building a viable network of agents - training module 2011

BUILDING A VIABLE NETWORK OF BRANCHLESS BANKING AGENTS

Training Package2011

TABLE OF CONTENTSSECTION SLIDES Introduction 3-16 Agent business case (Case study of 3 agents) 17-31 Agent network managers (Brazil case study) 32-40 Supply chain revenue analysis (Revenue sharing exercise) 41-50 Structuring an agent network (M-PESA case study) 51-61 Managing agents (Exercise comparing training approaches) 62-76 Conclusion 77-80 Annex: main messages in 12 slides 81-93

“Advancing financial access for the world’s poor”

CGAP is an independent policy and research center dedicated to advancing financial access for the world's poor. It is supported by over 30 development agencies and private foundations who share a common mission to alleviate poverty. Housed at the World Bank, CGAP provides market intelligence, promotes standards, develops innovative solutions and offers advisory services to governments, microfinance providers, donors, and investors.

CGAP’s Technology Program is funded by:

www.cgap.org/technology

These training materials are produced by CGAP

http://www.cgap.org/technology

http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/home.aspx

http://www.dfid.gov.uk/

How to use these training resources (1)

• This Training Package is based on CGAP’s Agent Network Management Toolkit, available at http://www.cgap.org/p/site/c/template.rc/1.9.49831/

• This Training Package enables users to train their colleagues on building a network of branchless banking agents. It is not intended to be used to train agents: we recommend providers develop their own materials for this end.

• The package includes 5 sections: (1) drivers of the business case for agents, (2) agent network managers (ANMs), (3) supply chain revenue analysis, (4) structuring an agent network, and (5) managing agents. Each section includes a lecture and interactive exercise.

http://www.cgap.org/p/site/c/template.rc/1.9.49831/

• We recommend using the material in 1 of 3 ways: 1. Cover the 5 sections in sequence, including the interactive exercises

(Duration: 5 hours)2. Select 1 or several sections corresponding to topics of greatest interest

(Duration: [1 hour per section)3. Present an overview of the main messages using the 10 slide summary

in the annex at the end of this slide deck (Duration: 30 minutes)

• The comment pane for each slide provides guidance on the main message for the slide in question and additional detail useful in presenting. Presenters/trainers are advised to familiarize themselves with the Toolkit.

• When using these materials, please give attribution to CGAP as the source.

How to use these training resources (2)

Definition: Branchless Banking

POS

Phone

Agent

Branchless Banking

Delivery of financial services outside

conventional bank branches using retail

agents and technology

Definition: Provider

Bank Non-bank

Company which manages customer accounts

Agent network manager

(ANM)

Any business or individual which helps a provider identify, vet,

train, monitor and manage agents

Definition: Agent

AgentOperates the cash

service point where the customer does cash-in

and cash-out transactions. Typically

registers new clients as well.

Agents are increasingly used by all types of financial institutions to distribute financial services

Country Provider Number of agents

Brazil Banco do BrasilBradescoCaixa Economica

15,30024,20015,200

India FINO 10,000

Kenya M-PESA 20,500

Pakistan easypaisa 10,500

Philippines GCash 18,000

Sources: CGAP interviews with senior management ; for Brazilian banks see Banco Central do Brasil,; FINO; M-PESA, see Daily Nation 15 Nov. 2010; for easypaisa; GCash. Current as of time of CGAP research in each market.

http://www.bcb.gov.br/?CORPAIS

http://www.bcb.gov.br/?CORPAIS

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/india/articlepdf/4545.pdf?CFID=26732942&CFTOKEN=65143148&jsessionid=a830921139325c725284642b1c2d7d721b2e

http://www.easypaisa.com.pk/agent.php

http://technology.cgap.org/2010/10/13/mobile-banking-20-or-05-%E2%80%93-mobile-banking-for-those-with-no-mobile/

Agents fulfill 3 important functions in a branchless banking service

Verify client identity•Comply with KYC standards•Guard against fraud

Make cash available •Enable clients to withdrawal

and deposit on demand

Act as face of the service•Educate clients about the

service•Troubleshoot clients’ problems

Compliance risk

Continuity risk

Concentration risk

Agents and ANMs highly motivated

Business split across many partners

Massive consumer

uptake

Adequate revenue to

share

Many agents

and ANMs

National presence

Marketing

Product

Healthy supply chains with many motivated participants will help manage risks and drive massive consumer uptake

To produce the Toolkit, CGAP analyzed agents in 3 markets

BRAZIL

INDIA

KENYA

Karnataka

Bihar

Delhi

In-depth interviews with

466 agents

Data on 16,000 agents

Interviews with 24 providers and agent managers

Analysis focused on 5 branchless banking services

NONBANK-BASEDBANK-BASED

Safaricom (MNO)

AGENT MANAGERS

(Top Image, superagent banks,

aggregators)

21,000 agents

Bradesco

6,000 outlets

State Bank of India

500 agents

State Bank of India

10,000 agents

TELECOM SERVICE

1,000 agents

Agent Toolkit Part I:Economics of the Supply Chain

1. Agent Business Casea. Upfront Capitalb. Liquidity Managementc. Rigid Staff and Space Costsd. Security Riskse. System Interruptionsf. Effect on Agent’s Other Line of Businessg. Adequate Revenue at Start-uph. Major Costs Related to Growthi. Fragmenting Demand Across Too Many Agents

2. Agent Network Managersa. Roles of ANMsb. ANM Business Case

3. Supply Chain Revenue Analysisa. Revenue Sources in the Supply Chainb. Enhancing Revenues in the Supply Chain

Agent Toolkit Part II:Building an Agent Network

4. Structuring an Agent Networka. Three Agent Network Structuresb. Implications of Structure on Overall Servicec. Example: M-PESA’s Changing Structure over Time

5. Managing Agentsa. Selecting Agentsb. Getting Agents Startedc. Paying Agentsd. Managing Liquiditye. Ongoing Monitoring and Managementf. Reducing Impact of Theft, Fraud and Abuse

6 . Annexesa. Financial Model with M-PESA Case Studyb. Analyzing Agents in the Fieldc. Useful Documents (sample contracts, applications,

monitoring instruments, job descriptions, commission structures)

Available online http://www.cgap.org/p/site/c/template.rc/1.9.49831/




SECTION 1:AGENT BUSINESS CASE

How do we make sense of vastly different agents?

HasitaSchool librarian in rural Karnataka, India

Agent profits: $0.91/day

Transactions: 34/day

CynthiaOwns 2 agent locations specializing in M-PESA in downtown Nairobi, Kenya



JoãoOwns pharmacy in small town 40 km outside Fortaleza, Brazil



It is useful to picture a risk/return curve for agents, set initially by direct costs and remuneration for acting as an agent

DIRECT COST

0

0

x

xDIRECT

REMUNERATION

Cost of capital

Liquidity management

Staff and

space

Won’t participate

Will participate

Capital has 2 elements. The first is the amount required.

1. Amount of capital

access

cost of capital

Cost of Hasita’s minimum capital of US$ 107 = 84 days of profit/year*

* Calculated at prevailing MFI interest rates. In actuality, Hasita’s bank does not require her to put up capital.

What can providers do?

Agent Most MNO-led schemes

Provider aids

Colombia: AVV Villas provides zero interest loans to agents, with risk-sharing by ANM (DDDedo)

Provider funds

Brazil: client funds become bank’s responsibility upon receipt at agent. Same with FINO agents (India).

ANM aids

Afghanistan: M-Paisa ANMs often lend start-up capital, for added 50% of commissions (instead of usual 30%)

Typical small shop devotes US$1200 to M-PESA capital

The second element of agent capital is liquidity management (i.e. the cost to convert cash to e-float, e-float to cash)

2. Liquidity management

trips/ day

cost/ trip


- Daily rebalancing in most high-volume services

Graphic shows rebalancing transactions (orange) and cash balance (blue) of M-PESA agent, Martin.

Establish network of “agents of agents”

- Cambodia: WING sets up well-established stores as “master agents”

- India: FINO pays well-off “super clients” to have liquidity ready to

deposit

- Kenya: M-PESA uses banks as “super

agents”

- Distance to exchange point drives cost

Staff and space costs create different break even points

Vincent Cynthia0

20

40

60

80

100

4.11 4.2610

87

Profit/day/tillTransactions to breakeven

- 40 trans/day- $0 staff- $0 rent

- 152 trans/day- $6.25 staff- $1.48 rent


Advise Advise on the impact of taking on staff and space expenses

Consider Consider special remuneration for strategic agents

Exogenous factors shift the risk/return curve positively or negatively

DIRECT COST

0

0

x

xDIRECT

REMUNERATION

Won’t participate

Will participate

EXOGENOUS COST

RobberySystem

reliability

EXOGENOUS BENEFIT

Foot traffic

Allied with brand

1 robbery can collapse the business case

Average robbery loss:

US$ 8100

US$ 540

Agent liability =

6.66%

Equal to 72 days of

profit


Require Require security improvements

Share Share cash insurance costs

Set Set cash-on hand limits

5. Agent profitability is highly sensitive to service disruptions

A Brazilian agent has her POS terminal down for 2 days. She loses 88% of her monthly profit

Monthly revenue (USD) Monthly expense (USD)1000

1025

1050

1075

1100

1125

1150

1175

1200

1065

1038

1162

- 88%

Foot traffic benefit can be a substantial exogenous benefit

73% of Brazilian agents report

increased foot traffic

Average foot traffic increase = 37% more customers

Agent profits Increased sales Total profit0

2

4

6

8

10

12

$1.96

$9.25*

$11.21

4.7x

* Assumptions: ¼ of clients for agency services make additional purchase. Each incremental sales yields average profit of US$ 1


Document Document foot traffic benefits

To complete the picture, we must recognize that certain factors create “jumps” in the agent’s risk/return curve

DIRECT COST

0

0

x

xDIRECT

REMUNERATION

Won’t participate

Will participate

EXOGENOUS COST

EXOGENOUS BENEFIT

Minimum required to

start

Growth-related costs

Fragmenting demand

The agent business case presents a multi-faceted puzzle. Understanding and tracking its evolution requires a dedicated entity

DIRECT COST

0

0

x

xDIRECT

REMUNERATION

Won’t participate

Will participate

Cost of capital


Staff and

space

Minimum required to

start

EXOGENOUS COST

RobberySystem reliability

EXOGENOUS BENEFIT

Foot traffic

Ally with brand


Fragmenting demand

Exercise: let’s look at 3 agents

Hasita CynthiaJoão

Trainer’s guide for Session 1 Exercise

Microsoft Office Word Document

- Distribute copies of the handout (embedded at right) to participants to read.

- Divide participants into groups and ask them to discuss the questions within their group. Then reconvene and ask groups to report back their answers to the questions.

- The trainer can use the next slide to draw attention to key takeaways.

How do the key features of the business case stack up?

Question Hasita Joao Cynthia

Provides capital?

Liquidity management costs?

Staff and space costs?

Is security a major issue?

System reliability issues?

Positive exogenous benefit?

Which of the 3 agents should be paid the most per

transaction?

Which type of agent would work best in your market?

Worst?

SECTION 2:AGENT NETWORK MANAGERS

Most providers use one or more Agent Network Managers

Selecting Agents

Training Agents

Identifying agents and helping them get

started

Regular Monitoring Visits

Support in Rebalancing &

Liquidity Management

Managing Agent Operations

Contribution to overall strategy

Influence pricing & product design

Key interface with customers

for marketing and other functions

How does M-PESA use Agent Network Managers?

M-PESA

Top Image Super agent Banks Aggregators

• Vet applicants• Provide training • Identify potential applicants

• Develops eligibility criteria & manages recruitment process

• Monitor fortnightly • Special facility for rebalancing

• Variable role in monitoring and rebalancing

• Area Sales Managers do some direct monitoring

• Runs agent call center

• Defines all aspects of business strategy

• Has influenced business decisions like pricing and eligibility

ANM pay must be linked to responsibilities they are taking on

M-PESA AGGREGATOR ANM IN BRAZIL

Selecting Agents ✔ ✔✔✔

Maintaining Equipment

✔✔

Training ✔ ✔✔✔

Rebalancing ✔

Monitoring ✔ ✔✔✔

Contribution to business strategy

✔✔

Share of Commissions = 20% 60%

ANM Business Case: Mr. Sinha from India

EKO Agent Network Manager: Sinha

REVENUE

Number of agents 35Accounts opened per agent 57

commission / account opened 0.54Volume of Transactions per agent 1,322

commission/transaction 0.10%Total Revenue 1,133

EXPENSES Transportation 109Wages 413Total Expenses 522

MONTHLY PROFIT (US$) 611

Mr. Sinha makes $4,300 from other distributor business and $611 from EKO. If he can reach EKO’s target of 100 agents, he will be making

$1,800 and this will be his single most profitable product.

