EY Global Consumer Banking Survey 2014

Winning through
customer experience
EY Global Consumer Banking Survey
2014

Contents
Welcome
Executive summary
Global insights
A promising, active environment
The power of trust
The experience is what matters
Key opportunities for banks
Segment insights
Getting to know your customer segments
Industry and institutional sentiments
Opportunities for segment-driven
investments
Why banks need to act now
Conclusion
Research methodology
Country contacts
1
2
6
20

34
40
42
44
Welcome
When EYs second global consumer banking survey was published in June 2012, the global
economy was sLruqqlinq Lo recover and consumer conldence in Lhe indusLry remained exLremely
low, parLicularly in Lhose counLries badly allecLed by Lhe qlobal lnancial crisis and iLs alLermaLh.
Fast forward to this new edition of our survey and the outlook for retail banking appears more
posiLive. AlLhouqh some economies sLill sLruqqle Lo deliver susLainable qrowLh, Lhe qlobal
economic recovery appears Lo be Lakinq hold. Consumer conldence in Lhe bankinq indusLry is
on Lhe rise, as is LrusL in individual insLiLuLions, and cusLomers are broadly saLisled wiLh Lheir
primary bankinq relaLionships.
However, the primacy of the banks relationship with its customers is under threat as never
belore. Demands and expecLaLions conLinue Lo evolve, olLen lueled by experiences ouLside
lnancial services, and consumers are increasinqly likely Lo develop relaLionships wiLh mulLiple
providers. Lmerqinq Lechnoloqy, and Lhe increasinq use ol mobile devices lor boLh bankinq and
payments, is making it easier for new entrants to challenge the status quo and exploit areas of
dissaLislacLion and underinvesLmenL.
This years survey includes responses from more than 32,000 retail banking customers across
43 countries and, although retail banking remains a local business, it is striking how many
parallels we can draw across markeLs. ln Lhis ediLion ol Lhe survey, we locus on Lhe lollowinq
key questions:
What is the role of trust in creating customer advocates, and how valuable is trust to the overall
banking relationship?
Are banks investing in the right aspects of the customer experience?
How well are banks performing on key interactions from the basics of day-to-day transactions,
Lo resolvinq problems and helpinq cusLomers achieve Lheir lnancial qoals?
How similar are customer behaviors across the globe?
How well are banks prepared to fend off potential new market entrants?
For Lhe lrsL Lime, we've developed eiqhL qlobal seqmenLs Lo porLray shilLinq consumer senLimenL,
olLen irrespecLive ol qeoqraphy.
We would welcome Lhe opporLuniLy Lo meeL wiLh you and provide cusLomized lndinqs Lo deliver
addiLional insiqhL, and we've provided a lisL ol counLry conLacLs aL Lhe end ol Lhis reporL. Please
visiL us aL www.ey.com/qlobalconsumerbankinqsurvey lor more inlormaLion, includinq Lhe abiliLy
Lo access addiLional survey daLa aL your convenience.

Bill Schlich
Global Banking & Capital Markets Leader
1 Winning through customer experience
Executive
summary
Conldence in Lhe bankinq indusLry is on Lhe rise, and LrusL in cusLomers'
own lnancial services providers is hiqh. BuL cusLomers are on Lhe move,
wiLh unprecedenLed access Lo compeLinq banks and Lo new Lypes ol lnancial
services providers. Banks musL earn Lhe highest levels of trust in order to
reLain cusLomers, win more business and creaLe qenuine loyalLy.
The banking industry is poised
for growth
Conldence in Lhe bankinq indusLry is reLurninq, wiLh
337 ol cusLomers qaininq conldence in Lhe pasL 12
monLhs and only 197 losinq conldence, compared
wiLh a ^07 decline in our lasL survey. While much
of the improvement may simply be a restoration of
conldence losL in Lhe wake ol Lhe Clobal Financial
Crisis, this improved sentiment can only help
lnancial insLiLuLions as Lhey work Lo solidily and
expand relaLionships wiLh Lheir cusLomers.
1here is siqnilcanL business opporLuniLy associaLed
with customers who are true advocates, those
who are very likely to recommend their primary
lnancial services provider (PFSP). Specilcally, ^^7
of advocates opened new accounts or services at
Lheir PFSP in Lhe pasL 12 monLhs and 97 inLend
Lo consolidaLe everyLhinq aL Lheir PFSP in Lhe nexL
year. Since 857 ol survey respondenLs delned Lheir
PFSP as a bank, iL is an opporLune Lime lor banks
to increase advocacy and expand their customer
relaLionships.
An improved experience is key to
realizing that growth
Customers generally trust their primary providers,
but the highest level of trust is a clear differentiator
in creating advocacy, and customer experience
is a key driver ol LhaL level ol LrusL. While overall
lnancial sLabiliLy was Lhe Lop reason lor cusLomers'
"compleLe LrusL" in Lheir PFSP, Lhe second mosL
cited response was the way I am treated, followed
closely by other elements of the experience, such
as communications, quality of advice and complaint
handlinq.
Moreover, the most common reason customers
cited for opening or closing accounts in the past
year was Lhe experience wiLh Lheir lnancial services
providers, edqinq ouL raLes/lees and convenience and
surpassinq branch locaLions and accessibiliLy.
So the experience drives not only complete trust,
and thus advocacy and referrals, but also the
amount of business customers are placing with their
PFSP. UndersLandinq Lhe imporLance ol, and Lheir
perlormance on, specilc aspecLs ol Lhe experience
will allow lnancial insLiLuLions Lo make LarqeLed
invesLmenLs.
2 www.ey.com/qlobalconsumerbankinqsurvey
While cusLomers are mosL likely Lo praise Lheir PFSP lor
convenience and security, those have quickly become
minimum requiremenLs. Much ol Lhe emphasis wiLhin
developed counLries has been on improvinq LransacLions.
Like A1Ms in Lhe '80s and, more recenLly, online
banking, mobile banking was viewed initially as a point
ol dillerenLiaLion amonq Lhose lnancial insLiLuLions
ollerinq iL. However, now iL is expecLed, alonq wiLh Lhe
abiliLy Lo move seamlessly across channels. 1he lnancial
landscape is different in emerging markets, but no less
challenqinq. 1he inLeqraLion ol Lechnoloqy, especially
mobile, has inLroduced providers Lo an inlux ol new
cusLomers seekinq basic lnancial services.
When asked to evaluate 31 experience elements or
benelLs survey responses poinLed Lo shorLlalls in
meeting basic expectations, such as transparency of
fees and communication, and the continued importance
ol ellecLive problem handlinq. ln addiLion, Lhe resulLs
provided insiqhL inLo opporLuniLies lor PFSPs Lo
differentiate themselves by customizing products and
solutions to meet customers needs and helping them
achieve Lheir lnancial qoals.
Key improvement areas for banks
Transparency of fees and simplicity of offers and communication. This is one of the most
souqhLalLer benelLs needinq improvemenL. CusLomers wanL lnancial insLiLuLions Lo be clearer
abouL whaL Lhey oller, Lhe lees Lhey're charqinq and how Lo avoid payinq lees.
Omni-channel experience. CusLomers are saLisled wiLh Lhe convenience ol LradiLional
banking but expectations are constantly rising as new technologies and consumer behaviors
develop. lncreasinqly, cusLomer behavior is chanqinq Lo involve web, mobile, social media and
inperson inLeracLions lor a sinqle purchase. 1o sLay compeLiLive, lnancial insLiLuLions need
Lo conLinue buildinq ouL channel capabiliLies Lo provide 2^/7 realLime access Lo bankinq,
seamlessly, across channels.
More and better advice. Customers tell us they are willing to increase their accounts and
balances in exchanqe lor banks' helpinq Lhem develop Lheir lnancial plans and qoals
demonstrating the power of personalizing the experience and creating a mutual exchange
ol value. 1hus, banks need Lo provide advice LhaL is cusLomercenLric, based on a holisLic
perspecLive ol Lhe cusLomer's unique siLuaLion and needs. Lquippinq advisors wiLh Lhe riqhL
skill seLs, incenLive sLrucLures and neLwork ol specialisLs; posiLioninq Lhe branch as a sales/
advice cenLer LhaL provides personalized assisLance; and redelninq Lhe role ol Lhe call cenLer
as a viable channel lor providinq advice are all sLraLeqies LhaL should be explored.
Greater use of data and digital channels to empower customers. Banks have access
to vast data sets, both in-house and externally available, that they should leverage to
personalize Lhe experience and empower cusLomers Lo make decisions. Key Lechniques and
Lools include makinq diqiLal conLenL dynamic based on cusLomer prolles, showinq whaL
"cusLomers like you" have bouqhL, and providinq personal lnancial manaqemenL Lools LhaL
help cusLomers save, invesL and spend more wisely.
Enhanced problem resolution experience. Solving problems in a way that leaves
cusLomers very saLisled wiLh Lheir resoluLion has lonq been, and remains, ol siqnilcanL
imporLance in Lhe relaLionship. While some problems are sellinlicLed, mosL sLem lrom an
issue wiLh Lhe lnancial services provider or anoLher company/person. How Lhe problem
is handled maLLers. 1he survey resulLs suqqesL LhaL Lhere is an asLoundinq upside il
cusLomers are very saLisled wiLh Lheir problem resoluLion versus a downward spiral in
LrusL and Lhe relaLionship il dissaLisled. Makinq iL easy lor cusLomers Lo raise issues,
equipping the front line to handle certain problems and escalate others, explaining why the
issue occurred, and following up to ensure resolution is complete are examples of ways to
improve saLislacLion wiLh Lhe experience.
Make banking
simple and clear
Help customers
make the
right hnancial
decisions in
a complex
environment
Work with
customers when
problems arise
and become
their advocate
Customers expect more
Customers products, attitudes and preferences are not
unique Lo a specilc counLry or reqion. We qrouped Lhe
results of the more than 32,000 customers into eight
segments that share common behaviors, expectations,
prelerences and, Lherelore, soluLions.
The segments vary in size, assets and willingness to pay
more lor key benelLs (Fiqure 1). 1hose LhaL are mosL
promising but view banks as having a limited competitive
advanLaqe over alLernaLive providers e.q., Lhe Upwardly
Mobile customers present the greatest challenge
to traditional banks ability to retain all or part of the
relaLionship.
LaLer in Lhis reporL we provide insiqhLs inLo Lhe benelLs LhaL
each seqmenL values mosL, prelerred channels lor specilc
transactions, current products and services, engagement
drivers and more. 1he seqmenLaLion analysis provides a
unique lens and highlights opportunities to consider segment-
based sLraLeqies Lo more ellecLively invesL bank resources.
While 607 ol cusLomers do noL have delniLe plans Lo open
or close any accounts in the next 12 months, this should
noL be inLerpreLed as loyalLy. Ol Lhose who delniLely
intend to maintain their current relationships, 22%
indicaLed LhaL all lnancial service companies are Lhe same
and 177 sLaLed LhaL iL was Loo dillculL or Lime consuminq
Lo chanqe. CusLomers are noL beinq reLained; insLead, Lhey
simply "remain" and are vulnerable Lo compeLiLive LhreaLs.
Although traditional banks are currently seen as being
in Lhe besL posiLion Lo deliver on core benelLs such as
branch and ATM access, they are most vulnerable on
benelLs associaLed wiLh Lhe hiqhesL qrowLh poLenLial,
e.q., proacLively alerLinq cusLomers Lo producLs and
services and cusLomizinq Lhem Lo lL Lheir needs.
Traditional banks scored lowest on mobile banking
features visvis the competition, and their competitive
advantage in online banking features is also relatively
small. 1echnoloqy innovaLion has enabled dillerenL Lypes
of companies to provide banking services, particularly for
transaction accounts, and banks may be on the verge of
cedinq Lheir posiLion as Lhe primary provider. WiLh online
banking being the second-most common product at
PFSPs, lollowed by oLher lrequenLLransacLion producLs,
the threat of another provider dominating these offerings
and then becoming customers primary provider is one
LhaL cannoL be iqnored.
1radiLional lnancial services companies musL
respond to these challenges, as there is a multitude
of new providers, including mobile telephone
services, technology companies, and new types
of banks with different technology and services
enLerinq and peneLraLinq Lhe markeLplace.
Segmentation can provide actionable insight
for improvements
Time is of the essence
Assets under management of total population
Relative population
10%19% 20% or more 1%9%
Customer engagement
(willingness to pay more Ior key benehts)
Large
Unhappy and
Unmovings
5elI5uIhcients
Balancers
Safety
Seekers
Small
B
a
n
k
s

