CHAPTER 5: FINDINGS FROM THE CROSS-CASE STUDIES
5.1 Cross-Case Analysis
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
25
CHAPTER 5: FINDINGS FROM THE CROSS-CASE STUDIES
5.1 Cross-Case Analysis
This research selected five cases according to previous research results to do in-depth interviews. Then, this research base on verbatim transcript (APPENDIX 3) summarized the results in Tables 5-1 to 5-6 beginning on the next page.
‧
Table 5-1: Strategy for Rebuilding Customer Base and Service Portfolio
Bank A merger with Bank A1 Bank B merger
with Bank B1 Bank C merger with Bank C1 Bank D merger with Bank D1
Bank E merger with Bank E1 People recognize brand is a major
factor.
First, we evaluated value of Bank A1 and the capacity of their customer consumption then accorded this to evaluate financial resources of individuals.
We would send the same grade or better grade of credit card to more valuable customers then focused on potential customers of Bank A1 to promote the consumption campaign. We hoped they can use our card to consume in order to get customer loyalty.
After merger, we traced the promotional activity result of Bank A1, and saw performance in daily report for one year, and the results of the input cost and actual recovery appeared bad. So we thought the customer contribution of Bank A1 not very high, thus we thought the effective of merger appeared not good.
We did not refine quality of customer in switch process. If customers not use our credit card, we would send our promotion to them.
And if customers did not reply to the notice letter, we did not help them change their card until their card could not be use.
The feedback types of credit card of Bank B penetration of products of Bank C1, and
understood how many times customer would trade with the company.
We focused on the customers in contribution which was not very high for Bank C1 to do regular communication post-merger. We used
communication let customer know the time we would over some business, if customer not traded with us, we would dispose of the account.
We found some rich or high-asset customers at first, then, according their regional place, we notified nearby branches to do communication or promotion in the hope that these customers would return as Bank C customers.
We looked at the valuable products of Bank C1 whether they could use in the system at first, then, we would think about this necessary of strategy. We use these standards to measure the products which we can keep in the company.
Bank C did not provide deposit books for their customers and also some branches were closed after merger, so for some customers it was very inconvenient.
Although every customers had high expectations of Bank C brand at the beginning, but main business of Bank C was in wealth management, not in credit card.
The quantity of customers of credit card were low so we thought these could not gained more money,
therefore we not particular refined
customers base.
We did not give up any product or business of Bank D1. So we could provide more
diversification of products for our customers.
We not especially try to maintain our customers, we only notified them about their rights were changed in merger process, and we would suspend their credit card privileges after the deadline unless their credit card changed to Bank E.
We would provide new products for customers in order to hope them could use our credit card.
Due to the superiors were not being familiar with the credit card business, we did not spend too much resources on this business.
‧
Table 5-2: Service Culture
Bank A merger with
Bank A1 Bank B merger with Bank B1 Bank C merger with Bank
C1
Bank D merger with Bank D1
Bank E merger with Bank E1
We only bought the credit card business from the Bank A1, so the employees of Bank A1 did not come into our company, therefore we did not consider any culture
problems.
We had different preferential and services from Bank A1, for example, we used SMS or phone call to reminder our customers when the credit card be used.
Other differences included the format of bill and benefits of cards, all these let customers feel differences.
Since we had different organizational types between each other, so there was culture clash after the merger, for example, the credit card department had to do everything related with credit card business in Bank B1, but they were doing business by function in Bank B.
The employees of Bank B1 felt like “rootless orchids” after the merger, because they were separated to different departments, so the result in some people could adapt new environment, but some people could not adapt.
The Bank B required performance more than Bank B1, so if you could not adapt you had to leave.
The superiors of Bank B would select
employees of Bank B1 who they want to stay or were alienated.
The performance system of Bank B evaluated performance on individual, so they not due to evaluate performance difference to provide different services to customer, because these would affect their performance evaluation.
We had serious
performance evaluation on individuals, so if the employees wanted to stay in this company they had to provide good services to customers.
The culture of Bank C1 is not clear, so we did not have culture clash problems.
Due to we had different management style from Bank C1, so the
employees of Bank C1 did not adapt this changes, for example, the employees used professional title to call their colleague of Bank C1, but we used their English name to call our colleague in Bank C.
Even had dissatisfied on personnel
promotion for employees of Bank E1. But the
employees of Bank E had huge tolerance, so there were not any culture clash problems.
Even we had different performance
evaluation, but all employees had to follow performance evaluation of Bank E after merger.
Some employees of Bank E1 not familiar in new operation, they said they felt they had to work harder than before.
‧
Table 5-3: Process Integration
Bank A merger with Bank
A1 Bank B merger with Bank B1 Bank C merger with
customer lists of Bank A1, we could understand customer condition at first.
The service process used process of Bank A.
The PM delivered education training program to the customer services department, then they had trained front-line staffs about new customer services.
The training program of customer services totally had three times in every day.
We used process of Bank B and did very well on education training.
We split the training to many stages for our staff.
And the superior s of Bank B assigned their trainers to train us about two months before merger. Every morning we had to study operation manuals and took test in the meeting. We had performance evaluation required on individuals, therefore
everyone had different education training problem.
We used systems and processes had situation like
“double track” in one year. In the education training, the superiors of Bank B1 assigned their outstanding staffs to learn new process methods of Bank B then came back to teach other people.
Customers had different feeling in the process operation at first. For example, customers thought our desk teller were all-around know every business, because they thought the desk teller would handle every customers problems. But now, customers had to take phone call to call center of Bank B, the call center would deal with customer problems. Therefore, customers would feel not suitable on these changes.
Because Bank C had global standards, so the Bank C1 need changed their process to be the same as Bank C.
We did education training in six months.
We assigned our employees to new branches teach new operation way to employees of Bank C1.
Bank C had SOP that we could follow it in every operation.
The business process used the process of Bank D, but some to complete the merger. We used these months to do education training.
The training strategy of Bank E was to such as operation and process We took four
months to do education training.
‧
Table 5-4: Technology Integration Bank A merger with
Bank A1 Bank B merger with Bank B1 Bank C merger with Bank C1 Bank D merger with Bank D1
Bank E merger with Bank E1 It took three months to
do data conversion.
We analyzed the reports from Bank A1 to do customer
segmentation in order to understand their customer condition.
Bank B only had IT operation staffs in Taiwan, and the design staffs and host computers were located in Singapore, so we systems had to connect to Singapore.
Thus, the staffs had to leave when the IT complete integrated.
The systems we used Bank B systems, and we took one year to transfer systems, it included six months to plan the data conversion and six months to maintain systems.
The data of credit card used batches transfer to Bank B.
We had two systems in a half year until the systems of Bank B was stable then shut down systems of Bank B1.
Systems need integrated in M&A process, so the form of system documents of Bank C1 need changed to Bank C. And this changed not let every customer satisfaction, for example, almost banks had deposit book but Bank C did not provide for their customers, they only provided
statements of account to customers. The customers personality of Bank C1 belonged conservative or localization, so they could not accept Bank C did not provide deposit books.
The systems integration took six months after merger.
The accounts were changed need to notice customers.
Due to computers of Bank D were full load in
currently and difference with Bank D1, so all systems of Bank D needed updating.
We had three times
technology operation tests in order to fit the
technology of Bank D, and through tests could actually find operation problems then modified it as possible.
Our systems and specifications were used operation of Bank E.
Because the customer base of Bank E1was small so even we had difference in defined data of database we also could switch quickly.
We had tables include customers of Bank E1 then we would observe their consumption after merger.
‧
Table 5-5: Communication
Bank A merger with Bank A1 Bank B merger with
Bank B1 Bank C merger with Bank C1 Bank D merger with
Bank D1 Bank E merger with Bank E1 Because we only bought the
customer lists of credit card of Bank A1, so we only announced this news for our employees, but the superiors of Bank A1 need to communicate with their employees.
Employees of Bank A1 sent the notice letter to tell customer that their business would change to Bank A, and the customers need to confirm this notice letter.
If customers did not reply to the letter in two to four weeks, we would do three follow up calls, but we did make follow up calls to all
customers, we only called we thought more valuable customers.
We would encourage customers of Bank A1 to change their credit card to Bank A, but if they not tell us they want to cancel, we would issue our credit card automatically.
We had a group to provide services and telephone sales for customers.
They would describe the interests of credit card in welcome call then please customers used their credit card.
We had communication with employees of Bank B1. We told them their salary and card they could not use until changed to our credit card. And we also notified customers who their bank card to our credit card.
We belong to a foreign company but Bank C1 belongs to a local company.
Because we had difference background so even we had communication with their employees before merger, but the employees of Bank C1 also opposed us. For example about email, many employees of Bank C1 could not use computers, so they could not use email in the work, therefore the clash occurred. But we had many channels for employees of Bank C1 can reflect the confusion, for example you could reflect to your senior supervisor. This shows we had good communication with employees.
Due to every communication channels had different costs, so we picked up the more valuable customers to use phone call or dispatched employees to visit them and we send email to connect the customers who we thought they had little valuable, therefore all customers we had communication.
Because the customers main bank not Bank C1, so the customers of Bank C1 were not what Bank C wanted.
We had two to three times communication with the customers of the Bank C1 at least, thereafter all customer accounts of the Bank C1 would change to Bank C.
We not only ensured employees work right but also retain employees benefits and not change their work place, so
employees not had dissatisfaction in merger process.
We announced three to five days in newspaper for customers and send letters to notice them can deal with business before declared date of merger.
The customers never complained anything after merger.
We told employees that this policy was imperative, so even employees unwilling to merger, we also still merged the Bank E1.
Due to customer base of Bank E1 not too much, so we not wanted to waste resources to maintain these customers. We did not do follow call to customers of Bank E1, we just only provided them our phone numbers of the call center.
Almost all customers knew merger notice from letter, newspaper and the announcement post in every branches, just only few customers did not know because they maybe in overseas not in Taiwan, but we retain the original phone number so these people could call this phone number to find the place of original branch.
The employees of branches could solve every customer problems, and we also used phone call to provide more services for more valuable customer.
‧
Table 5-6: Organizational Inertia Bank A merger with Bank
A1
Bank B merger with Bank B1
Bank C merger with Bank C1
Bank D merger with Bank D1
Bank E merger with Bank E1
Employees of credit card department had to switch credit card of customer to Bank A, and the bonus would be recorded in the performance of employee of Bank A when the credit card changed success.
The bonus is very important can avoid employees complain due to business increase.
If your performance not good that would affect your income and the stress would bigger than before, therefore you had to be familiar with new methods in one year, if you could not adapt, you had to leave.
Due to the employees of Bank C1 older than us, so we felt difficult teaching new operation methods to them.
We would communicate with the employees of Bank C1 and told them we would change our organization framework.
Since we did not worried about being laid off so even there had a little friction occurred in merger process, but in the result we had smooth integration after merger.
Due to the employees of Bank E1 not too much so we did not have adapted problems by employees.
The employees of Bank E1 maybe had not adapted in operation, but we gave them a period time to learn, so there not a lower service attitude.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
32