IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wop/pennin/95-03.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Performance in Consumer Financial Services Organizations: Framework and Results from the Pilot Study

Author

Listed:
  • Frances X. Frei
  • Patrick T. Harker
  • Larry W. Hunter

Abstract

Financial services comprise over 4 percent of the gross domestic product of the United States and employ over 5.4 million people. By offering vehicles for investment of savings, extension of credit and risk management, they fuel the modern capitalistic society. While the essential functions performed by the organizations that make up the financial services industry have remained relatively constant over the past several decades, the structure of the industry has undergone dramatic change. Liberalized domestic regulation, intensified international competition, rapid innovations in new financial instruments and the explosive growth in information technology fuel this change. With this change has come increasing pressure on managers and workers to dramatically improve productivity and financial performance. This paper summarizes the first year of a multi-year effort to understand the drivers of performance in financial services organizations. Financial services are the largest single consumer of information technology in the economy, investing $38.7 billion dollars in 1991 (National Research Council, 1994). While this investment has had a profound effect on the structure of the industry and the products it provides, its effect on financial performance of the industry remains elusive. Why this "productivity paradox" (Brynjolfsson and Hitt,1993) exists is an important part of this project. The authors describe the differences in productivity in services from manufacturing. In the service world, the consumer co-produces the product with the firm, ofte nadding labor to the creation of the service. In addition, the scope of the service enterprise typically is quite vast, with components of the service production process being both producers and deliverers of the service. In addition, the quality of the services provided is forever changing. Thus, the authors suggest that productivity gains from human resource improvements or technology investments may not show up in standard performance measures, but may rather be used to improve the quality of the service provided. What appears to be a stagnation in productivity may actually be an increase in value delivered to the customer. Delivering value to the customer may provide the institution with sales opportunities and much needed information about the institution's customer base. The pilot survey conducted by the authors examines the relationship between technological advancement and the relational part of service delivery by studying time spent with the customer in relation to technological sophistication and time spent on the entire delivery process. The authors adopt the view that processes are the central "technology" of an organization. As with any technology, the process must be maintained. After a process has reached its useful life, it should be scrapped or rebuilt. Thus, the authors suggest that researchers should take a life-cycle view of processes when undertaking efficiency studies. The authors rely heavily on a process-oriented methodology in their analysis of performance drivers in financial services. The study does not focus on traditional measures of productivity or financial performance. Rather, the authors base comparisons on intermediary measures which evaluate the drivers of performance from the perspective of all participants in the co-productive process. This pilot study starts with consumer financial services and in particular, retail banking. The authors review the relevant literature on financial services performance and then propose a conceptual framework for the study. The framework assumes that industry conditions and firm strategy are given. The authors focus is to examine the components of performance that managers can affect, given a strategy and industry operating conditions. Thus, their initial focus is guided by their desire to direct attention to issues of implementation and their effects on performance. The authors attempt to bridge the gap between traditional productivity measures and difficult-to-measure financial performance by developing a set of value creation components as an intermediary set of performance indicators. Based on pilot interviews, these indicators reflect effective performance in ways that are more meaningful than the more traditionalmeasure of productivity, as they are the goals toward which bank management strives. The key values the study attempts to measure are customer convenience, precision, efficient cost structure, adaptability and market penetration. The survey conducted by the research team benchmarks two types of management decisions that are presumed to drive these outcomes. The first set of management choices are implementation choices, human resources choices, technology implementation processes and product/servicedelivery processes. The second set of choices relates to management infrastructure, resource management processes, the information architecture of the firm, the performance management and control systems and the organizational structure of the firm. Based on interviews and the work of previous productivity studies, the research team developed a pilot survey focused on the practices of the functional areas, business lines, product groups and the retail distribution network. The pilot measured the outcomes and choices made by managers in seven large commercial banks. The pilot results will lead to a large scale survey of practices for the entire retail banking sector. Based on early pilot results, the researchers concluded that managers in consumer financial services firms typically assume that improvement in one area of performance is largely at the expense of decreased performance in other areas. The authors believe this is only partly true. Based on the pilot results, the authors believe that better management practices can move outcomes in a number of areas simultaneously. Through effective process design, use of technology and management of human resources, institutions can improve performance in multiple categories. The successful financial services organizations will be those which find processes and practices that enhance multiple measures of performance. The results of the large scale survey of practices will be available in early 1996.