c
o
m
p
e
t
i
t
i
v
e

d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
i
a
t
i
o
n

v
s
.

a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
s
Low High
Elites
Traditionalists
New World
Adopters
Upwardly Mobiles
Fiqure 1. Eight global segments
4 www.ey.com/globalconsumerbankingsurvey
Global
insights
A promising, active environment
Conldence in Lhe qlobal bankinq indusLry has increased siqnilcanLly over
Lhe pasL year. 1he percenLaqe ol cusLomers whose conldence has risen
now sLands aL 337, a 507 qain lrom our lasL survey, which parLially may
relecL a resLoraLion ol prioryear losses (Fiqure 2). ln addiLion, cusLomers
are qenerally saLisled enouqh wiLh Lheir bankinq relaLionship Lo recommend
Lheir PFSP (Fiqure 3).
Fiqure 3. How likely are you to
recommend your PFSP?
Unlikely
Very unlikely
Very likely
NeiLher likely nor unlikely (neuLral)
Likely
1%
40%
3%
37%
19%
Fiqure 2. Hcw has ycur ccnhdence
toward the banking industry
changed in the past 12 months?
33%
22%
48%
38%
19%
40%
2012 2013
Increased Decreased Remained
the same
The value of advocacy
A key quesLion is how much business benelL is associaLed wiLh Lhe hiqher raLinq, "very likely" Lo recommend. ln lacL,
across the board, customers who are very likely to recommend their primary provider have already increased their
business or plan Lo do so aL a qreaLer raLe Lhan Lhose who are only "likely" Lo recommend (Fiqure ^). As a resulL, in Lhis
reporL advocacy is delned as Lhe sLaLus achieved when cusLomers are very likely Lo recommend Lheir primary provider.
PFSP relationship
Our analysis is frequently done in the context of customers
relaLionship wiLh Lheir PFSP, so iL is imporLanL Lo
undersLand LhaL Lhey almosL always delne Lhis as a bank
(Fiqure 5). ln addiLion, Lhe producL mosL likely Lo be held
with ones primary provider is a savings account, followed
by oLher LransacLional producLs and services (Fiqure 6).
Of these, satisfaction levels with online banking and
online bill payment are highest, closely followed by mobile
payments which is owned by a smaller, but growing, portion
ol Lhe cusLomer base.
But customers are expecting more and more from their
providers and have an increasing array of options from
which to choose, so in this increasingly competitive
environmenL, banks cannoL resL. Over 507 ol all cusLomers
either opened or closed accounts and services in the past
12 monLhs and ^07 have similar plans in Lhe nexL year.
Given this dynamic environment, this report explores
key inluencers ol cusLomers' decisions and idenLiles
those aspects of banking in which traditional banks either
dominaLe or have only a sliqhL compeLiLive edqe.
Bank
CrediL union or cooperaLive bank/
microlnance company
lnvesLmenL/brokeraqe lrm
Credit card company
Technology provider such as
Cooqle or PayPal
Mobile telephone service
Fiqure 5. Dehniticn cf primary
hnanciaI services prcvider
PFSP
Fiqure ^. Percentage of customers who recently made or are planning changes with their PFSP
Very likely to recommend Likely to recommend NeuLral/unlikely
3%
2%
1%
44%
20%
34%
9%
4%
1%
30%
22%
8%
Consolidated all accounts
and services
Opened new accounts
or services
Intend to consolidate
all accounts and services
Intend to open new
accounts or services
Fiqure 6. Product ownership and satisfaction
Savinqs accounL (377)
78%
65%
29%
12%
Personal reLiremenL
accounL (337)
69%
57%
Online bankinq (^77)
27%
11%
Reloadable
precards (337)
52%
46%
Checkinq/currenL
accounL (397)
17%
8%
MorLqaqe (287)
54%
40%
Online bill
paymenL (^77)
15%
6%
Car loan (327)
59%
40%
CrediL card (367)
13%
5%
Savings with metals
and |ewels` (337)
32%
17%
Investment
accounL (307)
9%
4%
Home equiLy loan/
line ol crediL (367)
28%
15%
Personal loan (337)
4%
1%
Loans/meLals
and |ewels (317)
26%
14%
Mobile payments
(^07)
1%
0%
Identity theft
proLecLion`` (587)
43%
13%
Lile insurance (287)
1%
0%
Credit monitoring
service`` (^77)
Own accounL/service Own with primary provider (7) CusLomers very saLisled wiLh accounL/service aL primary provider
K
e
y

t
r
a
n
s
a
c
t
i
o
n
a
l

p
r
o
d
u
c
t
s

a
n
d

s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
``Asked in US only `Precious meLals and |ewels (like qold and diamonds)
Given the value of advocacy, it is
important to understand what a
customers primary provider must do
Lo Lurn iLs cusLomers inLo advocaLes.
The survey results show that 93% of customers trust
Lheir primary lnancial insLiLuLion Lo a siqnilcanL deqree
(Fiqure 7), buL earninq cusLomers' compleLe LrusL, versus
moderate trust, will result in much higher levels of
advocacy and is Lhus worLh invesLinq in (Fiqure 8).
Trust is multi-faceted and is most frequently associated
with the stability of the institution and the customer
experience, with the way I am treated being of great
importance, followed closely by communications, advice
and problem resoluLion. 1hese are all aspecLs ol Lhe
experience that we explore as opportunities throughout
Lhis reporL (Fiqure 9).
The power of trust
Fiqure 9. Reasons for having complete trust
Financial stability
Ability to withdraw money
Their security procedures
The size of the company
The way I am treated
How they communicate with me
Quality of advice provided
Problem resoluLion/complainL handlinq
My relationship with certain employees
The fees I pay
Interest rates I earn on my accounts
Interest rates I pay on my loans
Stories from friends or relatives
Their decision to open or close branches
Recent articles or news stories
Institutional stability
Customer experience
Fees and rates
Other
60%
54%
51%
42%
56%
44%
41%
38%
19%
26%
24%
20%
14%
9%
8%
Fiqure 7. Degree of trust in primary provider
Moderate trust
Minimal trust or no trust
Complete trust
Trust
44%
49%
7%
Fiqure 8. Relationship between trust and
advocacy in primary provider
Very likely to recommend
Neutral or unlikely to recommend
Likely to recommend
68%
20%
3%
50%
13%
30%
84%
27%
5%
Moderate trust Minimal trust
or no trust
Complete trust
The experience is what matters
Fiqure 10. Reasons that customers opened or closed accounts in the past 12 months
Reasons Lo close accounL/service Reasons Lo open accounL/service
41% 33%
Lxperience wiLh lnancial services providers
30% 32%
RaLes/lees
29% 28%
More convenient to have everything in one place
26% 18%
Branch/ollce locaLion
28% 17%
Access to branches and banking services
13% 7%
Information provided by friend or relative
9% 5%
Information provided by news or advertising
5% 6%
Their decision to open or close branches
7% 8%
Other
2% 3%
Not sure
RaLes and lees were also lrequenLly ciLed. 1his is
reinforced in the next section of the report, which
discusses the importance of fee transparency to
customers and their relative dissatisfaction with
bank perlormance. While convenience raLes lairly
high, physical branch access was more likely to be
a reason for opening accounts and notably less of a
reason lor closinq Lhem.
The experience is not only a key driver
ol LrusL, buL also impacLs behavior.
For customers who opened or closed
accounts or services in the past year,
the single most common reason was
Lhe experience wiLh Lheir lnancial
services providers (Fiqure 10).
Exploring the experience and the
opportunities
To gain a deeper understanding of the attributes that
customers value, survey respondents were presented
wiLh 31 benelLs, asked Lo selecL Lhe lve mosL imporLanL
ones and asked Lo evaluaLe Lheir currenL PFSP's
perlormance aqainsL Lhese benelLs. NoL surprisinqly,
most customers attributed high levels of importance
and saLislacLion Lo benelLs associaLed wiLh insLiLuLional
sLabiliLy. 1he more inLeresLinq lndinqs are LhaL banks lall
short in meeting some basic expectations and also have
Lhe abiliLy Lo dillerenLiaLe and add value.
Starting with trust
As previously shown, institutional factors such as
lnancial sLabiliLy and securiLy procedures are key
drivers ol compleLe LrusL in one's primary lnancial
services provider. ConsisLenL wiLh Lhis Lheme, cusLomers
raLed repuLaLion and securiLy ol personal or lnancial
information as very important, and satisfaction with
Lhese iLems is amonq Lhe hiqhesL (Fiqure 11). 1here is
potentially an opportunity to improve communication
about security practices and increase not only trust,
but also adoption of online and mobile banking services
where securiLy concerns are olLen a barrier Lo usaqe.
Opportunity 1: Make banking
simple and clear
Average
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
S
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n
High Low
High
Provides easy access
to branches and ATMs
Offers excellent online
banking features
Keeps your personal
information safe
Protects your hnancial
information
Has an excellent
reputation
Is transparent about what they
charge for and makes it clear to
you how to avoid paying fees
Has excellent mobile
banking features
Provides banking access at
places other than banks
Provides excellent
customer service at
call center
Makes it easy to conduct your
most frequent transactions
Handles your requests quickly
Fiqure 11. Beneht impcrtance and satisfacticn
Importance
Communicates important information clearly
Trust Convenience Communications
Larger diamonds indicate the benehts discussed in this section.
Convenience
Customers are looking for simplicity in their day-to-day
banking, as evidenced by some of the features they
value mosL (Fiqure 11):
Easy access to branches and ATMs
Excellent online banking features
Ease of conducting frequent banking transactions
Quickly handling requests
Mobile banking ranks lower in importance, probably
because of its newness and thus lower usage across
Lhe respondenL base. SaLislacLion wiLh mobile bankinq
features is notably lower than that of online banking,
which may also be a result of mobiles relatively recent
introduction as a channel customers expect that
everything they can do online can be done on their
mobile device, but those enhancements are still catching
up aL many banks.
However, mobile banking features do rate slightly
higher than the call center ratings, perhaps indicating
that banks investments in mobile in the past few years
are sLarLinq Lo pay oll. ln addiLion, as more and more
transactions shift to self-service channels, call centers
are left to deal with the more complicated questions or
problems which are, by Lheir naLure, more dillculL Lo
consisLenLly handle well.
Fortunately, for simple, everyday banking, customers
have many channels to choose from and can vary
their selection depending on access, experience and
whaL Lhey're Lryinq Lo achieve (Fiqure 12a). On a daily
basis, customers reported using the internet most
lrequenLly, lollowed by mobile and A1Ms. BuL when
combined with weekly usage, customers use the online
and ATM channels far more frequently than any others,
and overall are mosL saLisled wiLh Lhem over mobile,
branch and call cenLer channels (Fiqure 12b). 1his is
not surprising given customers familiarity with these
channels, the relative simplicity of transactions through
Lhem and invesLmenLs LhaL banks have made.
Fiqure 12b. ChanneI satisfacticn (X very satished)
Call center
Branch or ollce
ATMs
Mobile
Online/inLerneL
36%
56%
41%
26%
10%
21%
49%
30%
20%
8%
35%
57%
39%
28%
17%
29%
59%
39%
30%
20%
20%
53%
32%
25%
15%
Fiqure 12a. Channel use (% who use channel at
specihed frequency)
Call center
Branch or ollce
ATMs
Mobile
Online/inLerneL 20%
10%
9%
4%
3%
21%
18%
29%
37%
18%
8%
12%
7%
29%
33%
14%
40%
6%
10%
37%
37%
20%
49%
20%
9%
Daily Monthly
AlmosL never/never
Weekly
Few times a year
Total users Weekly users
Less frequent than monthly users
Daily users
Monthly users
Satisfaction levels for:
Customers have certainly come to expect convenience,
and electronic channels, headlined by the broad-reaching
capabilities of online banking, represent the preferred
choice for frequent transactions, balance inquiries and
adminisLraLive maLLers (Fiqure 13).
While electronic channels provide customers with the
freedom to bank when and where they want, this does
not mean that customers have lost their connection with
Lhe branch and iLs employees. When iL comes Lo sales and
advice, cusLomers universally crave Lhe personal conLacL.
Branches are largely preferred, but call centers are also
very convenienL and desirable lor obLaininq advice. Call
centers are also second only to branches for problem-
relaLed conLacLs, providinq Lhe convenience ol 2^/7 wiLh
Lhe abiliLy Lo have a conversaLion. As rouLine maLLers
continue to shift to self-service channels, investing in
call centers to handle more complex advice and problem
resoluLion maLLers will be increasinqly valuable.
In the survey, customers were asked to select the
single channel Lhey preler mosL lor perlorminq specilc
LransacLions and inquiries. Acknowledqinq LhaL Lhey
often use more than one channel, especially when
makinq siqnilcanL lnancial decisions, iL is imperaLive Lo
determine not only the role that each individual channel
will play in each banking interaction and ensure that
transactions are simple to perform without generating
problems, but also how to connect the data and
interaction history such that customers can complete
their transactions seamlessly across channels for an
omnichannel experience.
Deliverinq Lhis experience olLen requires inLeqraLion
of technology and data, with the goal of both enabling
customers to move among devices or channels, and
equipping the bank with a single customer view and
deLailed prolle ol accounLs and inLeracLions. Armed
with these insights, banks can be more successful in
identifying relevant products and services and then
offering, selling and servicing them through the most
ellecLive channels. Desiqninq an overarchinq cusLomer
experience with detailed interactions across channels,
as well as continuing to enhance individual channel
capabilities, will assist institutions in making the right
investments and delivering the omni-channel experience
that customers have enjoyed in other industries and now
come Lo expecL in lnancial services.
Fiqure 13. Percentage of channel preference by task among all customers
Branch Call center ATM Online/inLerneL Mobile Another way
20% 55% 3% 4% 16% 2%
12% 50% 6% 10% 21% 1%
40% 20% 30% 5% 4% 1%
49% 34% 6% 3% 5% 3%
52% 14% 3% 2% 28% 1%
30% 50% 5% 3% 8% 4%
65% 4% 20% 2% 7% 2%
54% 3% 2% 14% 22% 5%
Opportunity 1
Balance inquiry
Bill paymenLs/Lranslers
Administrative
ReporL a problem/
obtain status
Buy/sell invesLmenLs
Make deposit
Advice
Sales
CusLomers were noLiceably less saLisled wiLh one ol Lhe
mosL imporLanL benelLs: Lransparency and clariLy ol
lees (Fiqure 11). 1his presenLs a burninq issue lor banks
to improve upon, as customers who switched providers
last year also cited rates and fees as an extremely
imporLanL reason lor closinq accounLs. And iL is more
Lhan an irriLanL Lwo ol Lhe Lop lve problems lor which
customers requested assistance related to unexpected
lees and dispuLed charqes. 1his Lakes Lime and ellorL
for them to pursue, and even then only 20% of those
reporLinq Lhe problem were very saLisled wiLh Lhe
resoluLion, and a lull ^27 were less Lhan saLisled. Four
major indicators point to the need to invest in improving
how banks communicaLe abouL lees: 1) imporLance ol
Lhis leaLure, 2) lrequency ol associaLed problems, 3)
currenL sLaLe ol saLislacLion wiLh Lhe resoluLion and ^)
associaLed business impacL.
Satisfaction with clarity of communications in general
was also lower Lhan averaqe. Overall, every inLeracLion
in every channel is an opportunity to demonstrate
simplicity and clarity, which is particularly important
when cusLomers are searchinq lor a lnancial services
provider. While lriends, relaLives and social media remain
sLronq inluencers, Lhe mosL imporLanL inlormaLion
sources are those controlled by the banks themselves,
allowing them to describe their products, services
and, most important, fees in ways that are simple to
undersLand (Fiqure 1^).
Our lndinqs are reinlorced by Sieqel + Cale's
recent Brand Simplicity Index report, which states:
In a world crowded with complexity, simplicity
sLands ouL. lL brinqs clariLy insLead ol conlusion,
decision insLead ol doubL. And Lhe rewards are
real. SimpliciLy inspires deeper LrusL and qreaLer
loyalty in customers, and clears the way to
innovaLion lor employees."
For that report, consumers were asked to evaluate
the simplicity of their interactions with brands and
indusLries. 1hey raLed "undersLandinq when l'll be
charged fees or how I can avoid fees as the most
complex of 10 touchpoints evaluated, which is
very consisLenL wiLh Lhe dissaLislacLion we lound.
1he bankinq indusLry scored 517 on a scale lrom
0 Lo 1,000, rankinq 19Lh amonq 25 indusLries
and signaling an overwhelming need to simplify
how it does business, especially as consumers
compare Lheir lnancial providers noL only Lo
direcL compeLiLors buL Lo oLher indusLries.
Consumers not only expect this, they are willing
to pay for it: the same study found that 41%
of people are willing to pay more for simpler
experiences and inLeracLions.
Communications
38%
29%
22%
29%
13%
16%
14%
12%
10%
9%
Bank controlled Advocates
B
a
n
k

w
e
b
s
i
t
e
s
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

b
r
a
n
c
h
1
V

a
n
d
/
o
r

r
a
d
i
o

c
o
m
m
e
r
c
i
a
l
s
/
a
d
s
M
a
g
a
z
i
n
e

o
r

n
e
w
s
p
a
p
e
r

a
d
s
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n

s
e
n
t

i
n

t
h
e

m
a
i
l
B
a
n
k

e
m
p
l
o
y
e
e
s
F
r
i
e
n
d
s

a
n
d
/
o
r

r
e
l
a
t
i
v
e
s
S
o
c
i
a
l

m
e
d
i
a
F
i
n
a
n
c
i
a
l

a
d
v
i
s
o
r
T
h
i
r
d
-
p
a
r
t
y

w
e
b
s
i
t
e
s
Fiqure 1^. Mcst impcrtant infcrmaticn scurces used when searchin fcr a hnanciaI services prcvider
After mastering the basics of day-to-day banking, banks
have a tremendous opportunity to differentiate by
helpinq cusLomers achieve Lheir lnancial qoals. 1hus
lar, many ol Lhe opporLuniLies Lo realize benelLs lrom
improving the experience have related to simplifying
it, which often equates more to reducing pain points
Lhan Lo addinq incremenLal value. Also, Lhe inLroducLion
of technology and self-service channels into the
customer experience delivered a level of convenience
LhaL cusLomers quickly inLeqraLed inLo Lheir daily lives.
Constant access to banking and the security procedures
enabling banking to be conducted in a safe manner
now represent seemingly universal requirements and
minimum expectations for which customers generally are
noL willinq Lo pay more. So iL is imporLanL Lo look Lo oLher
benelLs lor revenue qrowLh.
Aside lrom Lransparency ol lees, Lhe benelLs wiLh Lhe
lowest satisfaction ratings all relate to personalizing
the experience, building a relationship and helping
cusLomers improve Lheir lnancial well beinq (Fiqure
15). While Lhese benelLs are noL as imporLanL Lo all
segments, they represent key vulnerabilities on both
ends of the spectrum:
Opportunity: many customers would be willing to
increase their business if performance improved
Risk: traditional banks have a somewhat small
competitive advantage relative to alternative providers
If these items are not addressed, alternative providers
can focus on offering experiences such as recommending
Lhe riqhL producLs and services, providinq lnancial
planninq and leveraqinq lnancial experLs. 1hese
Advice
Opportunity 2: Help customers
make hnanciaI decisicns
Advice
High
Low
High
Importance
S
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n
High
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
Average
Provides access to hnancial experts
Customizes products and
services to ht your needs
Knows previous
contacts/interactions
Invests in your
hnancial well being
Proactively
alerts you to
products of
interest
Takes
relationship
into account
when quoting
fees/rates
Recommends what you really need
Provides
hnancial plan
Finds ways to save money
Knows your accounts/
services/transactions
Always hnds new
ways to improve how
you conduct your business
S
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n
High Low
Importance
offer some of the greatest revenue potential, since
they contribute directly to cross-sell and long-term
relaLionship qrowLh. Doinq Lhis well requires a
personalized experience, which is another area of
opportunity, in the form of knowing customers existing
accounLs, services, conLacLs and inLeracLions. Beinq
able to analyze this data across the entire customer
relationship and putting it in the hands of the sales force
will be essenLial Lo deliverinq on Lhis caLeqory ol benelLs.
When asked what they would be willing to do if their
PFSP ollered a much beLLer experience on Lhe benelLs
they selected as most important, customers expressed a
clear willingness to reciprocate the banks investment in
Lhem by becominq a more valuable cusLomer. 1he hiqhesL
levels ol enqaqemenL, delned as willinqness Lo pay a liLLle
more, add more accounLs/services, or increase deposiLs/
investments, were related to items that personalize and
develop Lhe relaLionship in an advisory capaciLy (Fiqure
16). ln conLrasL, median scores were qiven Lo benelLs
such as improved transparency another attribute that
has become a minimum expectation with more downside
risk than upside opportunity, but a requirement for
qaininq LrusL and earninq Lhe riqhL Lo provide advice.
The tcp three benehts prcmisin the hihest enaement cppcrtunity aII reBect a wiIIinness tc increase
share cf waIIet in exchane fcr banks' heIpin them achieve their hnanciaI and bankin caIs
Banks are in an enviable position in providing
an omni-channel experience and having access
to customer data, as remote banking channel
luncLionaliLy exLends inLo lnancial planninq. As
noted in the 2013 eBook published by EY and
Knowledge@Wharton, Mobile Banking: Financial
Services Meet the Electronic Wallet, Banks,
through the credit card, through the transaction
history, see everything the customer does with
everybody, allowing banks to provide tailored
producLs and services."
lnvesLs in your lnancial well beinq
Provides a plan Lo help you reach your lnancial qoals
Finds new ways to improve how you conduct your business
Rewards you for being a loyal customer
Finds ways to save you money
Provides access Lo lnancial experLs
CusLomizes producLs and services Lo lL your needs
Takes overall relationship into account when quoting fees and rates
Respects your cultural or religious requirements
Recommends accounts, products and services that you really need
Fiqure 16. Engagement drivers what customers would be willing to do if their PFSP offered a much
better experience
Pay a liLLle more Add more accounLs/services lncrease my deposiLs/invesLmenLs
13%
17%
18%
11%
13%
16%
14%
14%
15%
9%
31%
30%
31%
29%
28%
27%
28%
28%
27%
31%
29%
25%
22%
25%
23%
20%
20%
19%
18%
20%
73%
72%
71%
65%
64%
63%
62%
61%
60%
60%
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
#7
#8
#9
#10
Combining the power of distribution options with access
Lo daLa and analyLics makes banks uniquely qualiled
to develop a deep understanding of their customers
and provide them with advice in ways that are both
convenienL and hiqhly personalized.
DaLa can also be aqqreqaLed and provided Lo cusLomers
Lo help Lhem manaqe Lheir lnances, by undersLandinq
their own spending patterns as well as obtaining insights
lrom oLher consumers wiLh similar prolles and qoals.
Given their access to both internal and external data,
banks are in a unique position to provide customers with
daLa LhaL is Lruly meaninqlul.
Once again, banks have more than one way to provide
services to their customers, and customers are open
Lo receivinq Lhem in dillerenL ways (Fiqure 17). While
in-person dialogue has the greatest appeal for receiving
advice, remoLe opLions are also ol inLeresL. Makinq Lhe
right investment decisions will depend on ones overall
customer and distribution strategies as well as analysis
ol specilc seqmenL prelerences. Realizinq Lhe benelLs
will require careful execution planning, including clearly
delninq Lhe roles ol channels, ensurinq LhaL employees
and advisors have appropriate skills and training support,
and aligning compensation structures and priorities with
Lhe desired behaviors.
Opportunity 2
61%
Meet in person
48%
By phone with someone
in a call center any day,
any time
49%
Use cnIine hnanciaI
management tools
50%
By phone with someone
I know at a branch
during working hours
31%
By video chat from
home or work
Fiqure 17. Percentage of customers who are somewhat or very interested in these ways of receiving advice
1his can also conLribuLe Lo increased LrusL, as supporLed by a December 2013 ForresLer Research, lnc.
reporL, "Financial Service Brands Fail Lo Larn 1RUL Consumer 1rusL." 1his reporL sLaLes: "Financial services
brands have lonq sullered lrom lack ol consumer LrusL, buL Lhe 2008 lnancial collapse undermined Lhe
brand relaLionship. DillculL as Lhe road is, lnancial service brands musL sLrive Lo secure brand LrusL Lo build
Lheir brand." One ol Lhe key drivers ol earninq back cusLomer LrusL is Lhrouqh superior personalized producL
ollerinqs. "HiqhqualiLy producLs LhaL meeL cusLomer needs are a key driver ol LrusL in lnancial services."
Importance
Problem resolution
Problem resoluLion also presenLs boLh opporLuniLy and
risk. 1here is, perhaps, no qreaLer momenL ol LruLh lor
a PFSP Lhan when supporLinq cusLomers requesLinq
help wiLh a problem. LllecLively workinq wiLh cusLomers
and even proactively contacting them in the event of a
problem remains ol criLical imporLance. While saLislacLion
levels wiLh problemrelaLed benelLs are hiqher Lhan
averaqe (Fiqure 18), Lhere are siqnilcanL opporLuniLies
associated with performing much better on this
dimension, and subsLanLial risk in noL doinq iL well.
A solid one-third of respondents reported having a
problem in the last 12 months for which they contacted
Lheir lnancial services provider (Fiqure 19a). 1his
critical interaction is a unique opportunity that allows
institutions not only to solve the problem but to increase
advocacy to the point that customers will increase their
level ol invesLmenL in Lheir provider. An analysis ol Lhe
relationship between problem resolution and advocacy,
as compared with satisfaction with products, channels
and benelLs, lound Lhe impacL ol problem resoluLion Lo
be subsLanLially qreaLer (Fiqure 19b). 1his means LhaL
for one-third of customers, how their problem is resolved
becomes the seminal experience driving advocacy and
impacL on luLure business.
Problem resolution incidence
% of consumers who experienced a problem
lor which Lhey conLacLed Lheir lnancial
services provider in the past 12 months
ReIative impact (X) cf different
experiences on advocacy
Degree of satisfaction
with problem resolution
ProducL saLislacLion
Channel satisfaction
BenelL saLislacLion
Satisfaction with
problem resolution
56%
4%
7%
33%
25% very
satisfied
42% satisfied
33% less
than satisfied
34%
Yes
Impact
Fiqure 19a. Fiqure 19b.
Opportunity 3: When problems arise, become
the customers advocate
Problem resolution
High
High
S
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
Average
Works with you when you need
help or encounter a problem
Reaches out if problem may exist
S
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n
High Low
High
Importance
Low
Given the power of effective problem resolution, most
customers are telling us that their institutions are not
maximizinq Lhe opporLuniLy. Ol Lhe 257 ol cusLomers
who indicaLed Lhey are very saLisled wiLh how Lhe
problem was resolved, two-thirds of them are advocates
(Fiqure 20), which LranslaLes inLo qivinq more or all ol
Lheir business Lo LhaL insLiLuLion. BuL noL everyone is
saLisled, and Lhe ouLcome is noL necessarily sLaLus quo.
ln lacL, Lhose who are less Lhan saLisled have advocacy
levels lower than customers who did not experience a
problem aL all (Fiqure 20), and 197 ol Lhose dissaLisled
and 327 ol Lhose very dissaLisled reporLed closinq
some or all ol Lheir accounLs or services (Fiqure 21).
Fiqure 21. Chane in business amcn thcse requirin prcbIem rescIuticn assistance
Very saLisled
SaLisled
Neutral
DissaLisled
Very dissaLisled
Not resolved
11%
+39% 6%
4%
3%
5%
3%
9%
25%
28%
16%
10%
5%
7%
38%
33%
55%
73%
68%
58%
68%
51%
41%
5%
18%
27%
18%
1%
1%
5%
4%
1%
Gave them all
of my business
Gave them more
of my business
Stayed the same Closed some of my
accounLs/services
Closed all my
accounLs/services
6%
2%
1%
Total
Resolution satisfaction
Fiqure 20. Relationship between satisfaction
and advocacy
807
60%
40%
20%
0%
Very
saLisled
SaLisled
Neutral
DissaLisled
Very
dissaLisled
Not
resolved
Advocacy (397) amonq Lhose
not experiencing problem
7 ol cusLomers very likely Lo recommend PFSP based on
satisfaction with problem resolution
A
d
v
o
c
a
c
y

