Okay, good morning, ladies and gentlemen. It's a great pleasure to be here, introducing our panelists. Mark and Iver have already been introduced. What I'm going to do is ask our two additional panelists to come up here. We have Harry Hendricks, who's the business architect at HPE Enterprise. Harry's also in the EMEA office of the CTO at HPE, and he initiated the business architecture workgroup that led to the open BA standard. Harry, could you join us up on the podium here? And then the fourth panelist is Mike Lambert. Mike is a fellow of the open group, and a former CTO of the open group, and one of the pioneers of the TOGAF standard. And when we're talking about pioneers, we mean back in the day. Okay. Please welcome these gentlemen up here. We're going to feel some questions. Can you guys pick a chair that clusters so we can get everybody on the cameras? You're not sitting down. I'm not sitting down. I'll move over then. All right. So in having brief conversations with the panelists leading up to this meeting, what I said to them was, this is really a high-energy topic, how you develop open standards. So one of the things that we would like to do is actually engage in a dialogue with folks about the most recent standards that have been developed, how we get there, and what the dynamic is for creating an open standard, okay? So in terms of background, we're not going to ask you to write down questions. If you have questions, there's a microphone in the middle of the floor, okay? We would ask you to come up and queue up. No doubt the line will be out the door. We are going to also answer questions about the last presentation from Ivor and from Mark about the Archimate, the newly released standard. In developing an open group standard, there are certain principles that are followed and guiding the standards process. Now, all of the material for developing a standard through the open group is published on our publications website. So the first principle for the open group is openness. That is not only being open in behavior, but being seen to be open by publishing the material and making it available for everybody, okay? So public availability is also a very important approach for us and leads to adoption. In adoption, one of the things we consider is that there's no legal impediment to the adoption of the standards. So we manage the way in which competitors meet and what they're allowed to discuss during the meetings. The staff manage that. We also try and respect the confidentiality of the materials being developed. Understand that we have more than 500 member companies in the open group at some point in time collaborating around the delivery of their IPR to the open group. And we need to respect the discussions that occur in those spaces and how that information is transferred to us for development of standards. The process is necessarily timely and deterministic. So we put a process in place that allows for relatively rapid delivery of standards. And the approach we take on a daily basis is one of consensus, not of voting if we can avoid it. But all of those contexts are something that are managed and worked through with the folks that are on the stage with me here today. So firstly, I would like to ask, are there any questions for Ivor and Mark about the standard presentation that they made just now? If there are, please put your hand up. Could you go to the microphone, please, sir? For Archimate 3, how big is the vocabulary and how much of it do you need to be to know to be conversant in Archimate 3? How many symbols? How many symbols in total? If you look at the total set of concepts, I think it's about 16 now, but there's a lot of commonality between the three layers. So you have things like the business process, application process and technology process. The actual set that you have to learn is a lot smaller than these 60 different concepts. We started out with, I think, about 30 in version one, and now it's up to 60, but with this large overlap in symbols, in definitions. So that's the total size. And then there's a number of relationships as well, of course. The only thing I would add to that is that it's all online. The entire spec is online, and the spec has a table of contents. So it's very easy to see what's at your disposal and then click just in the table of contents and then just click on the table of contents link to find it. So even if you only know a few of the concepts, you can actually become productive pretty quickly. Maybe also to add to that, what we advise usually our users in practice is that you shouldn't start using all the concepts at the same time. Usually you grow into that. You start with a smaller subset to really address the issues you're working on. Archiment is, of course, a language that it's intended for a broad audience. So it has quite a number of concepts for different areas of the architecture. But in practice, for a specific use case, you won't need all of them at the same time. Do we have another question from the floor? Yes, sir. If you have a question, you can just queue up. You don't need to wave your hand. Just wondering about the physical layer that you introduced. It looked to me, it's more like a supply chain or a value chain type of representation. I just wonder, have you considered doing it that way versus introducing a brand new layer? The physical layer underneath the technology. So I saw that you have like, you know, how different things happen, like a process dependency or step dependency, right? Yeah, well, the main concepts in the physical layer, the new concepts for these physical things are equipment and material and facility and distribution network. So they're really about the physical stuff out there that's used in a factory or in a laboratory or for the Internet of Things. So it's not really a value chain kind of model, but you can use that in that context. Yeah, I mean, I gave a supply chain example, but if you saw also in the Connected Health case study thing, you know, there was not only the ordering, but we were also showing how the device is used with IT infrastructure for data acquisition. So supply chain is just one of the many ways that you could use the physical layer. I'll use an example from a steel factory in my presentation later today, so that's really physical manufacturing. So how much of that is really architecture versus specific design of how things work flow? Well, you could have, we could dedicate the whole day to having a debate on the distinction between architecture and design, but, you know, as an enterprise architect, my job generally is to clarify the business processes, is to clarify what's going on, and for that I use, you know, I use that, and so if I were working in an area where something is physical, I may not be the inventor of the device or the inventor of the manufacturing process, but it's important to clarify it so that we can, so that we can develop the information systems necessary to support it. And that's what I see using the physical layer for, at least at first. And typically you would link down to some more detailed specification of this physical world in another language, like you would for software to UML or for processes to BPMN. For the physical world, there are other design practices, and you would link to those, and Archimedes tries to be an umbrella and links things together, but it's certainly not going to replace the design world of physical machinery, for example. Thank you. We have another question on the Archimate presentation. Okay, I want to start off the questions relative to the standards process and the materials that have been delivered and are being spoken about here today. Actually, Mike Lembert, I'd like to ask you a question here. What we've seen are presentations of the content of the standards and use cases of a standard, and the impression may be that the standards are the only thing that get produced. Can you take us through a little bit what is there beyond the standards that are value to people? Wow, that's a good question to start with, isn't it? The most recent standard I've been involved with probably for the last five years is Togaf. And if you just read the Togaf standard, it's not really very helpful to anybody on its own. Because what it is, it is a basic, agreed, common way of approaching enterprise architecture. What you need is help. And what you need is skilled people, predictable tools, and guidance. Surrounding most of our standards now is a certification program, and the certification program provides some statements that there are people who are skilled in using those standards. Around a lot of our standards, there is software. There is some kind of tooling. Certification makes statements about that tooling, but much, much more important is a question of guidance. Because Togaf is great. I've been involved with it for many years, so I think it's great, but I would hate to have to use it without the body of knowledge that's built up around it.  