Citibank Grp9

Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 12

CITIBANK : PERFORMANCE

EVALUATION
GROUP 9
FT151018

ANUJ KHANDELWAL

FT151066

ARJUN NAMBIAR

FT151052

ROHAN M SHAH

FT154011
FT151082

SIDDHANT PARNAIK
VAIBHAV JOLLY

CASE FACTS- CHARACTER


INTRODUCTION
FRITS SEEGERS : PRESIDENT OF CITIBANK CALIFORNIA
LISA JOHNSON : AREA MANAGER
JAMES MCGARAN : BRANCH MANAGER OF LOS ANGELES AREA
BRANCH.

LISA JOHNSON

LOS ANGELES AREA MANAGER.

HER AREA WAS THE BIGGEST IN THE DIVISION AND


INCLUDED TWO REGIONS THAT HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN
MANAGED SEPARATELY.

SUPPORTED MANY MANAGERS AND WAS WELL VERSED


WITH THE EVENTS IN EACH BRANCH.

JOINED THE COMPANY IN 1978 IN CHICAGO AND MOVED TO


CALIFORNIA IN EARLY 1988.

JAMES MCGARAN

WORKING IN THE BANKING INDUSTRY SINCE 1977.

THE BRANCH IN WHICH HE WAS WORKING HAD VERY DIVERSE


CUSTOMER BASE.

HE HAD DELIVERED IMPRESSIVE FINANCIAL RESULTS FOR FOUR


YEARS IN A ROW FROM 1992.

JOINED CITIBANK IN 1985 AS ASSISTANT BRANCH MANAGER.


PROMOTED AS BRANCH MANAGER OF LOS ANGELES AREA
BRANCH.

PURPOSE OF BALANCED SCORECARD

SET CLEAR GOALS FOR APPRAISE AND PROVIDE SPECIFIC


MEASURES FOR THE PERSON DOING APPRAISAL

INCLUDES BOTH QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE


PARAMETERS

PROVIDE ORGANIZATION WITH TOOLS TO DO STRATEGIC


MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL CONTROL

HELPS EXECUTIVES TO FOCUS ON SEVERAL IMPORTANT


MEASURES THAT DRIVE THE STRATEGY

INTRODUCTION OF PERFORMANCE
SCORECARD
IMPLEMENTED PERFORMANCE SCORECARD
SPECIFYING GOALS AND MEASURES MANAGERS
PERFORMANCE
IN 6: FOCUSED
AREAS:MAINLY ON TOTAL
FINANCIAL MEASURES
REVENUE AND PROFIT MARGIN AGAINST TARGETS.

STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION : MEASURES TRACKED REVENUE


FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF TARGET CUSTOMER SEGMENTS
RELEVANT TO THE STRATEGY OF THE BRANCH.

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION : DERIVED FROM QUESTIONS


THAT FOCUSED ON BRANCH SERVICE AS WELL AS OTHER
CITIBANK SERVICES .

CONTROL MEASURES : REPORTED BY EVALUATION BY


INTERNAL AUDITORS ON THE BRANCHS INTERNAL CONTROL
PROCESSES.

PEOPLE AND STANDARDS : NON QUANTIFIABLE RATINGS


DETERMINED SUBJECTIVELY BY THE BRANCH MANAGERS
BOSS.

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION METHOD

3 TYPES OF RATINGS FOR EACH PERFORMANCE INDICATOR.

BONUS LINKED TO FINAL PERFORMANCE SCORE CARD


RATING.

A MANAGER COULD NOT GET AN ABOVE PAR RATING


WITHOUT MINIMUM PAR RATINGS IN ALL THE COMPONENT.

BELOW-PAR, PAR AND ABOVE-PAR.


EVALUATION WAS DETERMINED JOINTLY BY A TEAM LED BY
FRITS SEEGERS.

PROBLEMS WITH THE CURRENT


APPRAISAL PROCESS

HIGHLY SOPHISTICATED CLIENT BASE.

WHILE MEASURING THE CUSTOMER SATISFACTION THE


SURVEY WAS DONE WITH A SMALL SAMPLE SIZE.

INCLUDING THE COMPONENT OF SERVICES EVALUATION LIKE


24 HOURS PHONE BANKING AND ATM SERVICES.

JAMES PERFORMANCE
Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Overal
l

Financial
measures

Above
Par

Above
Par

Above
Par

Above
Par

Above
Par

Strategy
implementation

Par

Above
Par

Above
Par

Above
Par

Above
Par

Control
measures

Above
Par

Above
Par

Not
reviewed

Above
Par

Above
Par

Customer
Satisfaction

Par

Below
Par

Below
Par

Par

Below
Par

People

Above
Par

Above
Par

Above
Par

Above
Par

Above
Par

Standards

Above
Par

Above
Par

Above
Par

Above
Par

Above
Par

PRACTICAL CONSTRAINTS FACED BY


JAMES MCGARAN

DIVERSE SET OF CUSTOMERS.

HAD A DEMANDING CLIENTELE AND CHALLENGING


COMPETITION.

THE BRANCH THAT WAS HANDLED BY JAMES WAS THE


LARGEST AND TOUGHEST BRANCH IN THE DIVISION.

EVALUATION: ABOVERATING
PAR
FINAL
EVALUATION
FOR JAMES
OVERALL
THIS IS THE FIRST YEAR THE BALANCED

SCORECARD WAS IMPLEMENTED. IT WILL TAKE


SOMETIME TO INSURE THAT ALL THE AREAS ARE
MEASURED APPROPRIATELY
HE HAS DONE EXCEPTIONALLY WELL ACROSS THE
SCORECARD AND HE IS CONSCIOUSLY MAKING
EFFORTS TO OVER COME THE ISSUES IN CUSTOMER
EVALUATION RATING
MANAGEMENT SHOULD ALSO HAVE A LOOK ON
JAMES PEER GROUP RATINGS TO ENSURE
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION IS FAIR INDICATOR
WHICH CAN BE LINKED TO OVERALL PERFORMANCE
AS THIS IS THE HIGHEST REVENUE GENERATING
BRANCH ANY DECISION WHICH MAY HAVE AN
IMPACT ON REVENUES GENERATED FROM THIS

HOW WOULD YOU COMMUNICATE THE


DECISION TO JAMES?

JAMES SHOULD BE AWARE THAT HIS CONCERNS WITH THE


CUSTOMER SURVEY AND CONSISTENTLY EXCEPTIONAL
PERFORMANCE WERE THE MAIN REASON FOR MANAGEMENTS
DECISION

HE SHOULD ALSO BE TOLD THAT IN THE FUTURE HE WILL NOT


GET AN ABOVE PAR RATING IF HE FAILS TO SCORE PAR ON ALL
THE MEASURES

ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF NON QUANTIFIABLE MEASURES


SHOULD BE COMMUNICATED TO JAMES AND ACROSS THE
ORGANIZATION

EXPECTED IMPACTS ON JAMES

UNSATISFIED WITH APPRAISAL:

COMPLAINT THAT TOP MANAGEMENT ASSESS BEHAVIOR


WITHOUT KNOWING PRACTICAL CONSTRAINTS

DECREASED DEDICATION TOWARDS THE AREAS IN WHICH HE IS


A TOP PERFORMER

SATISFIED WITH APPRAISAL:

PERCEPTION OF BEING VALUED AND BEING PART OF


ORGANIZATIONAL TEAM

HIGHLY MOTIVATED FOR THE IMPROVEMENT TOWARDS POINTS


MENTIONED IN FEEDBACK

THANK
YOU!!!!!

You might also like