(
7

v
e
r
y

l
i
k
e
l
y

t
o

r
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d

P
F
5
P
)
Satisfaction with problem resolution
Fees aqain sLand ouL as an area ol opporLuniLy.
RepresenLinq 157 ol all problems reporLed (Fiqure 22),
fees are a likely cause of lost customers, second only to
denials as a source ol dissaLislacLion (Fiqure 23).
In the near term, focusing on targeted issues will yield
boLLomline resulLs, as Lhere is delniLely value associaLed
wiLh prevenLinq problems alLoqeLher. lmprovinq problem
resolution for all issues, especially fees, will address a
frequent problem with less than average satisfaction
resulLs. lnvesLinq in call cenLers, prelerred by 307 ol
customers for reporting or obtaining status on problems,
can also provide immediaLe lilL. Since ellecLive resoluLion
impacLs advocacy, equippinq call cenLers Lo leld problem
related calls, strengthen the relationship and create sales
opporLuniLies is a naLural sLraLeqy Lo lollow.
`Denial includes crediL/loan requesLs and charqes when makinq purchases
Fiqure 23. Problem resolution satisfaction by
problem type
Total
Standard operations
DispuLe, losL or sLolen card
Fees
PaymenL/deposiL
Processinq
Denial`
Very saLisled SaLisled Less Lhan saLisled
25%
24%
35%
20%
21%
19%
18%
42%
48%
42%
39%
45%
45%
37%
33%
28%
23%
41%
34%
36%
45%
Fiqure 22. Types of problems experienced
Standard operations
DispuLe, losL or sLolen card
Fees
PaymenL/deposiL
Processinq
Denial`
Something else
29%
20%
15%
8%
8%
7%
13%
Segment
insights
Customers product requirements,
attitudes and preferences are not
unique Lo a specilc counLry or
reqion. We qrouped more Lhan
32,000 customers into eight
seqmenLs (Fiqure 2^) LhaL share
common behaviors, expectations,
prelerences and, Lherelore, soluLions.
The segmentation provides a unique
lens and highlights opportunities to
consider segment-based strategies
to more effectively invest bank
resources based on those segments
that are currently prevalent in ones
customer base, or are targets for
luLure prospecLinq.
Unhappy and Unmovings
Older, least educated, low
household incomes and low
investable assets
Lowest advocacy and trust
MosL criLical ol Lheir PFSP and
the industry overall
Infrequent users of both branch
and remote channels
Unlikely Lo move producLs as
they feel that all providers are
the same
High incidence of complaints,
especially around unexpected
fees, and low satisfaction with
resolution
Elites
Older, highly educated
with high household
incomes and assets
High levels of advocacy
and trust
Second highest number of
products owned
Heavy users of online channel
Value usinq sellservice lnancial
management tools and
conducting research online
Traditionalists
Less educated, most limited in
income
Lowest number of products, but
willing to increase engagement
when offered new ways to do
business
Will use remote channels
although prefer to use the
branch
Use Lhe A1M mosL lrequenLly
each week
Value being rewarded for loyalty
Upwardly Mobiles
Young, highly educated,
high household incomes and
investable assets
Highest advocacy and trust
View banks as relatively
undifferentiated compared with
alternative providers
Own the most products
Most active in opening and
closing accounts
Most likely to experience
problems requiring assistance,
with great returns if resolution is
highly satisfying
Value lnancial advice wheLher
in person, on the phone, over
video chat or via self-service
NoLe: AUM (asseLs under manaqemenL) is based on Lhe survey quesLion askinq cusLomers lor Lhe value ol Lheir LoLal lnancial asseLs, excludinq personal reLiremenL
accounL holdinqs and real esLaLe. Reler Lo Lhe Research meLhodoloqy secLion ol Lhis reporL lor inlormaLion reqardinq sLandardizaLion ol lnancial inlormaLion.
SeIf-Sufhcients
Older, less educated, more
limiLed lnancial means
Lower advocacy and trust,
but unlikely to open and close
accounts
Value convenience (online
bankinq leaLures, A1M/branch
access, ease ol doinq business)
and are least frequent users of
the branch
Preler doinq Lheir own research
and using self-service tools over
talking to an advisor
Balancers
More modest assets relative
to income
Do noL open or close accounLs
frequently
Comfortable with online channel
but value relationship aspects
offered by traditional banks
Value fee transparency and
assistance with problem
resolution
Safety Seekers
Younger, less educated, limited
cash low and savinqs
Likely to trust and advocate
for their provider, but have
relatively small portfolios
Value keeping personal and
lnancial inlormaLion sale, and
fee transparency
Strong preference for using
the branch for most banking
services
New World Adopters
Younger, highly educated,
relatively modest household
incomes wiLh siqnilcanL savinqs
relative to income
Heavy users of technology
High advocacy and trust in
PFSP, buL second mosL acLive in
opening and closing accounts
Receptive to options, including
a broader range of channels and
new market entrants offering
new ways of doing business
View banks as relatively
undifferentiated compared with
alternative providers
Getting to know your customer segments
Unhappy and
Unmovings
5elI5uIhcients
Balancers
Safety
Seekers
Elites
Traditionalists
New World
Adopters
Upwardly Mobiles
Fiqure 2^. Eight global segments
Customer engagement
(willingness to pay more Ior key benehts)
Large
Small
B
a
n
k
s

c
o
m
p
e
t
i
t
i
v
e

d
i
f
f
e
r
e
n
t
i
a
t
i
o
n

v
s
.