Everybody who uses Togaf has to make some decisions about how they're going to use it. And what's really valuable to us is that a lot of those people have taken the time to document how they use Togaf in a particular environment. So the ecosystem that surrounds it is much more important in many ways than just the underlying standard. So as an illustration of that point, I mentioned earlier that the standards themselves are published on the website. Adoption is an important thing. The case studies that you're going to see this week as a participant here in this conference will be published on a link from the agenda for this event in the history of events. That means that in order to foster adoption, we make available to all attendees all materials presented here. And with your registered ID, you can get access to that material which constitutes a part of the ecosystem that illustrates how other organizations, whether they're members of the open group or not, is not relevant. The adoption is what's relevant. And the method of adoption that occurs in your industry or other industries is one of the powerful things that is available to you through engagement with open standards. So as a reminder, in about two weeks, using your registered ID, you can come back to the open group website to this event and gain access to all of the materials. This is true on an ongoing basis for members. Okay? One of the interesting things around adoption is also that we frequently see things popping up in the most unexpected places. So as an illustration to the work that Mark and Iva have put in to the Archimate Standard, the customs authority in China, unbeknownst to us and not members of the open group, implemented in Beijing last year, how they have taken an adoption approach for an open standard, they didn't ask us about it, they just went ahead and did it, and then they drilled down through the connectivity of the cloud infrastructure they've implemented, and they showed us how they use that standard to help them manage the HVAC function for their data centers. Not the servers only, but all of the infrastructure related to managing their data centers. So the power of the open standards is that you can retrieve them and use them independently to add value to your business. Harry, we have heard a lot today from Jeff and Aaron about business architecture. How does the open BA standard address the issues that Jeff outlined? And if you could, would you talk a little bit about the way of thinking, the ways approach and the way of thinking in particular, because it intrigues at least me? Yes, I think that's a very interesting question, because what Jeff Scott this morning did in his presentation, he showed very, very well how diverse are the diversity of organizations is and their thinking. And I think one of the most important parts of talking about standards is talking about the way of thinking, because that determines what the standard is and what it will be and what it will resolve. If the way of thinking is not connected, then you have a problem to communicate with each other. So when we trigger this to the business architecture standard, then I think the history which will be shown this afternoon a little bit in the track as well. We will have several presentations which will get a little bit deeper in the different aspects, but the way of thinking will be also shown that it is kind of, at least for me it is, and I think some may confirm that as well, it's not the one avenue road to this standard. It has been many avenues and the point was there was now a certain point in the time that we could say, okay, these avenues, they all seem more or less alike. Just people don't know yet. And that's how we started two years ago. Okay, let's try to get sufficient mass to get this process started and to do the alignment for this. And that started with the way of thinking, by the way, because I discovered that a few years ago there was an article which wrote about what are the structural issues of enterprise transformations. I thought, well, every enterprise needs to go into transformations nowadays and even more accelerated than these. So if we could connect this with the business architecture, that would be great. And they really had spot on three structural issues which they identified as, that's the problem we have to solve to become more successful in strategy execution. So the three are and will be elaborated this afternoon as well. One is the systemic view of transformations. Many things are dependent on and many other things. So how do we explain to each other how this all relates to each other and what the impact for me as a stakeholder would be? Then the second one would be consistent communication. If at the beginning of an initiative I have an idea and I want to get it done at the end of the transformation cycle, in the 90s there were two years beyond the starting and the end point, nowadays it may be a scrum, but still the problem is the same. It has to be consistently pulled through that transformation cycle. So the consistent communication is very important. The problem is that usually during the process the people who had the idea are not the same people who design or develop it, so we need some kind of communication and structure around this. And then the third one is also to align these different stakeholders and that relates more to the first part of the transformation cycle itself. So we have to get from idea to a vision to a strategy and how do we get aligned those stakeholders who don't have time to discuss too much with the people who have to mobilize this. So you really have to be prepared to get the alignment of stakeholders and I think that's exactly the point where the open business architecture standard can help you. It will enable and guide you to create the views and the different structured narratives which can easily be understood by normal people and not designers or modeling techniques. And I think these are the most important part of the business architecture standard, but driven by we have identified the common problem and that's the way of thinking. Okay, the response that Harry just gave I've been fortunate enough to see you present on a similar sort of topic about how to enable communication with an architected approach and using Archimate. Would you agree that it's possible to use these models and diagrams as a communication vehicle for collaboration and strategic intent? Absolutely, absolutely. Archimate is basically just the bread and butter that I use to clarify what it is the business wants and where it's going and then we're collaboratively to show the systems that are necessary to support that business intent. In fact, that's just what I've been doing over the past week. My main assignment was to clarify an application of big data to a particular set of marketing processes and so first I modeled the processes and I got everyone to agreed on that. Then I modeled the exposed behaviors, the application services that those processes would have to, what would require. And then I modeled the applications and the technology using input from engineering teams, et cetera and just at the end of the week, in fact, Friday before I was gone for a few days so I was relieved there was actually really a consensus and that's what we're going to do. And part of that also, especially in the agile world is coming down to the minimal viable product. What's the essence? What's the least of this that can be important? And in my final set of Archimate diagrams it was very clear what was the minimal viable product and what were the key additions to really fulfill the vision. So yes, I'm using that every day, every week to clarify communication. Can I just add that I don't think that any architecture models communicate. They are tools to enable architects to communicate. Sending somebody architecture models as attachments to email is very dangerous because in general they don't understand them. If you take them through them, these are wonderful tools. Absolutely, I always take people through things but they also like something to hold on to that they can point to after the presentation saying that this is what we're going to do. I did several years ago a big multi-layer contact center CRM architecture for the financial services company I was working for. The VP of contact center took it and hung it outside of his office because it was something very tangible, something visible about what we were building. Yes, I like your remark very much because that was one of the problems we had to solve in the business architecture as well. The first thing we thought, well in fact we need a common language if we are people with diverse interests and goals or maybe with diverse languages, we need something in common. I discovered during all these work groups on the business architecture as well, well there's only a limited set of concepts to be used and then we can handle it. So why not formalizing these concepts? We want you to apply it in any industry and that's a real strength. So we started to develop those concepts and then building a common language. So no modeling, just a common language. One concepts relate to the other which improves the understanding. So we have a little bit more than 20 concepts to be used to guide people through from ID to vision to strategy and implementation plan and then it can be pulled through to the design and development phase. And it can be enriched between the argument and the standard, I believe. One is more focused on the real narratives and the languages. The other one is very strong in the modeling and the communication between designers and developers. So I think there's a good world open to combine those two in the common transformations. May I add to that? I think it's also important to realize that Archimate is not just a graphical notation. You have these concepts which have relationships which can be visualized in different ways. You can have an architecture diagram for the architects but you can have, say, a matrix or a list or any other visualization of the same model content for different stakeholders and that's very important to realize. Archimate is not just intended as something to produce pretty pictures. It's really also a way of making clear how things are related and how you can reason about that, how you can analyze that. So it's also a vocabulary, it's also a set of relationships that helps you to do that. So don't just see it as something to create pictures with. Right. Exactly. I think Archimate promotes better thinking. I train a lot of solution architects and things and then they start using Archimate and it's clearer what they want to do. And the other thing I'd like to say is that it seems that, you know, recently I looked at the U.S. NIST, National Institutes of Standards and Technology, Big Data Reference Architecture and I started mapping that to Archimate and I found that it was very easy. Much of it is written, of that standard, is written in terms of capabilities, resources and business roles which map directly to Archimate, so it was a matter of transcription. And I'm not aware of any explicit connection between the open group and the standards efforts by this U.S. government agency, but clearly there seems to be some convergence in how we talk about things. Yes, maybe I could make another remark on this, how I see this evolve. I've always been involved or mostly been involved in the idea to strategy planning and implementation phase and I sometimes tell people, one should be more like a magician, so all the techniques which are included in the standard, just keep them under the cover. They are for using them at the right time just in time, just enough. And it's like a magician, you just show them, wow, that works. So if you can achieve that type of, let's say, leveraging the process between the different views of the stakeholder, that's really terrific and that's all what the standard will provide you with. So the consulting skills, I fully agree this morning with Jeff Scott's consulting skills, very important techniques for the magician behind the cover and just act in the process. I think when Aaron was talking, he showed you towards the end of the diagram an illustration of the member companies and the individuals from those companies involved in delivering or developing the open VA standard. And I just want to illustrate with the folks on the stage here how this is representative. Iver at Cambia is what we would refer to as part of a member organization from the customer community. Mark and Harry are from suppliers, representative member community. And Mike is a little bit unusual. He's been in and out of industry but right now his role is as a fellow of the open group. The point that I'm trying to make here is that this is actually a diverse population contributing to the development of open standards.  Why are you involved in the open standards community and particularly in the open group either from a company value perspective or personally and professionally if I might probe you on that a little bit? Iver? Well, two reasons. First of all, strategically, I think that what Cambia is trying to do to become sort of this integrated technology-enabled health delivery company from being a health insurer and is in that transition is very complex and benefits from the leading edge in various areas. So in working in the standards process I'm exposed to leading edge thinking in a lot of different areas and not just in the archimage and risk area white paper that we did several years ago where we foreshadowed a lot of the things that went into the current standards. I was really looking very holistically at risk and complexity and got a lot out of that that I put directly into the company. And as a result of being in the standards process I'm in touch with enterprise architects all around the world and I'm aware of different techniques and I'm able to deploy them immediately in my company whether they're standardized or not. And then, you know, and then the other thing is that personally I find it just tremendous development because my work, you know, I write a lot of things and it's roundly criticized by people and then the best of it is accepted. And so I learn a lot about how to express myself to people that on the surface I don't seem to have a lot in common with how could they possibly understand what I go through day to day. I'll never meet them. They're on the other side of the world. But and also just professionally learning how to express myself in this way and just learning about the other problems that people face. So it's just been a tremendous developmental thing that contributes to my performance day to day as an enterprise architect. Well, to start from a personal perspective since I've been involved with Archimedes from its very inception I was the project manager when in my previous job at the Dutch Applied R&D Institute. Of course it's very interesting and nice to see the development of your work over the years and now it's been 15 years now that I've been involved with Archimedes and it's of course very satisfying to see how it's picked up internationally and how it's become a really popular standard, etc. So being involved in that, that's certainly a very important personal motivation for me. From the perspective of business design I think I see two main reasons that we're involved in this. First of all it's because we can serve our own clients in a better way because they have certain needs and we can influence the standard to cater to these needs. So that's one important aspect. The other is that of course the open group gives us visibility as experts in this area. So there's also, well you could say a marketing aspect associated to that. We can show that we're good at this stuff. So I think those are the two main drivers for the company to be involved in this. So it's certainly to help our clients that's the most important driver I would say. But also visibility. Harry? Yes. Well a personal reason to be in this. I started my career as, well I'm an economist and I started my career as a marketer. So thinking of what's needed in the market and how can I provide good services to that need in the marketplace. And since I was born I think like a system thinker, I tried to get that communicated to people but that's not easy if you are a system thinker because there are too many aspects which relate to each other. And that kind of drove me all the way down to where we are now. Okay, how can we communicate this and how can I, could I convince these stakeholders that this is a sensible investment to do. And that's how I got to the language we needed and to the modeling aspects I took in the background and to the process we needed to get stakeholders involved and convinced. But that's a personal drive. Now when we relate this to HP Enterprise then I believe there's, we have many contracts with clients which are very big, 100 millions of dollars. And there are commercial processes to those clients as well. And in order to get all those different disciplines aligned to what the client really expects from us and what they really need it seemed to be very, very helpful. And that's how we started to leverage this and to develop that capability within our company. And the open group has been a tremendous vehicle because it brought together a few lines of thinking which were very, very close to each other. And that's how we recognized this and how we started to jump in and to give the leverage. Right. Quite an interesting question. I first got involved with this organization as the representative of a supplier company. The motivation of that supplier company was nothing less than survival in a competitive market. And the early days of this organization, when it gets open, I think put off the demise of the European computer industry by a decade by providing a platform that all of the European vendors could use to attract the software industry. I came into the open group. I became the chief technical officer. My current motivation is directly related to Togaf. I was at the first ever meeting with the architecture where we decided on bringing Tafim into the open group. I've been involved with Togaf throughout and as I reach the end of my full-time career, my motivation is to see the next version of Togaf successfully delivered to the market. Why? Because I've been engaged for the last 10 years working with many companies around the world. And I've seen the lights come on when they suddenly figure out what we're talking about. You're not talking about drawing boxes and lines, are you? You're talking about communication. You're talking about relationships. So my personal motivation now is to get the next version out to market. Do we have any questions from the floor? I asked you to queue up, nobody's queued up, but maybe it's because I've been talking too much. Okay, Mike. I'll ask a question, then I'll answer it. Why is it so important that we've got customers, vendors, et cetera, in the same room? And the answer is that if you get vendors in a room developing standards, their motivation is minimalistic, so it doesn't affect their products, their business. Having customers in the room provides that balance because the customers say no. You simply can't duck that issue because if you duck that issue, what you're doing is of absolutely no use to us at all. Having both sides of the industry in the room at the same time is the thing which ensures that what comes out is of value. I just want to reinforce that point because as I used ArchaMate 2, I worked a bit on ArchaMate 2 and as we used it over the years, there were things that really didn't work that really didn't work for me, that were shortcomings of the language and I was able to communicate them to Mark and my other colleague through the standards process and those things are fixed. There are just a large number of things that I can trace back to a complaint that I had about the standard that I was able to communicate constructively to the right people. So that's fulfilling and it does work. I think to underscore that from a perspective of somebody who's responsible for the architecture products is that I'm going to ask Mark to comment on the actual process of delivery for ArchaMate so you have an understanding of what goes on. But what I was just illustrated is because it's an open standard you only have to engage in order to influence and make the changes that are necessary in the standards for your business value, whether that's your value from our perspective as a customer organization or as a supplier. So the critical thing here is engagement. Mark, you just nurse-mated with either in the ArchaMate forum the delivery of the standard to market as a member organization. Can you talk a little bit about from ideation through to delivery what you guys went through and how you operated? Well, the first initiative coming to version 3 of the standard started about two years ago. I was personally involved in that because that was really the point that we saw that it was time for a new version. There was input from various angles. First of all, there was this sort of a bug tracking system that the open group has request for change or issues with the standard. So that was an important input. We had from various different sources we had ideas about how to improve the standard, how to extend it. So what I started doing that summer was draw up a basically a large spreadsheet of all the things we might want to have in version 3. That was then discussed within the ArchaMate forum and basically decided upon that this is the set of requirements for version 3, this is the stuff and then we started working on that. First, we developed with a fairly small core team a draft of the next version over about the period I would say fall 2013 until summer 2014. So in summer last year we had the first drafts available with everything covered that we had in this list of requirements. And then we went into the official standardization process where we have the two levels of review, first the ArchaMate forum review so everybody in the forum could comment on that. Lots of comments came back of course. We addressed those came up with a second version that went through the company review many comments again of course those were addressed and that was then the version that was eventually standardized. So the whole process until the standard was completely finalized took us about two years. So from first idea that it was time for a new version until the delivery of version 3 last month that was about two years in total. I think we've done a pretty good job in compressing that time and sometimes it was a bit stressful but we really wanted to deliver it on time and I think we are blessed by the fact that the ArchaMate community working on the standard is fairly small and fairly coherent. I think Togaf has a larger challenge because it's a much more diverse and much bigger community and Togaf itself as a standard is a lot larger so moving that into the future is of course a much bigger effort so I think we are pretty flexible and nimble as a fairly small team and that really helped us as well. Thank you. One more opportunity for a question from the floor if there is one. Okay I want to wrap up here thank our panelists for their candor and their expertise thank you very much gentlemen


