Is Fraud Management the same as Revenue Assurance?

Jeepers creepers. My eyes popped out when I reviewed the proposal by Moshe Zolotov of cVidya to include fraud management in the TM Forum’s process map, the eTOM. In short, it gives a process map for fraud management that is the same as the process map for revenue assurance (apart from changing the names on the boxes).

Surely that cannot be right. Are revenue assurance and fraud management the same? I do not think so. I think you cannot take a revenue assurance analyst, ask them to swap desks with a fraud analyst, and expect them to do each other’s jobs. But maybe I am wrong – what do most of you working in RA and Fraud Management teams think? Let me know by commenting here, or else come down to the forum at the TMF and share your thoughts there. Any feedback is welcome!

Eric Priezkalns
Eric Priezkalns

Eric is a recognized expert on communications risk and assurance. He was Director of Risk Management for Qatar Telecom and has worked with Cable & Wireless, T‑Mobile, Sky, Worldcom and others.

 

Eric was lead author of Revenue Assurance: Expert Opinions for Communications Providers, published by CRC Press. He was a founding member of Qatar’s National Committee for Internet Safety and the first leader of the TM Forum’s Enterprise Risk Management team. Eric currently sits on the committee of the Risk & Assurance Group, and is an editorial advisor to Black Swan. He is a qualified chartered accountant, with degrees in information systems, and in mathematics and philosophy.

 

Commsrisk is edited by Eric. Look here for more about Eric’s history as editor.

  • The data may be the same and from the same sources but the culture and training are very different. Carriers try combining the groups, most divide them again. Alex

  • Güera Romo

    I think the difference is in the personality of the individual. Some people are by nature distrustful and can think like a criminal to catch the criminal. Others can\’t get into the mind of the fraudster and that I believe is difference between good fraud analytics and bad fraud analytics.

    Sure, the basic operations process and base data are or can be the same and I think this is where the TMForum is coming from. The eTOM view is generic enough to cater for that. Has that approach been successful in churning out successful RA departments? Not that I have seen. The devil is in the detail and we miss many dimensions of this detail.

  • Carlos Puertas

    I think that no its the same but is similar.
    Similar in metodology. Both need take a cases or requeriments get analisys & probes, identify root sources and planing actions inmediated for close leaks or faults and define solutions for root sources.
    Its diferent because fraud need recopilation of probes fisical, get study of camps, and its focus in persons in many cases with applied laws and action of disuation. RA dont need it.