On October 18, 2007 The Access Group will be presenting a Round Table for Senior executives in financial institutions event about helping Financial Institutions become more competitive.
[Email Flora (at) Access-Group.ca to request an invitation, contact me directly if you would like to be a host or partner.]
Our process for preparing for the event has many steps. Including posting one or more questions on LinkedIn Answers, strategy sessions with vendors, conversations with people who attend, online surveys, the event, and a white paper add the end of the event.
This post summarizes my results from the LinkedIn Answers part of the process.
I like LinkedIn Answers because my database is so large now, I get answers from all around the world. The Answers provide some good content which is used to increase the value of the strategy sessions as well as the Round Table event itself.
The first thing to understand is who Canadian’s think of as a Canadian Bank. The list is short and includes RBC, BMO. Scotia, TD, and CIBC.
All the other financial institutions are considered a foreign bank or a credit union or something else. So banks like ING and HSBC are not considered a “Canadian Bank” even though they operate and work here and are perceived to provide significantly better service.
I think this is a good thing for them – because Canadians don’t like Canadian Banks.
They don’t believe that the banks are customer oriented and they feel the banks are only interested in increasing revenues.
However, the Linkedin Responses did give a whole number of positive suggestions that can help the banks.
While these banks are far from being in trouble today – as “foreign” banks are given more freedom to operate in Canada, and as the Canadian mindset changes – the banks will see a progressive eroding of their market share.
(This is not unique – remember Eatons and Simpsons? And how about Bell Canada’s market share?)
Canadian Banks employee the smartest people in Canada – but because of there immense size, government regulations, history, moral obligations, and culture, they have many huge challenges.
Now about a recommendation?
Strategically – if you want to sell to the Canadian Banks – position your solution such that it provides the bank with a competitive advantage with their customers.
This appears like a simple recommendation, but, it is not easy to implement. It may require partners and it must be true and accurate, not just nice words.
When you position your solution this way – you must be able to answer some hard questions:
- Where are the risks (from the Bank’s perspective) about implementing my solution?
- Will I need to change the Bank’s culture?
- Will there be regulatory implications?
- What will the effect be on existing bank customers?
- Which Silo’s in the bank do I need to work with?
I approached the LinkedIn Answers part of the question from two different angles. One was from helping the Investment Analyst side and the other was a more general question about improving the business processes.
I received very little that can be shared publicly on the software vendor question.
But one response was amazing – it came from an Investment Analyst and I am able to quote it without naming the source.
I find lacking the software provided by my company and my experiences from other industries indicate that the software is below standard and hinders my ability to achieve top performance.
Ironically, just stating that opinion could get me fired by some managers in my present company. And there is your problem. The financial industry seems to be the last bastion in America of ego based management.
The best way to identify these people is that they have daily comments on the need for “trust” and “trust” is all that counts. (the reality is that there is little need for blind trust as safety checks are in place every step of the way so that no one has to blindly trust one another due to audit trails, state and federal regulations with stiff penalties etc.) They speak the mantra that it’s all about me and my clients “trusting me” and no one else as opposed to the clients having trust in competency of their IA or company of the IA. Making the issues completely intangible by making the issue always “trust” denigrates all other issues.
If the issue is trust instead of service delivery, product line, business processes, etc. they win the “political game” every time to survive one more day in their job.
The executive management often has thought processes such as:
“Life is hard. I struggled to get to the top of the heap in this industry! The CRM we provide them is better than I had. I only had paper 3×5 cards! I made three hundred phone calls a day and didn’t even get paid my first year. They should not complain and say “negative” things about the company by “criticizing” the company. Only bad people criticize the company and thus disrespect me their esteemed manager! We need to get these bad problem causing people out of the company.”
As you know the correct thinking standard in most industries is:
“What is the ROI of this new software? Suppose we enable instead of make life hard for the new hires and existing employees? What would be the productivity increase by this new software? Would our clients be happier? Would the productivity gains increase employee morale and increase employee compensation? What to our own employees think about these ideas in the task force that was formed? etc”
My experience with management of several finance companies is such that the thinking of the management is the problem! Also, there is some claim that govt regulation is a hindrance driving up the cost of new software.
Click here for my annotated and edited copy of the LinkedIn Answers on Helping Make Canadian Financial Institutions More Customer Centric
Here are The LinkedIn Answers about Software Vendors helping the Investment Analyst.
Keyword Related posts:
