Activity

  • Aaron posted an update in the group Group logo of Experiential Branding & Communications Experiential Branding & Communications 5 years, 11 months ago

    I honestly do not see what the big deal is surrounding banks and how they communicate with the customer. Businesses are in business because they provide products and services people want – if people don’t want it, the business will go under. This is survival of the fittest, and it is no different with banks. Everyone here does business with their banking institution because we have needs that they fill. I do not get up in the morning and decide that my bank isn’t good enough because their commercials are boring or the brand is old and outdated. I don’t look at my bank and think “oh, well they only call and email me when they could do so much more to communicate, like text alerts.” I stay with my bank because they are reliable and provide the services that I need, and I’m sure most of you do the same. So why is it that you are looking for something more from your bank at this point? Yes, more would be nice, but banks are doing just fine the way they are.

    • Yes, I can see that you’re thinking “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it,” but just because a system is in place that works doesn’t mean that we cannot improve upon it. Would you like a higher quality option if it is available at the same rate? Would you want your bank to help you more if it is within its power? Unless your answer is “No” (which would be surprising), then it makes sense that banks should do more to accommodate their customers. We are the lifeblood of the bank; they are not pulling money out of the air. If there is a new, innovative way to reach out to us then it should be implemented. Banks should and would love to connect with their customers because we are the ones who are sharing our wallets with them. So yes, banks are doing their job and making it work, but they can do so much more while still maintaining that level of efficiency and success that they currently enjoy.

      • Banks can’t be sure that people will be happy with the changes. How do they know that people will like the new options? Banks need to sink a lot of money into making these changes, and if they flop who is there to pick up the bill? It always comes back to fees for the customer, and if it isn’t necessary why implement it? We would save ourselves money if we didn’t ask for so much from the banks.

    • Aaron, while you may not appreciate the effort that banks are taking to establish additional channels of interaction, there are those who truly see a benefit. If you read the Deloitte article “Evolving Models of Retail Banking Distribution” you will see that there is a trend towards newer channels and the integration of technology into the banking space. Yes, many of the mainstays such as the bank branch and phone banking are still important, but technological advances are playing a role in making alternative channels very prominent. ATMs, mobile, and Internet banking are evolving, and with them their usage is increasing. The public is embracing these new channels and making them the new standard, and while that may mean there are more channels to maintain, there are more satisfied customers. This same concept applies to communication channels such as emails and text alerts. There are customers who will appreciate the convenience that these new alerts offer, and for those who are privy to the standard mail may opt for the channel they prefer. In addition, these communication channels work in tandem with the new banking channels, allowing customers to fully maintain their accounts through their smartphones. Banks are not making superfluous purchases to add random channels of communication; they are attempting to complement their current operational channels with corresponding communication channels.

      • My issue isn’t that I can’t stop the emails and messages. The problem I have is that banks are wasting their money to add these features. How many millions do you think it costs to set up the text alerts? How about the emails that they send out or to maintain Facebook, Twitter, and Google+ pages? These are not cheap little gimmicks that they can just start up. Some people like them and that is great, but who ends up footing the bill for these? The customers do. As a customer, I am not happy that I am basically paying for a service I don’t want.

        • Aaron, you need to consider the reverse of this situation as well. We may be taking a hit when it comes to costs because of how much they spend on new products and channels, but the money that they bring in will help to offset that. If they make changes there is always backlash, so most banks try not to push the costs onto the consumer. If they do, they stand to lose some customers. Sometimes we end up paying a few cents more, but usually they avoid that.

    • Why all of the hostility? I don’t suddenly feel like banks need to jump through all sorts of hoops to keep my business either, but it’s not like they do not have room for improvement. What is wrong with new communication channels anyways? It makes it easier for me to find out new things from my bank. Make my bank easier to talk to and maybe I’ll speak with them a bit more about my financial situation. Open a new channel and maybe I’ll actually read it unlike the emails that have started to pile up because I’m busy. You never know who might use it, so banks should try to open up.

      • Being realistic is different from being hostile. These new channels are expensive and the customers end up paying for it. The banks aren’t making these changes out of their own pocket, just like we wouldn’t be spending huge amounts of money to reach out to everyone we know. When banks can make a system where you pay to receive those alerts, I’ll be convinced it is a good system.

        • Most systems have the ability to opt in or out of them, so it is not like you are obligated to use them. To even have that option is something that is expected in today’s society. If we were charged to access our accounts then who would want to put their money with that bank?

    • You know, I think you should read up on some of the Senteo articles (like The Relationship Centric Bank). You’ll learn so much from Michael and see that relationship centricity is really the way to go 🙂 I promise that it’s an absolutely fantastic read! Banks are just trying to reach out to their customers, and it’s about time because they are really falling behind. So give it a shot and see what it’s all about! I know once you read some of Senteo’s work and their recommended readings you’ll be all for relationship centricity too 😀

      • I have read it and I’m sticking with what really is the truth: that banks are doing just fine. What good is a relationship if the bank can’t run efficiently. It is way more important for the bank to take care of its customers through better products and services, not building relationships. Where will a customer be if he can have a relationship with his bank but no products that he wants to use? He will be at another bank. Period. If the bank can’t offer him a decent product then there is no reason to be with that bank. For all the years Michael spent in the industry, he seems to have forgotten that banks offer products and services, not hugs.