It's great about mad is they even invite people from the dark side like me, so I hope that But being in the dark side Gives me oops. That's one. No, okay being on the dark side gives me the opportunity to really take a long step back and in 1821 of my fellow countrymen Wrote a very interesting thought the destiny of nations depend on the way they which they feed themselves well two centuries later, I think it's true than ever and You know the old planets or entire plans destiny is going to depend on how well We're gonna feed ourself in the next 20 years or so so the current the current state of the food system is really scary and But I would like to show you in the next 15 minutes 14 minutes And why and how chefs can act today to help shape up the different revolutions are taking place right now in the food world So we can gain control again about our own destiny So I'm sure that most of you here today are very well aware of the issues that the food system is facing But when you are looking at all the different facts in different angles, it's really really shocking So allow me for just a few moments to walk you through some of these facts So you can you know soak in the scale of the challenge we are facing so first of all our food is produced at a totally unsustainable way because Food is produced at a huge energetic and environmental cost but also it's produced at a huge human cost and Most of you know our modern Western diet is responsible for most of the diseases and health issue we're facing today and All of that while we are still wasting a third of what we are producing. So it's doubly absurd Now You would think things would change fast, but they are not because we are you know, we are in a monopolistic situation and Things are not going to change by themselves We are permanently brainwashed by the dominant ideology What we are beginning we are being given the illusion of that we can decide but we are not The reality were victims of a disastrous storytelling and have cleverly organized this information system Why would there be 57 legal names to name sugar in the US on a package? Why name something Evaporated can extract when it's just plain canned sugar You know we need a revolution So the But that's not all oh, sorry, you know They think that's fast. Okay. Yeah, and we cannot really afford the static core because we are facing a huge Increased in population the most important being the number of people reaching the middle class which is great for them But if we continue to feed the middle class five billion people all wanted a western diet in the next 35 years It's almost impossible We already have you know we the experts predict that we need to double or crop production And especially our animal production in the future But we're already using almost half of the available land to raise The corn them into grow the corn that feeds the animals to feed us So if we're already using half of that today, I don't know where we're gonna feed So it's just absolutely crazy to think we can continue with the same system. So we need a real revolution and It the flip side of that is you know, it is actually happening. It's brewing. There is revolution happening in different areas of the of of the of the agriculture and food system and as a venture capitalist, I'm You know preview to a number of these Revolution happening a new number of the disruption happening we're seeing hundreds of Startup companies being funded in these different sectors And they are I don't know if you're aware of that But there are several billion dollars being invested every year for the past two or three years in these different sectors so something is really happening and I'm gonna walk you through some of these sectors now and then look at the overalls picture after that So in in Botany, there is something really profound that happened in the past few years in microbiology It is the understanding of what happens with Micoriza and Micoriza is a symbiotic relationship Between fungi and plant roots. So all the crop plants need fungi to survive because it's a symbiotic relationship where you exchange Glucides against mineral and one cannot live without the other really Now you would think yeah, great. So what happened? Well until now industrial farming has been promoting deep tilling and the usage of herbicides Which are actually are killing systematically all the fungi in the fields. So now you have a Crop plant which is very fragile Which also has disrupt the entire water system around it. So that only survives because we are giving them this artificial You know diet made of whatever the Monsanto and other people are giving us and That explains a lot of the issues we're seeing in the fields today By the way in parallel we are doing we're seeing a lot of development in Biotech companies small biotech companies who are studying what's happening with our own biome You know all these things happening here and they are finding which is You know at the end would make sense But quite mind-blowing the first time you hear about it We are finding that there is a huge amount of symbiosis between our own biome and the soil in which we are growing our food So that if you are going your vegetables and your chicken in the same area of where you're eating You're in total symbiosis with them, but if you're not you might not be in the same symbiosis So expect some amazing developments in this area of microbiology in the next few years the first being really about the revolution in agriculture going on and In the past few years what we have seen is the crop yields in industrial farming all over the world Including in the best areas of Western Europe the best areas of the US We've seen the the corp is going down, but also the nutrient content of the of the crops of the Vegetables and the cereals that we are eating have been going down. So today for example in the UK It takes about nine carrots to get the same nutrient level that would you would be getting in the 1950s from one carrot So it's also something that people have been aware of But it's not widely publicized by the food industry so we really need to Stop growing plants on a fast-food diet of inorganic chemicals and bring back the complexity and the power of biology Into agriculture and it's this is just what permaculture is all about is bringing back the biology into the field so the far the you know Farm industry is telling us where it doesn't work. It doesn't scale obviously not true Because we're not going back to the dark ages It's not like going back to the middle ages and and trying to do you know things on the app as a Fashion we have a lot of technology at our disposal. We can use soil microbiology analysis Which is you know very different from looking at the soil component from a mineral point of view but looking at the actual actual microbiology inside we can use satellite Surveillance we can look at a lot of things in the field to make the informed decision about what happened there We can use other farming technologies such as precision farming where you use GPS and stuff and satellite to to Optimize the way you go into your field. We can use micro drones We can use small robots to bring the nutrients to the soil where they need it You can use bio Biodefense against pests and so on right at the right place And this is working financially at a large scale one of my companies one of the companies. I mean invested in is currently Is currently managing? 