Agent Turnover kills the ANM Business Case

Series10

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

200

400

Average transactions per month

For the ANM to break even, theoretically each agent must do an average of 200 transactions

per month

In reality, 50% of agents are not active so those that are must do 400 transactions per month for

ANM to break even

Impact of Agent Inactivity on ANM Business Case in Brazil

Who might be an ANM?

Businesses already doing the following might be good agents:

CASH TRANSPORT

• Armored cars• Companies who

maintain ATMs

DISTRIBUTION OF CONSUMER

GOODS

• Distributors of FMCG, airtime and other products which have extensive reach

MARKETING & PROMOTIONS

• Companies that do events, distribute marketing materials, etc.


TRAINER NOTES:

• Divide participants into groups of 3-4 people and have everyone read/discuss case study

• If useful, provide brief background to branchless banking in Brazil (see notes below)

• Use the following slide to ensure key messages come through



GROUP EXERCISE:Business Case for an ANM, BancoCenter

CHALLENGES

• Fraud and Theft

• Faulty Technology

• High agent

turnover

CHANGES MADE BY ANM

• Large investment in technology – for agents and HQ MIS

• Introduction of high margin payroll loans

SECTION 3:SUPPLY CHAIN REVENUE ANALYSIS

Supply basics: everyone must be happy

Revenue must be adequate to support all firms:

- Provider- ANMs- Agents- Others (e.g. partner banks)

Yet many struggle to meet this requirement:

-The agent network itself-Unstable transaction platform-Cumbersome sign-up- Inadequate marketing spend-Poor choice of product

M-PESA set expectations unrealistically high for others

M-PESA Monthly Revenue mid-2010

US$ 12 million in revenue/mo

Safaricom shares 42% with supply chain partners

Average small store earns 3.2x more from M-PESA than airtime

ANMs typically earn >US$ 5000/month in commissions

Customers provide 85% of revenue generated

Most branchless banking services see less aggressive uptake from the market

What if we “discount” M-PESA to be more similar with other pioneers in branchless banking?

Registered users

Active rate

Trans per month

M-PESA (Kenya)

13 mil 70% 5.3

7 others 5.2 mil 53% 2

Typical MM service

<1 mil 20% 1

7 services with good data:

- Banco Postal (Brazil)- FINO (India)- GCash (Philippines)- M-PESA (Tanzania)- Smart Money (Philippines)- WING (Cambodia)- WIZZIT (South Africa)

7 others

M-PESA

0 5000000 10000000 15000000

1500000

12000000

$2.71

Agent revenue at discounted level

Contribution to revenue

1.5%

Providers have 2 primary options to generate additional revenue

1. Intensify transactions per client

– Additional payments– Additional products

(savings, credit and insurance)

2. Realize benefits to core business

– MNO: churn reduction, airtime distribution

– Merchants: Foot traffic– Banks: reduced

cost/transaction

For more, see Section 3 of CGAP’s Toolkit: http://www.cgap.org/p/site/c/template.rc/1.9.49831/

A financial model is also available:http://www.cgap.org/p/site/c/template.rc/1.9.49775/



Providers facing limited revenue may be tempted to squeeze the supply chain. This is usually a mistake.

Low uptake by clients

Limited revenue

Provider cuts commissions

Agents and ANMs unhappy

Clients unable to find transaction

points

Trainer’s Guide for Session 3 Exercise

- Distribute copies of the handouts (embedded at right) to participants. It will be best if they have access to laptops for this exercise, but it is possible to do it with pen and paper as well.

- Divide participants into groups. One group will be a provider launching a new mobile money service. Each of the other groups is an ANM company bidding to win a contract to set up and manage an agent network for the provider. The ANM companies must each put together a proposal, from which the provider will choose a winner.

- Use the next slide for discussion, beginning with the provider, but inviting ANM companies to contribute their thoughts as well.

Microsoft Office Excel Worksheet

Discussion Guide: Exercise

• Provider: tell us which proposal you have selected as the winner, and why?

• Provider: were there some proposals which took very different approaches than the others? What were the strong and weak features of these?

• ANM companies: what was the most difficult part of this exercise?

• What lessons should we draw from this exercise?

SECTION 4STRUCTURING AN AGENT NETWORK

When thinking about agents, many providers start with the details

How much should I pay my agents?

