Basel III和Solvency II 對法國銀行系統的影響 / Following the 2008 financial crisis and the 2010 European Sovereign crisis, regulators and supervisors were urged to improve and reinforce the regulation of the banking system in order to prevent and assist banks from failing and provoking a system-wide crisis. Similarly some measures have been taken to regulate and reinforce the insurance industry in the EU. Basel III accords have been set up as an emergency measure and response to the financial crisis that hit the world in 2008 following a liquidity crisis that has started in 2007. Basel II framework had never been made to resist a system wide crisis and was not anymore effective in regulating the banking industry following the important deregulations that happened in the 2000s. Similarly to Basel, the primary goal of Solvency II is to prevent (with a 99.5% probability or 1 chance over 200) a company from ceasing payments and/or going bankruptcy. It has therefore introduced a complete framework relying as well on three pillars which have been adapted to the constraints and specificities of the insurance industry. Bank-insurances which are companies offering both insurance and banking services are therefore subject to both regulations. Moreover despite increasing their offerings, bank-insurer have to adapt to a complex maturing environment. The future of their business strongly depends upon their strategic choices regarding growth, profitability and mandatory compliance to regulation. They need to start and/or accelerate their transformation strategy in order to take into account this changing environment. The regulations are becoming more binding and therefore questioning the model of a global bank (as the banks have to increase their level of required capital). Despite these challenges, they still have an important role to play on the French Market.

金融資訊科技的發展及未來社會走向資訊化的必然趨勢下，自1960年至1970年間建置的銀行業大主機架構，多己到達設備投資轉換及軟體效率不足、系統發展週期過長及維護成本過大之瓶頸。由於核心銀行作業系統的複雜性及重要性，系統轉型的龐大投資計畫失敗時可能對銀行產生相當大的影響，系統廠商的評估選擇非常重要。本研究主要提出資訊系統整合廠商評量模式之形成及應用方式，針對核心銀行系統進行評估及選擇適當的系統整合廠商。 經由文獻探討及針對國內某商業銀行的個案研究，我們先建立一個初步的模型，定義出考量層級及涵蓋因素。之後，配合分析層級法(Analytical Hierarchy Process)設計問卷，收集國內各型銀行的資訊主管及業務主管針對「資訊系統整合廠商評量模式考量因素」進行兩兩比較所回應的相對重要性認知，經AHP運算建立層級因素間的權重分派，之後再依受測者所屬銀行類別及職務類別進行統計分析，作為評估廠商時參考的對象。決策者可根據各自銀行狀況再作權重調整，以此標準評量廠商資料，計算最後評比結果，AHP可在評量模式形成時，彙整產業認知資訊計算出考量因素之權重分配；也可在評量模式應用時彙整參與決策者意見，調整考量因素之權重分配，甚至在廠商評選時彙整參與決策者意見，如同計算權重分配一樣，計算出各合作廠商之優先次序。本研究可用來探討資訊系統整合廠合評量的主要考量因素，思考新的資訊科技可能所帶來的危機或轉機，而加以因應或利用；所發展的評量模式可以提供實務使用，期能協助銀行業，在核心銀行系統轉換需求過程中，建立一個對合作廠商評估與選擇的考量模式，在參考產業認知及層級分析的運算作業下，縮短系統轉型之時程，提高成功機率。 / Facing the technology advancement, it is about the time to upgrade the core banking systems built during 1960s and 1970s. The massive variety of banking operation requirements and the IT dependency of critical banking services make the system upgrade transition an enormous burden. This study aims to establish an evaluation model to be used for selecting appropriate system integration vendor of core banking systems. We review the literature and establish an initial model by identifying a group of consideration categories and their included factors. These factors are conformed to real world situations through a case study on a commercial bank at Taiwan. In the following survey, the weight allocation for these consideration factors is to be investigated from the banking community at Taiwan. A questionnaire based on the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) is used to collect the comparative perceptions for the importance of the consideration factors. Through the AHP, the aggregated evaluation weights can be calculated. Based on the perception difference among bank types and manager types, a statistical analysis will be conducted later. The decision-makers may adjust the evaluation weights based on the ad-hoc needs for their banks. The comparative scoring of the evaluated vendors is then calculated based on the evaluation weights. The study contributes to investigate the important consideration factors for core banking systems and establish an evaluation model based on the industry perception. The similar approach can be extended to other information systems evaluation in the future.