55,000 hectares of fruits and vegetables. That's a lot of fruits and vegetables and what we what we do We are passing the entire 55,000 hectares into ecological farming into permaculture and and the the results are absolutely staggering. We obviously are lowering the Input of the things we put in because at the end we don't put anything in the soil anymore once we are totally into permaculture and And our yields are going up by double digits every year So whatever the the big farm industry is telling you is not true so we are in six different countries in Very exotic country like Suriname down to Turkey and Argentina and Uruguay and and and Belgium So we're doing that in different places. The goal is really to scale up that a lot more if we can In parallel to that on the other end of the spectrum We're seeing the rays and I'm sure you guys have our pioneers in many ways in that too In the rays of urban farming so urban farming is the idea of being able to grow vegetables and fruits with species that don't need a lot of soil to start with you don't see here and And what we are seeing is a number of initiatives to grow these these vegetables into small boxes We have seen I'm investing in one of these projects or big boxes like the size of a football field and you can you can bring back The the farming in the urban areas where you're gonna get 80% of the population in the future So this is working very well. It brings back a lot of soil analysis and microbiology, but also computer programming looking at leads how do you program leads? How do you do these type of things? It's fascinating and it's really happening But all that would not be possible by itself So it's all interlinked which is very exciting without the food distribution revolution and These food distribution revolution is happening because everyone is interconnected as one is using mobile phones in Africa in Europe in Asia and Australia and Not only do they allow to do a better match between demand and supply you can actually aggregate the demand and get know exactly what you need to supply but it also gives a Access to market which was not possible for number of decades to small farmers. So I Picked a couple of examples, but you know, we have a new on-demand platform for aggregating demand for fish and I'm talking about line-code fish from our season fishermen So the guys know exactly the day after how many for example seabass do they need to catch So they when they come back, they know exactly, you know They're going to bring a hundred kilos worth of seabass not 50 kilo not 200 kilos and that avoid waste and also have a better A better impact on price equilibrium. So very interesting not possible five years ago We're seeing a number of short circuit distribution models that are taking place like the food assembly It's called a rush in France another Company we have invested in and they allow consumers to buy directly online from the producers in local virtual Farmers market which are themselves organized by micro entrepreneurs so someone can say well, I want to start a farmers market in my In my area in in London or in Paris or in this area of Denmark and I'm going to find two hundred three hundred people that want to buy with me and The platform is going to allow me to do that the the amazing thing there is that the farmers have a You know the the the cut they are getting from that which is around 80 percent or even more is Three to four times bigger than they were with the supermarket chains So they can really concentrate on quality instead of just quantity, which is very very important for the future so By the way food assembly is starting in Denmark in a couple of weeks if you guys are interested by participating and All of that is really sustained by a change in behavior from the public towards, you know, fresher food and Going back to you know knowing what's no provenance and what's inside So I just wanted to add one more example of that which is cookpad, which is a Japanese company I don't know I mean I know that some guys are from Japan. He I'm sure they know it Because cookpad really is a platform that allow you to post comment on share recipes cooking recipes Now there are 60 million Unique users of cookpad in Japan, which is really about You know two-third of all Japanese families using it every month Mind-blowing and these guys have started recently in other countries. They just started in Indonesia took off like crazy They're 15 million 15 million users and they just started in Spain They're five million users and they are you know, they're seven million users in the Middle East It's actually Amazing not because their stuff is so good, but because of the demand for it It means like people want to share they want to reconnect with their with their culture and and and the food that is behind it So we're using all cover you know all the startup companies using food is food nutrition databases and software programs to match Consumers demand for health and the recipes they are using so lots of things happening. It's really amazing Seeing hundreds. I tell you hundreds of new ideas every month Of course probably 2% of them are gonna be successful. That's pretty much the ratio within invention capital But it's really really interesting to see the you know five years ago. There was none not a single one So it's very interesting now What I wanted to bring up now is the fact that all these revolutions are going to happen anyway But they could go one direction or another, you know all old all revolutions can be hijacked by someone Remember the French Revolution you had Napoleon hijacked back to a centralized system. So it was not democracy really at the end And here we you know if we left it to engineers We're likely to go toward a very different type of I know I'm an engineer So we are likely to go back to a great to go to a different first future that would may be made of you know So you learn for for for lunch and then healthy pills for dinner So we can spend more time in front of our computers I think what chefs have the an opportunity To help us regain a sense of joy Fun and social fabrics for cooking and that's very very important that you guys realized The huge impact that you can have because we're not into a centralized world anymore. It's gonna be a very decentralized Actually, I was looking for a metaphor for my ideas around that and I came across this beautiful woman nesco broccoli and which is you know an example of a factual geometry in nature Which is really cool Of course as a mathematician I love it because you can you know as you scale in and out you get the same thing and It makes the invisible visible and more importantly the order disorder and the disorder order which is really Again for mathematicians fun but it's a it's a very resilient system, so We have you know if we go back to the first picture I'm not going to go back to it, but if we go back to the first picture of The individual farming of today. You see these very linear things You see these long rows of cows of chicken of corn of wheat all aligned all very clean very Soviet style Now if we look now the new revolutions, they're all happening at the same time They're all in parallel and they are all interconnected to one another the fungi the garden the distribution system between people the cooking and exchange of recipes and Actually, April Bloomberg this morning was talking about that, you know how she got Reconnected at different level between your cooking and between your farming. It's it's that you are doing broccoli revolution Because I think this is you know, maybe what how we should call that you know the broccoli revolution But these broccoli revolution are still very for dry We're still at the beginning of it as I said it could be hijacked back by the big farm industry the big food industry and we need to get a critical mass to make it very resilient and so We have I know it's very blurry chefs here So you can see Jamie and Ronnie and Alex and David Chang very blurry, but Maybe it's there's a purpose for it because I think chefs will go beyond the summit of the food and Beyond gastronomy and really embrace this food revolution to help them make You know joyful and human again So I came up with a couple of ideas, which I think are very very very important What for what chefs should be doing very concretely in the next couple of years really and it's first of all We need to eat real food. We need to stop talking all the time about nutrition and talking about you know Vitamins and stuff like that because that's the way the food industry has been hijacking the conversation, you know We you can come up with Oreo cookies, which are full of vitamin C.  I tell you being a farmer today is even worse because you see people around you are catching you know Developing cancer because of the older products you are using you don't want your kids to be farmers and that needs to change Otherwise, we're gonna go and continue to be in a more and more industrial world and the last point It's a personal point, but I think we really need to move away from a You know animal protein centric Diet because we cannot sustain it. We just cannot sustain it and we need to and and I know that Rene and Others here. I've been there, you know to showcase some of the you know vegetable based Dishes, but they should be a centerpiece of the menu not just that So I know I'm totally into it, but just a Lastly old thing here It's a ten days ago. I was having dinner in Santa Fe New Mexico show you that venture capitalist travel a lot and That's British on the rise of farm to fork Restaurant a new one in Santa Fe and courage you to go there. It's really cool But the really interesting thing is if you look on the on the right side on zoom in on some of the thing here You have body farms in Las Vegas and three sisters farm in Glorietta. I Know this place is because there is a high school there And six years ago. There was absolutely no market for any of these farms actually some of this one did not even exist there was a chance encounter talking about fractal and stuff like that between a biology professor at the high school and a chef that took over the job as Sodexo manager for the area the guys who are doing the disgusting school lunches for the for the for the schools and They met there's the guy from Sodexo say well Let's try to bend the rules and allow the school to get some of the Locally produced thing into the menu and we are with the Jamie Oliver food foundation got by serendipity Got alerted to that. We help them organize a food revolution day at the school They invited the entire community around this very poor area of New Mexico. It's one of the poorest counties And they started to have a discussion and all the schools started to get in the bandwagon and then the local Governments started to buy the food from these people. So today six years later You have a thriving community of organic farmers who have taken over over And now you even have in Santa Fe this type of restaurants that do that So it's very much like, you know, the old butterfly that change the things in the fractal world You can have an influence from far away because not everyone here is a celebrity chef But everyone is a master of his own world, which is his own kitchen So you can start a revolution in your kitchen and then see it propagates from there So each of you today as the opportunity and I would call that Social responsibility to help break the food system and build a better one because you are the better You are the butterfly that can make a food storm happen on the other side of the planet Thank you