What kind of agents should I select?

Does CGAP have

training curriculum for agents?

3 Structures for agent networks

1. Existing retail chains

2. Build network from scratch

3. Leverage existing distribution system

EXAMPLE:Bradesco Bank in Brazil uses postal network

Trade-offs in agent structure:Operational Readiness

Systems and processes that need to be in place before service can launch:• Hiring/training staff• IT• Cash Transport• Monitoring

Post office infrastructure already established throughout country – outlets, utilities, computers already in place

READINESS = HIGH

Quantity and location of outlets• Rural vs. urban• Sending/receiving

corridors• Target customer

Trade-offs in agent structure:Reach

• 6,000 outlets• Rural outlets can do

more than 10,000 transactions a month

REACH = HIGH

1. How much control the HQ has over outlets (e.g., quality control)

2. How much control or leverage provider has over network as a whole and agents(e.g., incentivizing front-

line staff, power balance)

• Banco Postal high bargaining power compared with individual agents

• Commissions are 5-10 higher than those of individual merchants

CONTROL= MEDIUM

Trade-offs in agent structure:Control

Using existing retail chains offers high readiness, less control

HQ should have good control.

Provider minimal control over

outlets.

Depends on network but usually limited to urban areas

Very high

Each provider needs to find structure that fits needs now, and in the long-term

TRAINER NOTES:

• Divide participants into groups of 3-4 people and assign each group to focus on one particular ‘phase’ of M-PESA’s growth




GROUP EXERCISE:M-PESA’s changing structure over time

PHASE 2 Build own network (and still some leveraging)

MEDIUM HIGH LOW

NETWORK STRUCTURE

OPERATIONAL READINESS

REACH CONTROL

PHASE 1 Leverage existing distribution system

MEDIUM/HIGH LOW(Adequate for

start-up)

HIGH

PHASE 3 All 3 – mostly build own network of small stores

MEDIUM HIGH MEDIUM

SECTION 5MANAGING AGENTS

6 areas of agent management

1. Selecting Agents

2. Getting Agents Started

3. Paying Agents

4. Managing Liquidity

5. Ongoing Monitoring and Management

6. Reducing Impact of Theft, Fraud and Abuse

1. Selecting:Qualities to look for in prospective agent

QUALITY

1. Ability to maintain sufficient cash and float balances

2. Customer profile suitable to target clients

3. Age, education, and experience of proprietor

4. Strategic Location

5. Proximity to banks/ATMs

6. Trust of Community

7. Business Activity

8. Literate staff

9. Willingness and motivation to try new product

2. Training:M-PESA agents receive 6 hours of initial training

1. M-PESA Basics

3. Float Management

2. Anti-Money Laundering

4. Store Management Till

5. Customer care

3. Paying:5 decisions to make regarding agent pay

1. What is the balance between registration and transaction commissions?

3. How should commissions be calculated?

2. Which transactions should agents get paid for?

4. Should agents be allowed to set the final price?

5. How often should agents get paid?

4. Managing Liquidity:Start-up Capital

Agents Transaction Provider

PROVIDER OF START-UP CAPITAL

Rebalancing cash and e-float

• In Brazil, many agents have full responsibility for rebalancing, at great cost in time, money and safety. AGENT

• M-PESA agents are responsible for rebalancing, but superagents and ANMs provide support. Superagents are bank branches with special facilities and queues for M-PESA agents.

AGENT, WITH SUPPORT

• In India, ANM FINO takes full responsibility for rebalancing. Full-time staff are dedicated to visiting agents whenever they need cash delivered or picked up.

AGENT NETWORK MANAGER

• In Colombia, the bank AV Villas outsources the rebalancing function to a security company. PROVIDER

Calculating agents’ liquidity management costs & upfront capital

5. Ongoing monitoring:Methods of monitoring vary greatly

Top Image staff monitor M-PESA agents by personally visiting each

agent once every two weeks

Telecom Services monitors its agents remotely via an MIS system and only

visits once every two months

Keep monitoring instruments simple and consistentM-PESA Monitoring Example

AVAILABILITY OF:

1. Float 1

2. Cash 1

3. SIM replacement cards 0

4. Log books 1

STANDARDS FOR:

5. Assistants 1

6. KYC 1

7. Recording of transactions 0

VISIBILITY OF:

8. Thematic advertising 1

9. Pricing poster 1

10. Agent Number 1

TOTAL 8

If score is below 7,

agent is not in compliance and receives a ‘red flag’

Some indicators to consider measuring

LIQUIDITY M-PESA 2009

1. % of customers unable to withdraw 5%

2. % of customers unable to deposit 4%

3. Average number of rebalancing trips per day 1

4. Total Capital (cash and efloat) $1,200 actual

5. Total times previous day’s largest deposit/withdrawal required in cash/efloat

1.5

VOLUME OF TRANSACTIONS

6. Number of transactions per day per agent 86

7. Average profit per day per agent $5.01

6. Reducing theft, fraud and abuse:4 steps to reduce theft

1. Require secure premises

3. Use armored vehicles

2. Lower cash limits

4. Purchase insurance

Limiting the impact of fraud and abuse

AREA OF FRAUD/ABUSE

RECOMMENDATIONS

Money Laundering • Comply with regulations and seek to influence effective, proportionate regulation

Customers are defrauded

• Providers can educate customers (e.g., do not disclose PIN, always wait for confirmation SMS)• Have a call center for customer complaints

Agents and customers defraud system

• Develop rigorous MIS to monitor transactions• Examine pricing and commission models for vulnerability for fraud

Customers (thieves posing) defraud agents

• Invest in rigorous agent training• Design user interface so messages from provider are distinctive and not easily imitated• Consider compensating defrauded agents

TRAINER NOTES:

• Divide participants into groups of 3-4 people and have them read and discuss the case study




Training is adapted based on factors like regulations, product offering and agent responsibility

FINO GCASH M-PESA TELECOM SERVICE

Regulations • Regulations originally required all agents to be trained in Manila by Central Bank

Product Offering and Delivery

• Savings account requires some financial education and lots of follow-up by agents

• Remittance product requires special training (see above)

• Focus on liquidity management and customer care due to high volumes

• Basic bill payments very simple but method of delivery (POS) requires training

Agent Responsibility

• Agent has full responsibility of selling product to customers and training them on it

•Agents do not have to sell but do have a lot of responsibility (e.g., liquidity management)

• Agent just conducts basic transactions – minimal training required

CONCLUSION

Key takeaways

1. The agent business case can be thought of as a risk/return curve driven by (1) direct costs and remuneration of being an agent, (2) exogenous factors and (3) drivers which kick-in at certain points in time.

2. The most critical factors tend to shift over time. Provider’s must constantly update their understanding, which is one reason that a dedicated ANM is valuable.

3. Most providers will need a dedicated ANM – either in-house or outsourced – to help identify and manage agents. Some ANMs also contribute to business strategy.

4. Implementations must generate – and share – sufficient revenue to support all companies in the supply chain.

Key takeaways

5. Agent networks can be constructed from (1) large retail networks, (2) individual, unaffiliated stores, or (3) distribution chains.

6. Each of these 3 structures offers trade-offs between (1) operational readiness, (2) reach, and (3) control. Providers often use a combination to obtain the optimal network configuration.

7. Providers and ANMs will need to develop tools and strategies to select, train, pay and monitor agents. They also need to develop systems to manage liquidity and reduce the impact of theft, fraud and abuse.

Advancing financial access for the world’s poor

www.cgap.org

www.microfinancegateway.org

http://www.themastercardfoundation.com/

http://www.uncdf.org/english/index.php

ANNEX: MAIN MESSAGES IN 12 SLIDES

“Advancing financial access for the world’s poor”

CGAP’s Technology Program is funded by:

www.cgap.org/technology

This material is produced by CGAP, and based on its Agent Network Management Toolkit

CGAP’s Agent Toolkit is available online http://www.cgap.org/p/site/c/template.rc/1.9.49831/

http://www.cgap.org/technology


http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Pages/home.aspx

http://www.dfid.gov.uk/

To produce the Toolkit, CGAP analyzed agents in 3 markets

BRAZIL

INDIA

KENYA

Karnataka

Bihar

Delhi

In-depth interviews with 466 agents

Data on 16,000 agents

Interviews with 24 providers and agent managers

It is useful to picture a risk/return curve for agents, set initially by direct costs and remuneration for acting as an agent

DIRECT COST

0

0

x

xDIRECT

REMUNERATION

Won’t participate

Will participate