Ron linked over to this white paper which makes for provocative and useful reading during these economic times. I say useful because I believe are in an industry transition time that will re-define companies including banks, and the economic situation is symptomatic.
The report also happens to fit with my belief that amongst other things, banks are still focussed on products, and not on customers. My belief is that is not a winning formula at the best of times, but with the advent of customer empowerment, and expectation of self service, product centric is a disastrous strategy. It only works when all banks follow largely the same approach. The thinking goes that if there are banks that can really break out then that will make an enormous difference to their success.
The Importance of Customer Experience in a Down Economy | Customer Futures
Forget the 4Ps: use the 4Es.
He advocates replacing the 4Ps with the 4Es: fromProduct, Price, Place, Promotion
to
Experience, Exchange, Everywhere, Evangelism.
The paper is constructed as a series of essays. The challenge with discussions on product vs customer centric often gets stuck on what those terms mean. On page 44, Rory Sutherland of Ogilvy offers the above to replace the traditional 4 P’s. This at least offers a framework to think about it differently, and avoid having to define product vs customer vs channel vs segment, which is often when the conversation leads. The essays are a little messy in structure, so don’t expect a text book. This makes them the more interesting too, because there are some real gems.
Relevance to Bankwatch:
In support of the above there are two fundamental shifts which have occurred.
Internet has flattened old hierarchies, made information freely available, and eliminated distance. This produced a revolutionary shift in customer expectations, and customer buying methods. It has also had the impact of opening previously closed kimono’s and exposed old style advertising for what it is … management of people’s opinions. Internet has allowed people to form their own opinions, and act on them. That empowerment is fundamental to many changes we see now.
One market shift is therefore ‘customer empowerment’.
Another driver, comes from the way customers are continually required to manage their own affairs, at the ATM, the pin pad, online banking, bill payments, office card access, airport check in, car rental drop off, quick hotel checkout, travel booking. This frequency of self service is now pervasive and required several times daily for everyone. Organizations have been depersonalized and become represented by their self service touch points. Self service has been underway for a long time, and internet has only accelerated that process for banks’.
Customers appreciate self service, but the sheer pervasiveness of it, has altered how they think about service. It means customers are continually, comparing and evaluating service through the filter of self service. Without realizing it, customers are comparing your bill payment web process flow, to the Hilton quick check out, the credit card pin pad machine to your ATM, the simplicity of gmail with your online banking, etc etc. People do not interact with products; they interact with self service touch points. While they will appreciate better rates, and lower fees, the value is experienced or lost at the point of interaction. If we think of this another way, customers will put up with fees or rates that are not optimum if they are being impressed by the service. In particular of the (self) service allows them to easily switch and pick their services, the value equation is strengthened even more.
Another shift then is the advent of ‘the experiential economy’.
So anything that offers a framework to define and think about customers in a granular yet different way is useful.

Colin:
The title of this post needs the word “if” at the end of it. Banks need to move away from a product-centric view IF — if they truly want to build multi-product relationships with customers.
The product-centric view (and org structure) of most large banks has resulted in their complete inability to develop broad relationships with customers, because “selling my product” is the mantra of everyone in every product silo of the bank.
However — if banks were to back off this notion that they were “integrated financial services organizations”, and let every product manager maximize the sale of his or her product line, then a product-centric approach would work just fine.
The product centric view can’t persist because it isn’t realistic to just compete purely on rates, which is effectively where this approach has brought us thus far.
@Ron I can’t see a situation where a bank doesn’t want a multi-product relationship with their customers, unless it only sells one product. Even if the bank has a product centric view the customer rarely reciprocates (unless the product is branded separately) seeing their relationship as with the brand/institution not just the product.
@Ron … you are quite right. Within each product they are customer centric – but isn’t that the whole point? Customers are not product centric – they are ‘bunch of services’ centric.
Elsa and Colin: Please don’t misinterpret my comment. I’m not advocating for a product-centric view (Colin knows me better than that). But what I am saying is that it’s a matter of alignment. A multi-product relationship strategy is not aligned with a single-product-centric approach to pricing and marketing.
But there’s nothing inherently wrong with a conglomerate-type approach where each individual LOB focuses on maximizing the sales and profits of its products.
What drives me nuts is that there doesn’t seem to be a single bank in North America that understands it has to trade off maximizing the profitability of any one product with selling multiple products to a single customer.