I'll drop the link in the Zoom chat when it's posted. Nice one. So this will be available also later on YouTube. Yeah, as soon as the meeting's over, okay, here. I'm gonna put the YouTube live stream in the link in the chat and just so you know, there's also a chat on the live stream page. So you wanna keep an eye on that as well to see if there are questions there. Thank you so much. Perfect. You're live now. Great, perfect. Thank you. So two things before we start. Administrivia, one, we are bound by the antitrust policy of Linux Foundation, which just means that we don't engage in collusive activity according to law of wherever we are. Second is a court of conduct, which is basically we treat each other with respect. Even when we are disagreeing with people, we are not disagreeable. These are the only two rules. And after that, after this little short administration, then I introduce Mario Raichel, Dr. Mario Raichel and Anya and Anya Camping, both from PPI, Mario is managing consultant, I think, and Anya is senior consultant. And Anya is focused on the innovation and such things and Mario is an old hand at ISO 2022 and the payments infrastructure. So I leave presentation to them and please everybody, could you please mute, mute if you're not speaking? I'll make you co-host so you can help manage. I mean, otherwise we're gonna have a mess here. Okay, I'm gonna mute Fami, which I did, and everybody else who's not speaking, please go on mute. Thank you. Go ahead, Mario and Anya, it's your meeting now, and I hope to make it without much disturbance by muting people who are not speaking. Thank you. Mario, you're not. Thank you very much, Vipin. I would share my screen now. Oh, yeah, great. And then I will hand over to Mario. Thank you. Thank you, Vipin, thank you, Andrea. I'm, we feel honored and I'm thrilled to give that talk to that large group. Some of the names I recognize and some new people. Nice to meet you all. So we want to talk about the beauty of ISO 2022. Yeah, let me introduce first myself and then later a few words about Anya. I'm with the PPI for more than two years, but in payments more than 20 years. By now starting with a software house, then a short break in debt in a FinTech company called Traxpay. You might have heard about it. Then it was in a Swift Service Bureau working for them in an outsourcing environment for payments, of course. And now I am a consultant at PPI. I can represent and, yeah, represent and being active in industry bodies and market practice initiatives that I did, yeah, over the last more than 10 years. In some of that I can tell you about that's actually part of that talk. We have a little agenda on the next slide. Yeah, that's a very short introduction of our company. Then I will present you a basic overview of ISO 2022 and Anya will give you our view, basic overview of digital currencies. And then you will see how that all comes together. So let us start with a short introduction of PPI. On the next slide, PPI was founded in 1984 in Hamburg. And now we have offices in many German cities, but also in Zurich, Milano and in Paris. So we are a European focused company consulting and software development. And that's more or less about payments. Since the early 2000s, we started in communication in payments and we are in Europe, Central Europe, very much known about subject ebics. But on the next slide, you will see that we are not just about payments. We also, especially in Germany, we are consulting company for broader aspects of financial institutions and insurances in matters of risk, treasury, compliance and all that kind of stuff. With our latest parts, PPI crossing, our collaboration lab for cross sector technology driven services in buzzwords AI, RPA and other latest developments. We provide the layer for innovations in other units. But more or less about payments on the next slide, you can see what we cover in payments. That is on one side, consultancy. That's where Anja and I work. Anja is in that next generation payments unit and working with fancy things like blockchain and cryptocurrencies she will talk about later on. And I'm working in those cross section between consultancy and products. Our traffic suit is covering the whole value chain from the communication that was our beginning, but now also with central payment processing at the bank with our flagship product traffic payment hub, especially designed for ISO 2022 data layer inside and for instant payments working on. So yeah, that's enough for the introduction. Let us dive into ISO 2022 that is very much of our daily business right now because all the banks are talking about. As banks, we are migrating to ISO 2022, not just in domestic payments in Europe. We have that since 2008 in SEPA, but now we are migrating the high value payments, RTGS, like target two, Euro one, step one, also CHAPS, and so on, they all move to ISO 2022. And next to it, you might have heard about it that correspondent banking is also moving ISO 2022. And 2025, we hopefully are all done and then we will look for new challenges. The history all started in the early 2000s. We have on the next slide coming from many national formats in the payment arena. In the payment initiation with many different room for remittance information, what a corporate is especially interested about. So we had countries where you had, let's say 140 free tax characters, or only a few like countries with eight or 12 characters remittance information, that's not much. And many different items and data elements. Out of that, the initiative called Twist Treasury Workstation Integration Center Team developed the idea of a unified core payment kernel, having all the data elements for all payment initiations all over the world, coming from CHECK to electronic and all different means, including data elements for regulatory reasons. That kind of stuff, putting that all together and coming to a message format that then was the basis for the ISO 2022. In 2003, an MOU was signed by Twist, IFX, OIG and Swift to develop further on that core payment kernel. In 2004, we had the birth of the standard ISO 2022. Of course, there was an organization built around that. ISO 2022 ISO, as you may know, is organized in different technical committees for financial services, the so-called Technical Committee 68 is managing all that and defined the ISO 2022. Yeah, build the registration management group and the standard evaluation group and all that is published and available all different messages on the ISO2022.org website. Swift as an organization became the registration authority and is managing a lot of that stuff around that standard. It was soon chosen in Europe at the area as the banks were defining the single euro payment area, so-called SEPA and coming from those many different domestic formats, we had to choose a new format so that no country had an advantage over the others. And EPC, the European Payment Council that was founded for building up the SEPA and the rule books and all that stuff. They decided in 2006, so very much the same time to go for a data model according to ISO 2022 and had chosen for XML and the launch was in 2008. Yeah, and that was just the beginning. Now we have on the next slide an overview. Now you could get the impression that ISO 2022 is an XML message format, but it's not. It's rather the idea of globally uniform standard to define messages. It's a data dictionary, a repository. It is talking about the business data dictionary and data flows and coming from those elements defining the messages that are then consistent for the different use cases. On the next slide, we have a short overview that ISO 2022 is of course supported by Swift as a registration authority and the service provider providing all the messages on that website as shown. By now we have more than 650 different messages in many different areas. We will come in a minute about that. ISO 2022 is a single standardization approach, a methodology used by financial standards initiatives and central financial repository of data elements that are used in different use cases in different not just messages in the, it is so to speak a language, overall financial businesses. And Swift is not mandating a migration. It is supporting all the communities to decide if and when they want to migrate. We have seen that since 2006. We have more or less every year a change cycle, a release cycle in the ISO 2022 messages. And we will see that has its own beauty. ISO 2022 is not just XML as I mentioned before. There are different available syntax and representation layers like that ASN one standard that some of you might heard about it. But I'm sure many of you heard about the JSON representation of the language of API. And also here in the JSON representation you can transport either XML or data elements. And if you go here and if you go here then you also can talk in the data, with the data elements in the language of ISO 2022. And that makes that new standard or not so new standard best fit for future developments as well. On the next slide, I have brought to you a little diagram where generic ISO 2022 messages is not the biggest quantity. The larger quantity of messages, message formats, message definition is the so-called MX. This abbreviation MX is drawn from the Swift MT message type abbreviation where we in payments know about the MT103, the customer payment or the MT202, the bank-to-bank transfer and the MT940 statement. And Swift is for example, going and define new MX messages by the need of different communities in the Swift world. There are not just living payment messages in the so-called category 1 MT1XX or category 2 MT2XX, but also we have the category 3 for foreign exchange and money market messages we have the famous trade services messages, the category 7 and reporting the category 9 and of course the securities messages, the category 5. And in all those areas, by now there are equivalents, more or less ISO 2022 messages, but they are, let's face it, by the definition, by the data model, that big coming from the idea that we have a unified language for financial messaging all over the world. And so it might be too big for a domestic market or for a certain community. And soon there was a need for harmonizing the implementation of ISO 2022 messages and one of those first harmonization initiatives was CGI, Common Global Implementation. That is a free