a
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
s
Low High
Assets under management of total population
Relative population
10%19% 20% or more 1%9%
Fiqure 25. Customer segments by geography
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 507 60% 707 807 90%
100%
Upwardly Mobiles Elites New World Adopters Balancers
Traditionalists SellSullcienLs Unhappy and Unmovinqs
Safety Seekers
Global
South Korea
Singapore
Turkey
Colombia
Indonesia
Kenya
Vietnam
Mexico
Russia
Nigeria
Japan
Malaysia
Brazil
Egypt
Chile
Argentina
Saudi Arabia
South Africa
Switzerland
Germany
PorLuqal
Ukraine
Australia
Austria
Poland
UniLed Kinqdom
France
Spain
Italy
Denmark
Ireland
Czech Republic
Netherlands
Sweden
Norway
Finland
Belgium
Canada
UniLed SLaLes
Luxembourg
Honq Konq (SAR)
India
China
Each country has a unique representation across
segments and shares commonalities with other
counLries wiLhin and ouLside ol iLs qeoqraphic reqion.
lL is inluenced by a ranqe ol exLernal lacLors, includinq
economic/poliLical/bankinq indusLry sLabiliLy, culLural
norms, newer Lechnoloqies, income and alluence. 1his
opens the door to new levels of insights and inspiration
to explore strategies and results in countries that share
similar cusLomer characLerisLics.
The diagram below groups countries based on similarities in
seqmenLs, reqardless ol qeoqraphic proximiLy (Fiqure 25).
SeqmenLs comprisinq aL leasL onellLh ol Lhe populaLion
are generally highlighted to show which customer types are
mosL dominanL and inluenced Lhe qroupinqs.
The segments were developed based on factors including
product holdings, channel preference, attitudes, reasons
lor LrusL, income and asseLs. AddiLional variaLions across
segments are clearly observed in their demographic
prolles, elemenLs which can be used in LarqeLinq and
idenLilyinq each one. We've provided some ol Lhe
characteristics that differentiate the eight segments so
LhaL lnancial insLiLuLions can beqin Lo develop comparable
insiqhLs lor Lheir own cusLomer base (Fiqure 26). While
age skews younger for some and older for others,
education the percentage graduating from college or
university shows a clear progression from segments that
are leasL well oll Lo Lhose LhaL are mosL well oll lnancially.
Upwardly
Mobiles Elites
New World
Adopters Balancers
Safety
Seekers Traditionalists
Self-
Sufficients
Unhappy and
Unmovings Total
% Population 6% 11% 12% 10% 22% 157 14% 10% 100%
Gender
Male 597 577 537 537 517 ^87 49% 537 52%
Female 41% 43% ^77 ^77 49% 527 517 ^77 48%
Ae (in years)
183^ 43% 26% 44% 277 41% 39% 32% 33% 36%
35^9 377 31% 29% 357 24% 257 26% 277 28%
50 or older 20% 43% 277 387 357 36% 42% 40% 36%
Education
College graduate 807 707 757 597 537 537 517 ^77 59%
Household income*
Median S^8,571 S^6,667 S29,58^ $41,429 S18,667 S16,358 $29,922 S25,000 $28,090
Assets*
Median S250,000 $122,393 S93,750 S^6,875 S31,875 S31,875 S28,68^ S30,98^ $46,875
% Assets under
management
257 21% 187 77 11% 77 6% 57 100%
Fiqure 26. Segment characteristics
`Reler Lo Lhe Research meLhodoloqy secLion ol Lhis reporL lor inlormaLion reqardinq sLandardizaLion ol lnancial inlormaLion.
Chanqes in conldence in Lhe indusLry olLen mirror
leelinqs Loward one's PFSP. 1his is readily apparenL in
Lhe Upwardly Mobile and New World AdopLer seqmenLs,
which have the highest levels of trust and advocacy,
and in Lhe Unhappy and Unmovinq seqmenL, which
has Lhe lowesL (Fiqure 28).
Upwardly Mobiles' sLronq advocacy resulLs, in parL, lrom
the exposure to different institutions and the frequent
surveillance of the competitive landscape that comes
wiLh Lheir larqe porLlolio ol producLs. Likewise, LliLes and
New World AdopLers also have relaLively larqe porLlolios.
These three segments were most likely to open and close
accounts in the prior year, activity that allows them to
evaluate the status of their primary provider in light of
competitive offerings and consciously select the one best
suiLed Lo Lheir needs.
Across all segments, the principal products likely to
be held with primary providers are the core accounts,
including transactional accounts, notably deposit
producLs (checkinq/currenL, savinqs accounLs) and online
While conldence in Lhe bankinq indusLry has increased
globally over the past 12 months, this is not true for all
seqmenLs (Fiqure 27). Upwardly Mobiles and New World
AdopLers exhibiLed Lhe qreaLesL increase in conldence,
aL 6^7 and ^77, respecLively. ln conLrasL, Lhe Unhappy
and Unmovinq seqmenL had Lhe larqesL decrease in
conldence aL 387. 1he oLher seqmenLs had varyinq
deqrees ol neL posiLive or neqaLive chanqe in conldence,
and in each case, approximately half of the customer
base reporLed no chanqe in conldence level.
Global
Upwardly Mobiles
Elites
New World Adopters
Balancers
Safety Seekers
Traditionalists
SellSullcienLs
Unhappy and Unmovinqs
Increased Remained the same Decreased
0% 20% 40% 60% 807 100%
Fiqure 27. Hcw has ycur ccnhdence tcward the bankin industry chaned in the past 12 mcnths?
60%
507
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Upwardly
Mobiles
Elites New World
Adopters
Balancers Safety
Seekers
Traditionalists Self-
SullcienLs
Unhappy and
Unmovinqs
Global
PercenL wiLh compleLe LrusL in PFSP PercenL very likely Lo recommend PFSP
Number ol lnancial producLs owned (averaqe)
Fiqure 28. Trust, advocacy and product ownership
Industry and institutional sentiments
bankinq/bill paymenL. Dillerences ol noLe include Lhe
relaLive absence ol checkinq/currenL accounLs amonq
New World Adopters, who have an above-average
number of products including high ownership levels in
savings accounts and online banking, and Traditionalists,
who have Lhe lowesL level ol online bankinq/bill paymenL
and credit cards but often hold reloadable prepaid cards
and almosL always have a savinqs accounL (Fiqure 29).
Upwardly Mobiles, wiLh Lhe hiqhesL number ol producLs
on average, are generally least likely to hold them at
Lheir PFSP. For example, while 8879^7 have savinqs,
online bankinq/bill paymenL and crediL card producLs,
Lhese are held aL Lheir PFSP only 6^7727 ol Lhe Lime.
SellSullcienLs are mosL likely Lo hold Lhese accounLs aL
Lheir PFSP (707917 ol Lhe Lime) and even more so lor
Lhose who have checkinq (or currenL) accounLs (957).
SaLislacLion wiLh Lhese core accounLs held aL one's PFSP
tends to be highest, most notably for online products
bankinq and bill paymenL as well as mobile paymenLs.
This is fairly consistent across segments, perhaps
because the customers have deliberately chosen to hold
Lhese producLs aL Lheir PFSP, wiLh Lhe excepLion ol Lhe
Unhappy and Unmovinq cusLomers who are less saLisled
wiLh Lheir accounLs across Lhe board.
Upwardly
Mobiles Elites
New World
Adopters Balancers
Safety
Self-
Sufficients
Unhappy and
Unmovings Total Satisfaction*
Savings account 94% 867 96% 8^7 727 827 657 517 787 37%
Online banking 92% 957 90% 977 ^77 14% 977 567 69% 47%
Credit card 887 877 727 807 43% 34% 577 ^77 597 36%
Online bill payment 897 877 737 787 31% 13% 757 32% 5^7 47%
Checkinq/
current account
69% 877 9% 757 ^57 22% 687 657 527 39%
Life insurance policy 877 687 66% 69% 23% 29% 22% 257 43% 28%
Investment
account
807 757 5^7 26% 157 177 12% 157 32% 30%
Personal reLiremenL
account
69% 61% 29% ^57 177 19% 14% 177 29% 33%
Personal loan 737 30% 30% 36% 21% 22% 20% 21% 287 33%
Mobile payments 877 39% 61% 13% 13% 14% 11% 9% 26% 40%
Reloadable
pre-paid cards
727 36% 42% 10% 16% 277 20% 177 277 33%
Mortgage 527 257 11% 46% 77 77 10% 157 177 28%
Car loan 677 187 14% 30% 77 77 77 9% 157 32%
Savings with
precious metals
and jewels
517 20% 21% 10% 9% 87 57 6% 13% 33%
Home equiLy loan/
line of credit
577 9% 9% 14% 3% 57 1% 4% 9% 36%
Loans against
precious metals
and jewels
26% 3% 4% 2% 2% 2% 1% 2% 4% 31%
ProducLs owned
(mean)
11.5 8.2 6.8 7.1 3.7 3.2 4.8 3.9 5.5
Average product
satisfaction
39% 39% 38% 35% 42% 35% 40% 20% 37%
`7 reporLinq Lhey are very saLislied wiLh Lhe producL il held aL Lheir PFSP
Fiqure 29. Product ownership and satisfaction
RemoLe bankinq is no lonqer remoLe. lL is aL Lhe lronL and
cenLer ol everyday bankinq, wiLh ^87 ol all cusLomers on
averaqe usinq eiLher Lhe A1M, online/inLerneL or mobile
channels aL leasL weekly, and up Lo 757 lor cerLain
seqmenLs (Fiqure 30).
The convenience of these channels and the high adoption
levels would noL be possible wiLhouL a siqnilcanL
emphasis on securiLy. 1his appears Lo be a cosL ol
entry across all segments, as evidenced by keeps your
personal inlormaLion sale" and "proLecLs your lnancial
inlormaLion" beinq in Lhe Lop lve mosL imporLanL benelLs
lor all seqmenLs and Lhe Lop Lwo overall (Fiqure 31).
Satisfaction was:
HiqhesL lor Upwardly Mobiles and LliLes who also
reporLed Lhe hiqhesL levels ol online/inLerneL usaqe.
LowesL lor Lhe Unhappy and Unmovinq seqmenL,
who have Lhe secondlowesL usaqe ol online/inLerneL
and use Lhe A1M more lrequenLly. Reasons lor low
usage of remote channels worth exploring could
include security concerns, lack of familiarity with the
protections available, lack of access in their markets
or acLual experience.
Beyond the security that makes this type of banking
possible, simplicity in the form of accessible branches
and ATMs and an excellent online banking experience are
also amonq Lhe Lop lve benelLs overall.
Transparency around fees and how to avoid paying
them also represents a point of common concern across
segments, with virtually all segments expressing lower
levels ol saLislacLion wiLh Lhis hiqhly imporLanL leaLure.
This is indicative of segments wanting their banks to save
them money and is reinforced by dissatisfaction with
lowcosL bankinq opLions. 1he Unhappy and Unmovinq
segment again expressed the lowest satisfaction of the
seqmenLs. Balancers had Lhe secondlowesL saLislacLion
ratings on this feature, which for them and them alone is
Lhe mosL imporLanL benelL and Lhus a hiqh prioriLy qap
Lo lll.
Fiqure 30. ChanneI use (at Ieast weekIy)
Upwardly
Mobiles Elites
New World
Adopters Balancers
Safety
Self-
Sufficients
Unhappy and
Unmovings Total
Branch or office 46% 23% 277 187 277 26% 11% 187 24%
Call center 34% 10% 177 77 12% 11% 57 11% 12%
ATM 767 61% 63% 557 57% 57% 507 50% 58%
Online/inLerneL 79% 79% 67% 76% ^57 277 71% ^57 57%
Mobile 69% 34% ^87 24% 26% 23% 20% 177 30%
Remote channel
average*
75% 58% 59% 52% 43% 36% 47% 37% 48%
`A1M, online/inLerneL, mobile
Opportunity 1: Make banking
simple and clear
investments
Fiqure 31. Beneht impcrtance and satisfacticn with PFSP
(Benehts shaded are the tcp hve mcst frequentIy seIected by each sement)
Upwardly
Mobiles Elites
New World
Adopters Balancers
Safety
Self-
Sufficients
Unhappy and
Unmovings Total
Keeps your personal
information safe
44% 40% 36% 33% 40% 377 377 19% 36%
ProLecLs your linancial
information
^87 42% 43% 357 387 357 377 157 37%
Provides easy access Lo
branches and ATMs
507 46% 507 42% 49% ^57 44% 257 44%
Is transparent about what
they charge for and makes
it clear to you how to avoid
paying fees
36% 26% 287 23% 287 24% 257 87 25%
Offers excellent online
banking features
49% ^87 ^57 44% 44% 377 507 24% 45%
Has an excellent reputation ^57 ^87 42% 41% ^57 41% 42% 20% 42%
Reaches out to you as soon
as possible if they believe a
problem may exist with your
account
377 36% 32% 29% 34% 277 30% 12% 30%
Offers low-cost banking
options
34% 257 277 24% 277 24% 29% 13% 26%
Works with you when you
