“All organizations are perfectly aligned to get the results they get.” – Organizational design expert Arthur W. Jones

• • •

He stopped loving her today … So wailed George Jones in mournful country-western lyrics about the end of a life-long love-affair that could never be reconciled. I can relate. After nearly three decades, I just left my bank. It was my first break-up with a bank other than when I moved to a new city. The reason was not service, convenience, price or a disagreement that caused the split. I finally came to a simple decision: a banker relationship is more valuable than a bank.

The bank I am leaving is geographically closer, has more ATMs, more products, and better rates. They are designed for strong customer service, convenient locations, anytime-anywhere service or transactions, state of the art technology and sale of diverse products. Efficiency, predictable processes and interchangeable parts and people born of massive scale mean everything goes pretty smoothly about 95 percent of the time.

Went half crazy now and then … However, about once a year I have a “non-standard” transaction – like handling a unique draft or some glitch like when they stopped sending copies of my checks which I use for tax records. My old bank doesn’t work well outside the box. They are designed for single, efficient, transactions. Each person you deal with does a decent job with what is in their purview. However, absent a relationship, I have no one to own a more complex problem and then doggedly pursue it until it gets resolved, especially if it requires crossing department lines. That leaves me to tell the story, many times, to many people, with multiple follow-ups, and often poor results. The absence of relationship represents a transfer of cost – time, effort, frustration and expense – back to me. The price of the remaining five percent has become too high.

My big mistake was thinking I could change them – transform a transaction bank into a relationship bank. I invested in meeting the branch manager at the closest branch – there have been four of them in the past five years. Every time I took the time to meet one, by the next time I had a need, she had gone. I also met a couple of service people and personal bankers – but they have turned over too. I even met a couple of investment types, but even though I maintained relatively large balances, when I was unwilling to move my investment funds to them, they shuffled me back to the branch. They were into sales; relationships – not so much.

My new bank is designed for relationship. That doesn’t mean their locations, convenience, customer service or prices are superior. They are not. However, their focus is on building a connection with the customer. They ensure you establish a connection with a primary and secondary person. While it appears they target a smaller number of customers, the ones they go after have meaningful potential and value relationship. In their branches you sit at desk when you come in rather than stand at a teller window. Rather than invest in a large branch system, they use imaging technology to allow checks to be deposited from home or small business for those who have that need. Rather than invest in a large ATM network, they use the savings to pay for customer ATM fees and invest in the customer relationship. They have commoditized the standard transactions and are investing in the actual relationship.

It appears that this designing for “human scale” rather than just efficient scale is making a comeback. Human scale requires design that promotes a mutual knowing, serving and being accountable to each other. There are many examples of its emerging value – the surge strategy in Iraq war that emphasizes small and local relationships at the community level, smaller schools where the goal is for students to know each other and all their teachers, the rise of the “house church” movement where small groups meet in people’s homes, the food industry’s move to promote food grown locally by producers known and living in the area (neighbors!). Certainly community banks fit into that category.

The affinity for “human scale” is a response to a world increasingly distrustful and disillusioned with large, distant institutions. The current distaste for large corporations and large government represents an opportunity for those who can be competitive on cost but stand out on relationship. Organizations are now emerging that use technology, physical layout, customer management processes, and pricing structures to promote better allocation of resources to develop and serve relationships.

This relationship model is not targeted for the mass market, but I believe we will see a growing population of customers who prefer and seek in their schools, restaurants, retailers and banks organizations structured for “human scale” that produces relationships.

He had underlined in red, every single I love you … For those customers who have been recipients of unwanted and costly management duties, relational acts by providers are increasingly underscored as signs of affinity.

(Column appeared originally in ABA Bank Marketing magazine – October 2009)

By ROBERT E. HALL

Not to be reproduced without written permission. All rights reserved. © Copyright Robert E. Hall 2009