initiative of, a free initiative of corporate banks and vendors in the corporate to bank space and they took the idea of ISO 2022 messages in SEPA to the global approach. Then later on the market infrastructure took the idea and said that's a great language, ISO 2022. Let's think about how we can transport financial information, but in an harmonized way. And they founded the initiative HVPS Plus. HVP comes from high value payments and in that initiative you have market infrastructures like the European Central Bank with their T2 target two system. You have EBA clearing, Euro one. You have CHEPS in there. You have CHEPS, the Fed from the US as you have Singapore, Canada and many more. And they defined a subset of payment messages in ISO 2022 by their needs for high value payment systems for real-time gross settlement functionalities. And target two is so to speak a subset. There is a similar picture for CGI. Anya, would you please click? Another click? Right. So that light blue bubble could be the set of all CGI market practice usage guidelines. And the green one then would be the local bank implementation guideline for corporate. But via that guidelines, a corporate can have a multi-bank user experience all over the world. And now SWIFT started the project after a consultation of their members and they said, hey, let's go all to ISO 2022. And they founded the harmonization, the usage guideline group. It's called CBPR plus. And CBPR stands for cross-border payment and reporting. And that is because SWIFT is going to discard all the category one and two and nine MT messages out of their SWIFT network in an phased approach. It starts with the SWIFT release November 2022 and November 2025. We then have all over the world ISO 2022 payment messages. Maybe some exceptions anyway. And the latest harmonization initiative is called IP plus that's an instant payment or also called real-time payments. And they look how to use that beautiful message standard to leverage in the real-time payment world. Next slide, please. After all that harmonization, we can look at those different usage of ISO 2022 messages. And the first thing I learned 20 years ago if you want to talk about payments, you have to look into the so-called four-corner model. There you have a debtor and the creditor and the debtor bank and the creditor bank. And if the debtor initiates a payment, the debtor bank has to find its way to transport the information and the money to the creditor bank and they would report that incoming payment to the creditor. With SEPA, we got that additional bubble in the four-corner model. It's called Clearing and Settlement Mechanisms, CSM. And there it was kind of custom that such a clearing and settlement mechanism is an automatic clearinghouse where not every debtor bank and creditor bank have a bilateral relation, but they are all more or less direct or indirectly connected to an ACH and automatic clearinghouse. And yeah, the biggest in pan-European one is, for example, step two, by EBA Clearing taking care of the reach for all SEPA payments in Europe. That way for clearing and settlement from the debtor bank to creditor bank in a global international view is a bit bigger. There you still have your correspondent banking relationships because if you have a foreign currency payment from the debtor to the creditor, then you don't settle that such a payment domestically in your country. The money has to flow in the country of the money so therefore from the debtor agent, the debtor's bank in the country of the debtor usually has to send a payment message to their correspondent bank, so-called Intermediary Bank, in the country of the currency and they would hand over to the correspondent bank of the creditor agent via an RTGS in that country of the currency and transport the money and the information towards the creditor agent and then they would credit the creditor. And right now many of those errors are empty messages, MT103, MT202, MT940, but as I mentioned with the CBPR plus initiative, we will move all that to beautiful ISO 2022 messages. And what does it look like? Let's have a look into the next page where an ISO 2022 message, I mentioned some of them already in the former slide, Payne 001, 002, 003, I have intentionally used a message with three different numbers, namely the first four characters of a message in XML according to ISO 2022 is a so-called business domain. And Payne as a business domain is a payment initiation, a Pax message is a payment clearing settlement, that's the equivalent of an interbank message. Yeah, CEPA started 2008 using Payne Pax and CUM cache management business domain messages. Target two already in 2007 founded WentLife, has already many XML messages in their so-called application-to-application services. T2S, Target Two Securities, a service for settlement of security flows in central bank money in different currencies, is working with many, many business domains already in ISO 2022. And the automatic clearinghouse by Deutsche Bundesbank, so-called CEPA Clearer SCL, is also handling their directory in an ISO 2022 message format, the so-called ROX, that's rooting for clearing and settlement. And there you can see many, many different business domain. We even have the T-SIN messages in the intent lower corner for trade service initiations. And just recently I was told that this message is used already live in some banks. Yeah. The GPI Tracker messages, TRCK, is an example for an MX message that is not ISO 2022. Such a message definition, Swift is bringing to the financial community in order to move their GPI Tracker and trace services to the ISO 2022 world. Okay. Let's dive into some examples. What is the beauty all about ISO 2022 messages? On the next slide, I show you a little bit about the granularity. We have many different instruction ideas, so-called end-to-end reference. We have the famous UETR, the unique end-to-end transaction reference. That's the reference Swift introduced with their GPI initiative in 2016 in the MT world. And as I mentioned, this functionality is moved to Swift ISO world with the CBPR plus migration. A big challenge is migrating address data to structured address information. And this little example with the Cuba sports bar in drill is the example. If you have that Cuba sports bar at Ocean Drive, California, on just a free text address, four lines as 35 characters, then you certainly have a hit in the sanctions screening because the buzzword Cuba is somehow suspicious. And then a clerk has to look into that and can see that Cuba is not the country and not even the country code, but it is a name. And if you transport information in granularity like this, you can avoid those false positive hits and come to a much more frictionless payment experience. Let's have this much on the pain and granularity level. On the next page, we have an example for the richness of the data we can transport in ISO 2022. Let's think about that we have a single credit transfer that shall settle several invoices and a credit note and a discount. If you want to bring this in a remittance information field, free text, four lines as 35 characters, you have to use abbreviations and certainly the ERP system at the credit side will have its challenges. But with structured remittance information that beauty brings ISO 2022, we have dedicated fields for dedicated invoice numbers and code words for commercial invoices and credit notes and so on. As we can see here in that example, that brings a level of richness and on the other side granularity that makes that format machine readable from end to end. And I used to say that in banking business, if banks talk about end to end, they usually talk about account to account, but in an corporate and a B2B world, I would rather see end to end as ERP to ERP. So the payment initiation comes out of an ERP system into a payment file is transported via banking channels and then leads to a statement that then is imported into an ERP system and all invoices are checked. Let's see on the next slide that that kind of information has to be transported and the little picture on the right-hand side is not to be read, it's much too small, but it shows the XML tree, often financial message by the standard ISO 2022 and you see the granularity and the different texts and sub-trees where you can transport information. And this is comparable to logistics inventing the container and not to transport every single barrel from the harbor to the ship or vice versa. That's the different thing in the beauty of ISO 2022 and much more because we do not define just messages but business flow. We do not consider the happy flow in Pax 8 that is transported for credit transfer from debtor bank to creditor bank but we also cover returns, rejections and many other so-called art transactions and even a recall that might be necessary and the positive or negative answer to a recall is covered by different messages in ISO 2022 and via that you have a much higher rate on STP and STP straight through processing not only in terms of payment processing but also in terms of exception and investigation as you easily can imagine. And the clearing and settlement mechanism that is in between, a little word about that, the clearing is of course only the sorting of different payment items in the bulk file Pax 8 to different channels. For example, in an automatic clearing house sorting all the items to different direct respectively indirect participant but also takes care about settlement and the settlement is taken either in central bank money if the clearing house is the central bank itself like target two is or is done via liquidity management mechanism for the step two or the SIPA clearing system that is to be done in the SIPA area at least. If not, if it is not settled in central bank money you have commercial bank money where the correspondent bank has a banking relationship and an account servicing institution and then the money is settled via those accounts. To hurry up a little bit, let's have a look into the next slide and look into the next slide into the transport of information. For me, payments is about transporting money but sometimes even more important than transporting information and doing so by a message standard like ISO 20 or 22. We have a uniform set of data elements