need help or encounter
a problem
32% 36% 31% 31% 357 31% 33% 12% 31%
Handles your requests
quickly
357 357 34% 29% 377 33% 387 157 33%
Makes it easy to conduct your
most frequent transactions
377 41% 357 39% 40% 31% 377 20% 35%
Legend:
Color represents frequency
ol selecLion as Lop lve mosL
imporLanL benelLs
7 relecLs "very saLisled" wiLh
benelL as provided by PFSP
Selection frequency is repeated
in certain segments in the event
of equal percentages
SelecLed as one ol Lop lve imporLanL benelLs mosL lrequenLly
Selected as one of top lve imporLanL benelLs Lhird mosL lrequenLly
SelecLed as one ol Lop lve imporLanL benelLs llLh mosL lrequenLly
Selected as one of top lve imporLanL benelLs second mosL lrequenLly
SelecLed as one ol Lop lve imporLanL benelLs lourLh mosL lrequenLly
CusLomers who are "very saLisled" wiLh Lhis benelL as provided by Lheir PFSP %
Scratching below the surface, it becomes clear that
segments place different emphasis on the other elements
LhaL conLribuLe Lo simpliciLy and clariLy. 1radiLionalisLs
and SellSullcienLs are mosL unique in Lhis reqard:
Traditionalists use the ATM most frequently and prefer
to use the branch for all transaction types surveyed,
with the sole exception of using ATMs for balance
inquiries (Fiqure 32). 1hey were Lhe only seqmenL Lo
select handles your requests quickly as one of the top
lve mosL imporLanL benelLs (Fiqure 31).
SellSullcienLs qo online mosL lrequenLly and preler
this channel for many transaction types, although
Lhey use a mix ol channels (Fiqure 32). 1hey selecLed
makes it easy to conduct your most frequent
LransacLions" as one ol Lheir Lop lve benelLs, wiLh
excellent online banking features as their number
one choice (Fiqure 31).
Both of these segments value access to branches
and A1Ms. While noL in Lheir Lop lve benelLs,
accessing banking at places other than banks, such
as supermarkeLs and posL ollces, was noLably more
appealinq Lo Lhese seqmenLs. lnLeresLinqly, Lhey boLh
rated fee transparency lower in importance than other
segments did, perhaps indicating a relative comfort in
understanding their accounts and with getting access to
Lhe people and inlormaLion Lhey need.
1he nexL Lier ol benelLs alLer Lhe Lop lve ollers addiLional
insiqhLs Lo benelLs which, when qrouped LoqeLher,
can oller a compellinq value proposiLion. For example,
Balancers and SaleLy Seekers boLh place siqnilcanL value
on a personal contact that knows them and an institution
that recommends accounts, products and services they
really need, cusLomizes Lhem accordinqly and lnds ways
Lo save Lhem money. Civen LhaL Lhese seqmenLs also
prefer obtaining advice in person, and from one person on
a broad ranqe ol accounLs and services (Fiqures 3^ and
35) posiLioninq branchbased employees Lo build Lhese
relationships and personalize the experience would be
perceived very lavorably.
When asked whaL channels are prelerred lor specilc
transaction types, the call center emerged for problem
sLaLus and reporLinq lor lour seqmenLs (Fiqure 32), Lhree
of which have above-average product holdings, income
and assets, as well as the highest levels of problems
requirinq resoluLion. 1his prelerence lor call cenLers is
likely due to the need for more immediate assistance
assuminq LhaL Lhe lnancial impacL may be qreaLer
as well as lamiliariLy, since some ol Lhem (aL leasL Lhe
Upwardly Mobiles and Lhe New World AdopLers) use call
cenLers more olLen Lhan Lhe oLher seqmenLs do.
Fiqure 32. Preferred channel by task across segments
Upwardly
Mobiles Elites
New World
Adopters Balancers
Safety
Self-
Sufhcients
Unhappy and
Unmovings
DeposiLs Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch
Sales Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch
Pay bills/
transfers
Online Online Online Online Online Branch Online Online
Buy/sell
investments
Online/
branch
Online
Online/
branch
Online/
branch
Branch Branch Online Branch
Problem sLaLus/
reporting
Call center
Branch/
call center
Call center Branch Branch Branch
Branch/
call center
Branch
Balance inquiries Online Online Online Online Online ATM Online Online
Administrative Online Online Online Online Branch Branch Online Online
Advice Branch Branch
Branch/
call center
Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch
Opportunity 1
While each segment has a distinct set of behaviors,
needs and preferences, understanding opportunities
Lo lurLher enqaqe seqmenLs reveals siqnilcanL
commonaliLies across seqmenLs.
Across all eight segments, customers share a universal
willinqness Lo enqaqe wiLh PFSPs LhaL are willinq Lo
invesL in Lheir lnancial healLh, meaninq LhaL cusLomers
would be willing to add more accounts and services,
increase their deposit or investment balances, or in some
cases pay a liLLle more. ln parLicular, cusLomers lrom all
eiqhL seqmenLs ranked Lhe lollowinq Lwo benelLs amonq
Lhe Lop Lhree benelLs lor which Lhey would increase
Lheir enqaqemenL wiLh Lheir PFSP:
lnvesLs in cusLomers' lnancial well beinq
Finds ways to improve how customers
conduct business
Most segments also ranked providing a plan to help you
reach your lnancial qoals" amonq Lhe Lop Lhree. 1he
excepLions Lo Lhis paLLern are Upwardly Mobiles, who
would increase enqaqemenL wiLh access Lo lnancial
experts, and Traditionalists, for whom being rewarded
for being a loyal customer represents an important
enqaqemenL opporLuniLy (Fiqure 33).
Fiqure 33. Benehts presentin reatest enaement cppcrtunities, such that custcmers wcuId be wiIIin tc add
accounts and services, increase balances or pay a little more
Upwardly
Mobiles Elites
New World
Adopters Balancers
Safety
Self-
Sufhcients
Unhappy and
Unmovings Total
lnvesLs in your lnancial
well being
92% 757 857 61% 737 7^7 5^7 567 73%
Provides a plan Lo help
you reach your lnancial
goals
827 767 8^7 62% 737 737 687 577 72%
Always lnds new ways Lo
improve how you conduct
your business
887 727 837 60% 707 787 587 567 71%
Rewards you for being a
loyal customer
837 69% 777 597 657 7^7 527 49% 65%
Provides access Lo
lnancial experLs
897 60% 817 537 64% 62% 42% 507 63%
Average engagement
fcr 31 benehts
82% 55% 74% 47% 60% 59% 37% 43% 56%
Legend:
PercenLaqe relecLs Lhose cusLomers who would be willinq Lo increase
enqaqemenL il Lheir PFSP ollered a much beLLer experience. CusLomers
were asked Lo evaluaLe Lhe Lop lve benelLs Lhey had selecLed.
1he Lop Lhree benelLs lor each seqmenL are shaded as indicaLed below:
8071007 are willinq Lo increase Lheir enqaqemenL
Opportunity 2: Help customers
make hnanciaI decisicns
investments
These results clearly indicate that customers across
all levels of sophistication and standing are seeking
opporLuniLies lor Lheir PFSP Lo exLend beyond Lhe
delivery of convenience, expanding the experience,
leveraging data and providing advice in a way that
improves cusLomers' lnancial healLh.
While Lhere is a seL ol common benelLs LhaL would
increase engagement across customer segments, the
degree of opportunity varies, as does the means to
deliver Lhem. 1he mosL popular channel lor receivinq
advice is in person, but many segments are open to other
approaches, some of which may be more cost effective
Lo deliver (Fiqures 3^, 35).
Fiqure 3^. What type of advice would you most like from your primary provider?
Fiqure 35. Hcw interested (very cr extremeIy) wcuId ycu be in cbtainin hnanciaI advice cr assistance
in the following ways?
Upwardly
Mobiles Elites
New World
Adopters Balancers
Safety
Self-
Sufhcients
Unhappy and
Unmovings Total
Advice from one person on
a broad range of accounts
and services
36% 287 32% 32% 33% 30% 257 26% 30%
Advice from specialists
for particular account or
service
41% 30% 30% 287 26% 257 19% 23% 27%
Preler Lo do my own
research and then get advice
based on my questions
177 30% 26% 287 257 277 377 26% 27%
Preler Lo qeL advice lrom
different information sources
4% 87 87 6% 87 87 87 9% 8%
Not sure 2% 4% 4% 6% 87 10% 11% 16% 8%
Upwardly
Mobiles Elites
New World
Adopters Balancers
Safety
Self-
Sufhcients
Unhappy and
Unmovings Total
In person 767 63% 61% 597 677 64% 49% 557 61%
By telephone with someone
I know at a branch whom
I can call during their
working hours
727 527 557 ^87 527 49% 377 42% 50%
By usinq online lnancial
management tools to make
decisions around spending,
investments and loans
757 557 62% ^57 ^87 ^57 40% 357 49%
By telephone with someone
in a call center whom I can
call any day, any time
707 ^87 60% 40% 527 527 33% 36% 48%
By video chat from
home or work
61% 31% 42% 257 32% 31% 187 24% 31%
Opportunity 2
The likelihood of needing problem resolution support
varies subsLanLially across seqmenLs. SeqmenLs wiLh
broader producL porLlolios, parLicularly Upwardly
Mobiles and New World Adopters, are more likely to
require assisLance. A ma|oriLy ol Upwardly Mobiles (5^7)
required problem resoluLion supporL in Lhe pasL year.
Even the segment with the lowest needs, Traditionalists,
still required assistance for more than one in four of its
cusLomers (Fiqure 36).
Fiqure 36. Problem resolution incidence and satisfaction
Problem resoluLion incidence in pasL 12 monLhs 7 very saLisled wiLh resoluLion
60%
507
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
40%
20%
0%
Upwardly
Mobiles
Elites Global New World
Adopters
Balancers Safety
Seekers
SullcienLs
Unhappy and
Unmovinqs
As previously reported, satisfaction with problem
resolution varies by the type of problem experienced,
with notably higher satisfaction for lost or stolen cards
and dispuLes Lhan lor oLher issues. WiLhin each problem
Lype, Lhouqh, Lhe seqmenLs are lairly consisLenL. 1he
mosL siqnilcanL deparLure lrom Lhe oLher seqmenLs'
percepLions comes lrom Lhe Unhappy and Unmovinq
seqmenL. 1hese cusLomers reporLed siqnilcanLly lower
saLislacLion Lhan averaqe lor all problem Lypes (Fiqure
36). 1heir hiqhesL, "very saLisled," raLinq was awarded
to card issues, but even that was only 13% compared
wiLh Lhe averaqe lor all seqmenLs ol 3^7. Only 77 were
very saLisled wiLh Lhe resoluLion ol problems relaLed Lo
fees and to denials, well below the global averages of
207 and 187, respecLively.
Segments are also fairly consistent in the types of
issues Lhey experience mosL lrequenLly: a) inLerneL/
mobile bankinq and online bill paymenL issues, and b)
losL or sLolen cards, dispuLed charqes and idenLiLy LhelL.
Together, these top two categories comprise 34%42%
of all problems, followed by fee-related problems, which
comprise 137167 ol all problems lor mosL seqmenLs.
Exceptions to these patterns include:
New World Adopters, for whom 49% of issues are in
those top two categories, due to the high number of
inLerneL/mobile bankinq issues
Unhappy and Unmovinqs, who reporL only 327 ol Lheir
issues in the top two categories, as fee-related issues
are their most common concern 20% of the time, which
surpasses each of the other segments
WhaL is also common across seqmenLs is Lhe PFSPs'
power to create positive outcomes for themselves based
on Lhe problem resoluLion experiences Lhey provide.
Across seqmenLs, cusLomers who are very saLisled wiLh
their problem resolution experiences have much higher
levels ol advocacy Lhan Lhose who were only saLisled.
The advocacy levels are effectively the same for those
who are only saLisled as Lhey are lor people who had
noL experienced a problem. 1his holds Lrue even lor
Unhappy and Unmovinqs, Lhe mosL criLical ol Lhe
seqmenLs (Fiqure 37).
P
r
o
b
l
e
m

