BUs) reports to reportorial requirements under Process and Control. We used the Action Research Cycle concept as our research methodology in accomplishing this research. Moreover, we also used several frameworks to guide us in understanding situations and for planning our next actions. Our original plan for the two cycles was to resolve the general causes under People (Cycle 1) and Process and Controls (Cycle 2) for the Bank to comply with the ITRS reportorial standards. For the first cycle, we focused on addressing the knowledge and accountability issues of BUs in preparing the report. However, our single approach was not effective for all of the BUs. As a result, for our Cycle 2, we focused on the BUs who failed to comply, and collaboratively implemented our planned intervention. In the end, we have significantly improved the understanding of BUs in the ITRS reporting of the Bank. Empowering BUs through training significantly improved the quality of regulatory reporting supply chain of the Bank in reporting the ITRS report.