that can travel from the ERP via the payment initiation via a payment hub in a bank to the interbank space via central clearing and settlement mechanism to the payment hub of the creditor bank to the accounting system in that bank. Usually the information has to go through the accounting system and then arise the statement and at the very end it arises the ERP system where it has to go to. In former times we had trade services or trades pictured in that left-hand side and now since the 60s, since the container was invented we have a revolution in logistics seen over the last years and growing and speed and richness that we could have in payments in financial messaging with that messages. Hi, Mario. Yes. Maybe we have to give Anya a chance to talk about her stuff. So could you please switch over? The last slide. Anya, skip the next one. The next one. Harry, I'm sorry. Yeah. And click here to show the XML is moving around and if we talk about cryptocurrency we could talk about the wallet to wallet payment flow. And this is the buzzword for Anya for her slides. Yeah. Thank you very much, Mario. And also thank you for the invitation and for having the chance to talk in this hyper ledger event here tonight. Just a short introduction of myself. My name is Anya Camping. I'm a senior consultant at PPE since 2019. Before I was an SAP consultant in the banking area and at PPI with our unit consulting payments I'm concerned with innovative payment topics especially with blockchain, crypto and digital currencies. We call them next generation payments. We have put the main focus of our presentation on ISO 20.022. And Mario mentioned in his part the four corner model. You see it here. And this is how conventional payments are working with intermediaries and corresponding banking and all the different stages. And now we switch to innovation and payments. I will go to the next slide. Yeah, you see here, crypto currencies somehow enable person to person or wallet to wallet payments. We call them W to W payments. And yeah, these are payments without having involved any intermediaries such as banks or other financial institutions. And this is why it is so fascinating. You see it here on the right side of the slide. Banks and financial institutions are literally fade away in this case of crypto transactions. So you have here only peer to peer wallet to wallet payments. Yeah, and yeah, this is why Bitcoin is also so fascinating as to mention an example of a cryptocurrency. But before I come to tell you more about digital currencies and the terms behind them, I would like to start with a short overview of the history. So I will go on to the next slide. Because in my point of view, this helps to get an understanding of where all this comes from. So you have here a kind of historical overview. And you see here that we have a kind of four phases. Indeed, Bitcoin marked a very important step. But the idea behind Bitcoin is not new. For example, David Chalm already invented a kind of cryptocurrency which was called DigiCash in 1989. And DigiCash transactions had the future of being anonymous due to cryptographic protocol. And this was invented by David Chalm. And yeah, I would say this is a phase in the history which I would call the origin. Yeah, with the Bitcoin White Paper in 2009, the phase of cryptocurrencies somewhat began. So the booming phase of the cryptocurrency Bitcoin marked an important change. And the interest in digital currencies literally exploded. Therefore, I would call this phase the phase of cryptocurrencies. This is here the second phase. Yeah, what makes cryptocurrencies interesting is technology with blockchain and or to use a more general term with distributed ledger or DLT. It is possible to enhance and simplify business organizational processes and even the involved payment processes. Therefore, private institutions and also companies began to examine the possibilities around this new technology. And this is the phase of DLT platforms and applications. And also here we have in 2016, very important, the hyperledger launch. Yeah, and in the past few years, you can see a very interesting evolution. And this is the kind of back to digital currencies. Recently, central banks worldwide identified their intentions to create an own digital form of money, which is called a central bank digital currency, or just shortly CBDC. And in my opinion, this is mainly due to the announcement of the DM association. You may have heard of it. Yeah, they wanted to introduce an own private digital currencies, which would be available to everyone worldwide and could be used as a means of payments. For example, with your Facebook account. And since DM can pose a risk to financial stability, central banks somewhat intensified their intentions to create a feasible alternative for the public. So kind of digital form of central bank money, which comes directly from the central bank. So we have this important phase now with central bank digital currencies. To go into the next slide. As I've said, you have different kinds of digital currencies, and it is important to distinguish between them. So a good starting point is the digital money flower, which was created by the Bank of International Settlements, and this provides a very good overview. So you have digital currencies, which are issued by the private sector. This is for example, number one or number two. For example, number one, we have public cryptocurrencies, which yeah, for example, like Bitcoin. This means there are no limitations and everybody can access the cryptocurrencies. But we also have, and this is a point two in this diagram. We have cryptocurrencies which are commissioned. Either the cryptocurrencies restricted to a certain group or to have an access to this currency. You have to provide a suitable verification of your identity. And yeah, it is very important to make the difference between these private solutions. So between one and two and between CBDCs, which are point three, four and five, because a CBDC would be a digital form of money which is issued by central banks, not the private sector. So CBDC can be designed in different ways. For example, a CBDC can be accessible to everyone, for consumers as well, for corporates. So this is the so-called retail or general purpose CBDC. Or on the other hand, a CBDC can be designed to be used only for Hosei payments. So only for the interbank area. So the excess would be restricted only to banks and financial institutions. And this is the so-called Hosei CBDC. Yes, and we also have another difference in the design. For example, you can have a token-based variant of a CBDC and a token-based system. The CBDC is created as a token with a specific denomination. The transfer of a token from one party to another can be compared with the process of handing over a banknote from one person to another. Or if you look into the digital money flower here, you have here, for example, cash. And you also see that this is also token-based, but not digital because cash is, you can call it like a kind of physical-based form of a token. You can also have an account-based design and with an account-based design, verifying the identity of the payer is required. So it is possible to have a CBDC account directly at the central bank. So me and you, as normal consumers, can have a CBDC account directly at the central bank. Or this is another way you can have a CBDC account at an intermediary, for example, at your house bank. And yeah, this was just a short glimpse at this very interesting topic of digital currencies. And yeah, I hope that I was able to provide you a basic understanding. And if you have any questions, my colleague, Mario and I, I'm very happy to give you answers. Thank you, Ania. That was very clear and definitely exhaustive discussion. I mean, from my side, it was a very good one. I appreciate it. I'll leave it on to the attendants to make questions, gentlemen. And also another reminder that we have to relinquish the room at... Yes, in a very few minutes. In four minutes. Yeah. So I should thank Mario and Ania for showing up and doing an exhaustive review of ISO 20 or 22. I know that it's very detailed, so it's difficult to ask questions. We could talk for hours, I think. Yes. I feel sorry that I overdid. No, no, no. Only a few minutes, yeah. They have to see something, Mario. It was a very interesting one. Yeah, that's the thing. If you feel enthusiastic about something, then you can talk. Andrea and Mario and Ania, it's Eugenia here. I want to share my suggestion. I was actually attending yesterday the live event from Bank International Settlement where they were illustrating a different approach for providing interoperability by CBDC in which essentially the second approach where essentially there were interlink between different national projects involving CBDCs. So 2022 were enlisted as one of the best operative standards for providing transmission of information over the DLT infrastructure. So I was wondering if you were aware about that and if you maybe have some suggestion to implement this statement. I personally, I was not aware of a live event of yesterday at the Bank of International Settlement. There is so much going on. I was aware that the base was providing room for the CPMI, the central payment for the market infrastructure. They discussed last week about the correspondent banking system and the need for enhancements because of all the problems and all the regulatory burdens of KYC and so on. Some areas, some countries, some currency corridors are drying up on correspondent banking relationships. There are different studies on that and now central banks discussing on the G20 level about what could be done about that and it's an idea called Ampluz where central banks help in that area by connecting RTGS, cryptocurrency, especially CVDC central bank digital currencies and therefore enhancing, especially remittance services on an international level. Unfortunately, we have come to the end of this very interesting hour and we have to relinquish the room to the next... Exactly. I would like to thank myself as well, Mario and Ania and not too soon, everybody. This was a very interesting joint meeting. I hope to do more in the future. Thanks, everyone. Thank you, Mario. Thank you, Ania. We'll be happy to follow up.