Citibank Performance Evaluation Essay Example

well-rounded performance reviews using both quantitative and qualitative measures. While financial measures are important in analyzing performance of the bank, they do not provide any insight into non-quantifiable measures that can be equally important in performance assessment. In addition, the balanced scorecard forces employees to adopt a broader view of the business and concentrate not only on financial measures, but on measures that are truly important to the success of the company.

In the service industry, customer satisfaction is a particularly important measure in determining how the company is doing. A high level of customer service is a significant component of Citibank’s strategy in California. Frit Seegers sees it as a leading indicator of future financial performance of the bank. From the past experiences, it was determined that customer satisfaction ratings do not follow the same pattern as financial performance, and it is necessary to measure customer satisfaction separately.

Evaluate James perform in Exhibit1 Financial measures: Above Par The financial performance of James branch has consistently exceeded management expectations for the last 4 years. This year was no exception. James exceeded financial goals by 20%, thus ranking the branch #1 in the marketplace. Strategy implementation: Above Par This is the rating James received in quarters 2, 3 and 4. The branch met or exceeded its growth goals in the business, professional and retail segments. The scorecard does not indicate the goals for this measure, which makes analysis less dependable as we have to rely on comments only. ) Control measures: Par This measure was assessed only in 3 quarters, and in all 3 quarters the branch scored above par. Even though James works

hard on making sure his branch operates in compliance, there is still some room for improvement in this area, and James can implement several measures to lower the operating and fraud losses sustained by his branch. People: Above Par James is an excellent people manager.

His performance is consistent in this area and always exceeds expectations. Standards: Above Par James is a well respected leader that has high standards for himself and people he employs. He continually works on improving himself and his employees. He is involved in the community and encourages the same from his employees. Customer Satisfaction: Below Par This is a measure that can potentially cause the most controversy as James is concerned with the survey that is used to asses customer satisfaction. In two quarters, James scored below par on customer satisfaction.

However, he identified the improvement opportunities and substantially improved service by scores the end of the year. Overall Evaluation: Above Par we understand that according to current policy James cannot get an above par overall rating due to a below par score on the customer satisfaction measure. However, we will disregard the policy in this case due to several reasons: This is the first year the balanced scorecard was implemented. It will take some time to insure that all the areas are measured appropriately.

James concerns about adequacy of the survey used to measure customer satisfaction might be valid. Management should review the survey and get some input from the branch managers on what indicators should be used to measure customer satisfaction. The current review process raises some concerns as well. Presently, a branch manager’s supervisor

subjectively assesses performance in the non-quantifiable areas. The process can be improved by allowing the manager to self-asses his own performance and discuss it with his superior. This will allow the process to be less subjective.

The manager will get an opportunity to defend his performance if he does not agree with the assessment of his superior. If we give James an overall rating of par, disregarding his hard work, it will lower the morale of one of our most successful managers and will possibly result in lower performance in the future, jeopardizing the performance of the branch in the marketplace. Management has a valid concern that if James receives an above par score on his evaluation, employees might think that management disregards non-financial measures during the evaluation.

However, it is easier to reiterate the importance of non-financial measures than to negate the effects of low morale in James branch. Management should communicate the importance of qualitative measures in the balanced scorecard and the fact that it will be taken into full consideration during the performance review after management makes sure the survey is well suited to measure a customer satisfaction. The BSC in Citibank In 1996, Citibank was an emergent banking institution attempting to increase its market share in the competitive Los Angeles area.

In order to do so, the bank’s strategy was to focus slightly less on their financial growth, and much more on providing “a high level of service to its customers”. Management viewed this paradigm shift as “critical to the long term success of the franchise”. To implement these changes, a new Citibank employee performance assessment scorecard was

created, briefly tested and quickly implemented. Though we believe it was a much improved and broader way to gauge individual performance, there was certainly room for improvement.

The scorecard was composed of financial, strategy implementation and control goals which had the advantage of clearly, objectively and transparently measure a manager’s work. These measures were readily accessible though the general accounting system, and left little (if any) room to argue over a manager’s performance. However, all three measures focused primarily on the upcoming quarter(s) and how those numbers compared quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year, making them a short-term or “lagging” indicator of success.

The remaining measures on the assessment scorecard (customer satisfaction, people, and standards) were all noticeably subjective, yet viewed as sound long-term indicators and therefore crucial in evaluating the foundation of the future success of the organization. Obviously, the customer is (and will always be) the most important part of the equation, as it is customer business that allows banks to conduct theirs. People and standards measures are both especially significant measures, as they address the character, personality and perceived image of individuals, management and the organization as a whole.

Maybe we can give some recommendations for Citibank. For instance, on the performance scorecard, customer satisfaction was rated 55 (26 below the goal of 80) due to short staffing. As a result, by spending more time on these internal issues, such as increasing the workforce and spending more time on training, the company can eliminate this issue and focus more on giving individual customers the attention they need. By increasing the staff and spending more time on training, employees will be able to

better service customers and thus may increase customer retention.

In addition, customer satisfaction could be increased by giving customer incentives in an effort to retain customers as well. Although Citibank is extremely successful and taking steps to improve their company, in order for them to retain profits and to continue to thrive, drastic improvements to customer service must be taken. As Seegers stated, non-financial measures ultimately will decide whether a company succeeds or not. Therefore, because this particular branch is already thriving financially, by improving their non-financial measures as well, they will be able to incur long lasting success.