Suggested Citation

  • Frances X. Frei & Patrick T. Harker & Larry W. Hunter, 1995. "Performance in Consumer Financial Services Organizations: Framework and Results from the Pilot Study," Center for Financial Institutions Working Papers 95-03, Wharton School Center for Financial Institutions, University of Pennsylvania.
  • Handle: RePEc:wop:pennin:95-03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://fic.wharton.upenn.edu/fic/papers/95/9503.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. E. Caves & M. E. Porter, 1977. "From Entry Barriers to Mobility Barriers: Conjectural Decisions and Contrived Deterrence to New Competition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 91(2), pages 241-261.
    2. Harry J. Holzer, 1987. "Hiring Procedures in the Firm: Their Economic Determinants and Outcomes," NBER Working Papers 2185, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Kim B. Clark, 1989. "Project Scope and Project Performance: The Effect of Parts Strategy and Supplier Involvement on Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(10), pages 1247-1263, October.
    4. Fried, Harold O. & Knox Lovell, C. A. & Eeckaut, Philippe Vanden, 1993. "Evaluating the performance of US credit unions," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(2-3), pages 251-265, April.
    5. Jay B. Barney, 1986. "Strategic Factor Markets: Expectations, Luck, and Business Strategy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(10), pages 1231-1241, October.
    6. Casey Ichniowski & Kathryn Shaw & Giovanna Prennushi, 1995. "The Effects of Human Resource Management Practices on Productivity," NBER Working Papers 5333, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Vernon L. Smith, 1994. "Economics in the Laboratory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 113-131, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Frances X. Frei & Patrick Harker, 1996. "Measuring the Efficiency of Service Delivery Processes: With Application to Retail Banking Journal of Service Research," Center for Financial Institutions Working Papers 96-31, Wharton School Center for Financial Institutions, University of Pennsylvania.
    2. Berger, Allen N. & Demsetz, Rebecca S. & Strahan, Philip E., 1999. "The consolidation of the financial services industry: Causes, consequences, and implications for the future," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(2-4), pages 135-194, February.
    3. M. S. Krishnan & Venkatram Ramaswamy & Mary C. Meyer & Paul Damien, 1999. "Customer Satisfaction for Financial Services: The Role of Products, Services, and Information Technology," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(9), pages 1194-1209, September.
    4. Steven J. Pilloff & Anthony M. Santomero, 1996. "The Value Effects of Bank Mergers and Acquisitions," Center for Financial Institutions Working Papers 97-07, Wharton School Center for Financial Institutions, University of Pennsylvania.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luís Cabral, 2018. "We’re Number 1: Price Wars for Market Share Leadership," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(5), pages 2013-2030, May.
    2. Mehmet Ali Köseoglu & John A. Parnell & Melissa Yan Yee Yick, 2021. "Identifying influential studies and maturity level in intellectual structure of fields: evidence from strategic management," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1271-1309, February.
    3. Amir, Rabah & Wooders, John, 2000. "One-Way Spillovers, Endogenous Innovator/Imitator Roles, and Research Joint Ventures," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 1-25, April.
    4. Eriksen, Bo & Knudsen, Thorbjorn, 2003. "Industry and firm level interaction: Implications for profitability," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 191-199, March.
    5. Roller, Lars-Hendrik & Sinclair-Desgagne, Bernard, 1996. "On the heterogeneity of firms," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 531-539, April.
    6. Stoelhorst, J. W. & van Raaij, Erik M., 2004. "On explaining performance differentials: Marketing and the managerial theory of the firm," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(5), pages 462-477, May.
    7. James J. Chrisman & Alan Bauerschmidt & Charles W. Hofer, 1998. "The Determinants of New Venture Performance: An Extended Model," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 23(1), pages 5-29, October.
    8. Paul-Valentin Ngobo & Eric Stéphany, 2001. "Les différences de performance financière entre les entreprises: résultats du marché français," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 4(1), pages 89-121, March.
    9. Gheorge-Florentin Miulescu & Paul Marinescu & Sorin-George Toma, 2019. "Competitive Cooperation – Market Development Instrument," Manager Journal, Faculty of Business and Administration, University of Bucharest, vol. 29(1), pages 106-113, December.
    10. Chang, Ting Fa Margherita & Droli, Maurizio & Iseppi, Luca, 2015. "Extra-Core Production and Capabilities: Where is the Food Industry Going?," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 18(1), pages 1-21, February.
    11. Pankaj Kumar & Xiaojin Liu & Akbar Zaheer, 2022. "How much does the firm's alliance network matter?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(8), pages 1433-1468, August.
    12. Gonçalo Pacheco-de-Almeida & Peter Zemsky, 2007. "The Timing of Resource Development and Sustainable Competitive Advantage," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(4), pages 651-666, April.
    13. Sheen S. Levine & Mark Bernard & Rosemarie Nagel, 2018. "Strategic intelligence: The cognitive capability to anticipate competitor behaviour," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(2), pages 527-527, February.
    14. Della Corte, Valentina & Aria, Massimo, 2016. "Coopetition and sustainable competitive advantage. The case of tourist destinations," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 524-540.
    15. Peter Cappelli & Steffi L Wilk, 1997. "Understanding Selection Processes: Organization Determinants and Performance Outcomes," Working Papers 97-14, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    16. Ying Zhang & Lihua Wang & Jie Gao, 2017. "Supplier collaboration and speed-to-market of new products: the mediating and moderating effects," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 805-818, March.
    17. Susan Helper, 1997. "Complementarity and Cost Reduction: Evidence from the Auto Supply Industry," NBER Working Papers 6033, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Schmid, David & Morschett, Dirk, 2023. "Retailers’ foreign market exits over time: A strategic management perspective," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(5).
    19. Mena, Jeannette A. & Hult, G. Tomas M. & Ferrell, O.C. & Zhang, Yufei, 2019. "Competing assessments of market-driven, sustainability-centered, and stakeholder-focused approaches to the customer-brand relationships and performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 531-543.
    20. Chang-Yang Lee & Ji-Hwan Lee & Ajai S. Gaur, 2017. "Are large business groups conducive to industry innovation? The moderating role of technological appropriability," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 313-337, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wop:pennin:95-03. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Krichel (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fiupaus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.