Skip to main content
注目のグループ

* Financial Services Cloud *

Welcome! This group is dedicated to your success with Salesforce Financial Services. Join the conversation here to stay up to date on the product, learn best practices, and everything in between. Use this group to review resources, ask questions, help each other, and share experiences. --------------------------------------- This group is maintained and moderated by Salesforce employees. The content received in this group falls under the official Forward-Looking Statement: http://investor.salesforce.com/about-us/investor/forward-looking-statements/default.aspx

Im looking for feedback from Architects/BA/Admin/Users who have experience running Retail and Corporate Banking in the same Salesforce org. 

We currently have: 

Retail Banking using Person Accounts 

Corporate Banking using the traditional Business Account + Contact model 

As part of an enterprise Customer 360 initiative, we're evaluating whether Corporate Banking should move away from the Account + Contact model and adopt the same person-centric approach used by Retail Banking. 

The proposed model would be: 

Business customers remain Business Accounts 

People associated with those businesses (directors, owners, signatories, guarantors, authorized representatives, etc.) are represented as Person Accounts rather than Contacts 

Relationships between individuals and organizations are managed through relationship objects (Account Contact Relationships) 

The primary driver is to have a single representation of an individual across the bank. For example, the same person could simultaneously be: 

A retail banking customer 

A company director 

A beneficial owner 

A guarantor 

A signatory on a business account 

without existing as both a Contact and a Person Account. 

Questions: 

Has anyone implemented Person Accounts as the primary representation of peole across both Retail and Corporate Banking? 

What challenges did you encounter with: 

Account Contact Relationship 

Reporting. 

Security and sharing. 

Standard features such a events and task rollup to primary accounts . 

If you retained the traditional Business Account + Contact model for Corporate Banking, how did you address Customer 360 and duplicate identity challenges when the same individual was also a Retail customer? 

Looking back, would you make the same architectural decision again? 

Interested in hearing from anyone with real-world experience in banking, wealth management, insurance, or other FSC implementations that needed to support both B2C and B2B customer models within the same org. Thanks in advance !

0/9000

Join Our Webinar and Scale High-Touch Client Relationships with Agentforce

 

Hello Trailblazers, 

 

Did you know high-touch relationship managers spend nearly 70% of their day on administrative tasks instead of deepening client relationships? What if your digital workforce could handle that for you — automatically, in the background? 

 

Join us for a webinar on Tuesday, June 9 at 9:00 AM PST / 12:00 PM EST, where financial leaders will share how autonomous AI agents are transforming the way relationship managers work — shifting from systems that inform to systems that act

 

Here's what makes this different:

  • Autonomous Agents at Work — See a live demo of digital workers that run in the background, prioritizing your tasks, managing your meetings, and freeing you up for what actually matters: your clients
  • Proactive Customer Experiences — Hear how Agentforce is helping relationship managers double their capacity
  • Clicks, Not Code — Deploy agents using prebuilt templates — no engineering required

 

This isn't just another AI conversation. This is about agents that 

do the work

 so you don't have to. 

 

Whether you're just exploring AI agents or ready to scale, this is a session you won't want to miss.  

Register Today

0/9000

Hi,

We have a non-admin user with a custom profile and FSC Standard PSL assigned. This user has Read, Create, and Edit permission on Financial Account confirmed. But every time they try to create a Financial Account they get:

System Administrator creates Financial Accounts without any issue on the same org. 

 

We traced this to the FSC managed FinancialAccountTrigger. The trigger behaves differently based on whether the running user is a System Administrator or not — and for non-admin users it throws the error regardless of their CRUD permissions on the object. 

 

Has anyone run into this? Is there a specific permission, permission set, or configuration step required to allow non-admin users to create Financial Accounts in FSC? 

 

Any guidance appreciated.

1 件の回答
  1. 5月28日 11:15

    @Simran Singh the key is to separate case creation from email threading.

     

    If the requirement is only "let the manager create a Case from an email," then Salesforce Outlook/Gmail integration can work. You can expose a Create Case quick action in the Salesforce side panel, and Salesforce docs confirm users can create Cases directly from the email side panel. Attachments can also be logged to Salesforce as Files, depending on the email integration setup (https://help.salesforce.com/s/articleView?id=sales.outlookcrm_side_panel_create_actions.htm&type=5

     

    But if the requirement is "all future client replies must automatically stay on the same Case," then Email-to-Case needs to be part of the flow. Salesforce’s Email-to-Case threading works when outgoing Case emails and incoming customer replies are routed back through Email-to-Case. If replies only go back to the Account Manager’s personal inbox, Salesforce will not automatically attach those replies to the Case (Email-to-Case Threading

     

    The scalable design is usually: use one central Email-to-Case routing address, then configure mail-system forwarding or a controlled forwarding process from the AM inboxes into that address. Once the Case is created, assign it to the right Account Manager using Flow, assignment rules, or a mapping based on the original recipient/customer/account. Salesforce documents Email-to-Case forwarding as the standard pattern for routing emails into Cases (Salesforce Help | Article

     

    The one point to be careful with is the “send from the individual AM email” requirement. If the email truly goes out from the AM’s personal address and the customer replies only to that address, the reply will land in Outlook/Gmail, not automatically in Salesforce. You can show the AM as the owner/agent, but for automatic Case threading, the Reply-To path should route back to Email-to-Case. Salesforce also notes that the default reply From address can be the user’s address, so this needs to be tested carefully in your org (Default Email-to-Case 'From' address for replies to email

     

    My recommendation is to use Outlook/Gmail integration for manual Case creation if needed, but use Email-to-Case as the system of record for the lifecycle. If the business insists on true personal inbox ownership for the full thread, then you are likely looking at a custom Microsoft Graph/Gmail API integration rather than standard Email-to-Case alone.

0/9000
3 件のコメント
0/9000

Hi FSC Trailblazer community! 

 

Thank you so much to everyone who has participated in the previous surveys! 

 

Here's the link for this week's survey

about your use of industry agents. If you participate and sign up to be part of the research database, you'll be eligible to receive a $10 giftcard of your choice. 

 

If you haven't yet filled out last week's survey, but would still like to share your feedback, it is still open and can be accessed

HERE

 

Due to the US holidays next week, this will be the last survey we share in May.

0/9000

Hello FSC community, 

 

Huge thank you to those who've filled out our

first survey

. (Note: If you haven't and want to participate, we'll be allowing responses for another week.) 

 

In this second week of May Madness, we'd love to learn a little more about the business workflows and data you're connected to and want to solve with AI. 

 

Take me to the survey!

 

 

____________________ 

 

As with before, at the end of the survey you’ll have the option to provide your contact info to receive a small token of appreciation ($10 gift card)*—completely optional.

 

 

Thanks again for being part of the Financial Services Trailblazer Community!

 

 

*You must be opted into the Salesforce Research Program to receive compensation. You’ll have the chance to opt in at the end of the survey, and can unsubscribe at any time. The gift card may take 1-2 weeks to send out.

0/9000

I'm running up to the deadline to be compliant with Reg S-P. I've contacted Salesforce to get their statement assuring notification of breaches of their system that may expose our data. The regulation says they need to notify us within 72 hours. My "rep" says this requires a legal addendum to our contract. I find that hard to believe. 

1) Has anyone been told the same? 

2) Has anyone found a different method that meets compliance? (ex: SF Documentation they are compliant with GDPR) 

 

Thanks, 

Bob

2 件の回答
  1. 5月11日 13:40

    Bob — yes, you're not alone. We've heard the same from others navigating this with large SaaS vendors. Salesforce routing it through a legal addendum is pretty consistent with how they've handled similar requests. 

     

    To your second question: beyond a formal addendum, other approaches that firms have used include a written questionnaire or attestation from the service provider acknowledging the 72-hour notification obligation, or documenting a risk-based vendor oversight decision if a contractual commitment isn't obtainable. The SEC gave some flexibility here — what matters is that your written policies reflect a reasonable effort to obtain that assurance and that you can demonstrate it during an exam. 

     

    On the preparedness side, it's worth getting clear now on exactly what NPI lives in your Salesforce org — things like account numbers, SSNs, income data, credit info, or transaction history. If a breach occurs, Reg S-P requires you to notify affected individuals within 30 days of becoming aware, and the notice needs to clearly describe what information was compromised, the potential risk of harm, and what steps individuals can take to protect themselves. Knowing your data footprint in advance makes that process significantly less painful. 

     

    For what it's worth, our team at LASER Credit Access works with financial institutions on Salesforce regularly and these compliance questions come up a lot. Happy to compare notes if it's helpful. Good luck on the deadline.

0/9000

Hello FSC community, 

We’re kicking off 

May Madness

 with Agentforce, and we’d love your input!  

 

This is the first of several quick weekly surveys designed to gather your thoughts as an customer on AI, Agentforce, and FSC — so expect a few more short invites in the coming weeks coming your way. 

 

At the end of the each survey, you’ll have the option to provide your contact info to receive a small token of appreciation ($10 gift card)*—completely optional. 

 

Thanks again for being part of the Financial Services Trailblazer Community! 

 

*You must be opted into the Salesforce Research Program to receive compensation. You’ll have the chance to opt in at the end of the survey, and can unsubscribe at any time.

*AI generated responses will not be validated and are not eligible to receive the gift card.

0/9000

Are there any Practice test for Financial Services Cloud Accredited Professional (AP-208) Exam?

1 件の回答
0/9000

Hi All,

 

I am configuring a custom ARC graph for the Person Account record, and running into an issue with displaying fields for the Contact-Contact relationship record nodes, as well as Account-Contact Relationships not displaying the record name. See attached. Any insights?

 

Thank you,

Salesforce FSC: ARC Issue

3 件の回答
0/9000