What’s inside: company memory · output checking
The question this file answersWho in my credit team is actually deciding — and who is just collecting payslips?
Fits: banks, payment firms and fintechs where compliance files are still assembled by hand.
Typical, not a measured desk; no loan-file volume is published in the finance playbook. Payslips, IDs and statements arrive by email and portal; an analyst chases missing ones, retypes fields into the credit system, then reads the case. It hurts when the analyst is also the chaser.
On the morning a complete application lands, the analyst's screen already shows the file, the gaps and a draft score, so the week goes to affordability and the conversation with the applicant. Files with a missing payslip or an unreadable statement still go back to a person, and you can see per case what was assembled and what was chased.
Typical, not a measured client result. Every figure here comes from the playbook source named below.
the same file-assembly build as KYC onboarding — no published figure for credit files
Before: an analyst spends the week assembling and the hour deciding. After: the file arrives assembled and pre-scored; the decision and the signature stay with the analyst. No percentage — the KYC figures are about onboarding.
The 40–60% previously shown here came from KYC studies (McKinsey, 2023; Thomson Reuters, 2023) about onboarding time, not credit-file assembly. We no longer carry it here; the KYC file keeps the range. Not an approval-rate claim.
Your core system stays — Temenos, FIS, Finastra or the one you run — and nothing is booked without the analyst. This is the same file-assembly build as our KYC onboarding, pointed at credit:
Approval is a signature, not a model output.
The affordability judgement. Fraud. Policy exceptions. The conversation with the applicant.
Not an approval-rate claim.
Statements and payslips come in hundreds of layouts and as photographs; a layout the model has not seen is not guessed — it goes to the analyst as a whole document. Affordability, fraud and policy exceptions are not in scope — this build prepares the file, and if your credit policy is not written down the pre-score has nothing to check against.
The path: free 60-second estimate → free 20-minute review → paid audit of this one process (€1.5–3K, typically two weeks) → pilot with your people in the loop (€10–20K, weeks, not quarters). No transformation programme. Prices are public, on the services page →
Scoped in the audit — the playbook has no estimate for this exact desk.
That depends on your volumes and wage costs — this page will not invent the number. The free 60-second estimate runs that calculation from your answers, with every multiplier sourced.
Not a named Aperanda client. Process file · Finance.
Short process file. Same build as its parent file; the playbook has no separate volume or benchmark for this desk.