r
e
s
o
l
u
L
i
o
n

i
n
c
i
d
e
n
c
e
S
a
t
i
s
f
a
c
t
i
o
n
Opportunity 3: When problems arise,
become the customers advocate
investments
Opportunity 3
Very saLisled SaLisled Less Lhan saLisled No problem experienced
Fiqure 37. Advocacy based on problem resolution satisfaction
100%
807
60%
40%
20%
0%
Upwardly
Mobiles
Global Elites New World
Adopters
Balancers Safety
Seekers
SullcienLs
Unhappy and
Unmovinqs
However, Lhe associaLed business impacL, delned as
wheLher cusLomers qave Lheir PFSP more or all ol Lheir
business as a result of the resolution experience, varies
more by seqmenL (Fiqure 38). While all reporLed an
increase in business based on a positive experience,
more so il Lhey were very saLisled, Lhe deqree ol Lhe
increase varied depending mostly on the size of the
cusLomer's producL porLlolio. 1hose who hold producLs
elsewhere or have broader lnancial needs have a qreaLer
opportunity to move business from one institution to
anoLher.
The value of the consistency across segments and the
business opportunity is that many improvements in
the problem resolution experience can be designed
and implemenLed once lor Lhe benelL ol all cusLomers.
Clearly communicating on a website how to report a
problem and equipping sales and service professionals
with tools to capture information required for resolution,
as well as improving processes to prevent problems
altogether, are examples of strategies that typically bear
no incremental costs whether deployed for one or for all
seqmenLs.
Segment preferences or opportunities can then be
used to develop targeted strategies, such as fee waiver
policies or additional outreach to ensure the problem
has been lully resolved Lo Lhe cusLomer's saLislacLion.
The business case is typically compelling, since the
opportunity for increased business and revenue growth
is usually complemented by a reduction in operating
cosLs relaLed Lo more ellcienL resoluLion and lollowup
processes, more effective customer communications,
and redesigned operational processes that generate
lewer problems in Lhe lrsL place.
Upwardly
Mobiles
Global Elites New World
Adopters
Balancers Safety
Seekers
SullcienLs
Unhappy and
Unmovinqs
100%
807
60%
40%
20%
0%
Very saLisled SaLisled Less Lhan saLisled
Fiqure 38. Positive impact on business based on problem resolution satisfaction
Why banks
need to
act now
Customers are actively exploring and
pursuing their options
Exposure to products and services through their daily routines and
interactions helps customers create informed opinions and with these
opinions comes Lhe possibiliLy ol lrequenL producL movemenL.
Interest in exploring competitor offerings is perhaps
encouraged by the experience offered by other
indusLries, e.q., consumer producL companies
where mobile capabilities and interactions are more
advanced. Over hall ol cusLomers have opened or
closed at least one product in the past year and
nearly as many, 40%, plan to do so in the coming
year (Fiqure 39). NoL surprisinqly, cusLomers wiLh
more producLs reporL more acLiviLy. Upwardly
Mobiles stand alone in their level of product
movemenL, wiLh 717 openinq and 227 closinq
accounLs in Lhe pasL year. While 557 ol Lhem
Fiqure 39. Percentage of customers who opened and closed accounts and services in the past year
or intend to do so in the the coming year
T
o
t
a
l

o
p
e
n
e
d

o
r

c
l
o
s
e
d

a
c
c
o
u
n
L
/
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
T
o
t
a
l

i
n
t
e
n
d

t
o

o
p
e
n

o
r

c
l
o
s
e

a
c
c
o
u
n
L
/
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
O
p
e
n
e
d

a
L

P
F
S
P
l
n
L
e
n
d

L
o

o
p
e
n

a
L

P
F
S
P
C
l
o
s
e
d

a
L

P
F
S
P
l
n
L
e
n
d

L
o

c
l
o
s
e

a
L

P
F
S
P
O
p
e
n
e
d

a
t

o
t
h
e
r

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
I
n
t
e
n
d

t
o

o
p
e
n

a
t

o
t
h
e
r

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
C
l
o
s
e
d

a
t

o
t
h
e
r

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
I
n
t
e
n
d

t
o

c
l
o
s
e

a
t

o
t
h
e
r

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
S
w
i
t
c
h
e
d

a
l
l

a
c
c
o
u
n
t
s

t
o

p
r
i
m
a
r
y

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
I
n
t
e
n
d

t
o

s
w
i
t
c
h

a
l
l

a
c
c
o
u
n
t
s

t
o

p
r
i
m
a
r
y

p
r
o
v
i
d
e
r
PasL 12 monLhs Next 12 months
52%
40%
7%
5%
7% 6%
35%
22%
18%
12%
46%*
31%*
13%* 10%*
2%
6%
`NeL ol cusLomers' acLiviLy aL PFSP, oLher provider, or boLh
opened new accounLs aL Lheir PFSP, 3^7 conducLed
new business with other providers, suggesting that
they continue to scan the marketplace for the best
providers. LliLes and New World AdopLers have
similar paLLerns.
At the other extreme, fewer than half of Self-
SullcienLs and Unhappy and Unmovinqs moved any
producLs over Lhe pasL year. 1his is noL surprisinq,
given their level of inertia and their belief that the
indusLry lacks dillerenLiaLion. While consolidaLion
is rare, these customers are more likely to open
accounLs wiLh Lheir PFSP, probably due Lo added
convenience.
When asked whether customers had accounts or
services with an institution before it became their
PFSP, only 357 ol cusLomers reporLed LhaL Lhis was
Lhe case (Fiqure ^0), suqqesLinq LhaL Lhey are very
open to exploring and establishing relationships with
new providers, and actively concluding that existing
providers are no longer suitable to be their primary
lnancial insLiLuLion.
Not sure
Fiqure ^0. Prior relationship with PFSP
59%
No
Yes relationship No relationship
59% 35%
6%
Banks have new, viable competitors
for prized offerings
Given the high levels of activity and openness to
change, it is important to understand which type of
insLiLuLion would besL be able Lo deliver Lhe Lop lve
benelLs idenLiled by each cusLomer. 1he compeLiLive
landscape is no longer limited to traditional banks
buL now includes new Lypes ol bankinq and lnancial
manaqemenL providers.
The results show that traditional banks are seen as
besL able Lo deliver on many benelLs buL have only
a small advantage on some that offer the greatest
capacity for increased customer engagement
(Fiqure ^1). Many ol Lhe benelLs lor which banks
aren'L siqnilcanLly dillerenLiaLed can be LhouqhL
ol as ways Lo improve Lhe cusLomer's lnancial
health and to personalize the experience, some of
which can be delivered via technology and effective
daLa analyLics, e.q., pushinq realLime soluLions
Lo cusLomers aL relevanL poinLs ol inLeracLion.
They represent the highest area of vulnerability,
signaling the importance of investing in the key
enqaqemenL drivers.
In addition, online banking has become a major
local poinL lor whaL delnes a PFSP, alonq wiLh
oLher lrequenLLransacLion producLs. Civen
the small competitive advantage banks have
over providers for online and mobile banking,
one should take seriously the threat of another
provider dominating these offerings, personalizing
the experience and then becoming a customers
primary provider.
Figure 41. Type of organization best able to meet customers needs,
ranked by banks competitive advantage
11% 8% 20% 61%
41%
Provides a personal conLacL who knows you
11% 7% 22% 60%
38%
Provides easy access Lo branches and A1Ms
11% 14% 20% 55%
35%
Has an excellent reputation
14% 11% 21% 54%
33%
Knows your accounLs/services and pasL LransacLions
14% 12% 21% 53%
32%
Works with you when you need help, have a problem
16% 13% 21% 50%
29%
Keeps your personal information safe
13% 14% 22% 51%
29%
Knows previous contacts and interactions
14% 12% 23% 51%
28%
ProLecLs your lnancial inlormaLion
#6
11% 13% 26% 50%
24%
Provides access Lo lnancial experLs
13% 16% 24% 47%
23%
Handles your requests quickly
13% 16% 24% 47%
23%
Communicates important information clearly
13% 14% 26% 47%
21%
Provides excellenL cusLomer service aL call cenLer
14% 17% 24% 45%
21%
Reaches out to you if problem may exist
20% 15% 22% 43%
#9 21% Respects your cultural or religious requirements
12% 12% 28% 48%
#10 20%
Recommends products and services that you really need
14% 12% 27% 47%
#8 20%
Takes overall relationship into account when quoting fees, rates
12% 18% 25% 45%
20%
Makes it easy to conduct most frequent transactions
12% 14% 28% 46%
18%
Provides bankinq access aL places oLher Lhan banks
15% 14% 26% 45%
19%
Is transparent about charges; clear on how to avoid paying fees
14% 14% 28% 44%
16%
Offers low-cost banking options
16% 14% 27% 43%
16%
Allows you to choose from pricing options
17% 14% 27% 42%
#4 15%
Rewards you for being a loyal customer
13% 14% 29% 44%
#7 15%
Customizes products and services
13% 13% 30% 44%
#1 14%
lnvesLs in your lnancial well beinq
16% 14% 28% 42%
#5 14%
Finds ways to save you money
12% 19% 28% 41%
13%
Able to get help at any time
10% 18% 30% 42%
12%
Offers excellent online banking features
10% 13% 32% 45%
#2 13%
Provides a plan Lo help reach lnancial qoals
13% 18% 30% 39%
9%
Alerts you to products, services, promotions
12% 24% 28% 36%
8%
Has excellent mobile banking features
10% 19% 33% 38%
#3 5%
Finds new ways to improve how you conduct your business
Competitive
advantage
Engagement
drivers*
Other** New Lype ol bank LhaL ollers dillerenL Lechnoloqy/services Lhan LradiLional banks
`Willinqness Lo increase deposiL/invesLmenLs, add more accounLs/services or pay a liLLle more il PFSP ollers a much beLLer experience. (See paqe 15.)
``1echnoloqy company like Cooqle or Paypal, or mobile Lelephone service
Traditional bank All the same
Benehts
Segments view the competitors differently
Equally provocative is that the competitive gap is
substantially smaller for some of the most desirable
customer segments, suggesting that defections
to competitive types of institutions could be
disproporLionaLely led by more prolLable cusLomers
(Fiqure ^2). Upwardly Mobiles and New World AdopLers
are clearly among the most prone to defection, as both
view Lhe Lwo Lypes ol insLiLuLions almosL idenLically.
Dillerences in perspecLives by seqmenL are shown in
Lhe Lable below lor selecLed benelLs; Lhe lower Lhe bar,
the less differentiation banks have with respect to the
compeLiLion (Fiqure ^3). Usinq Lhese resulLs wiLh oLher
survey data can be powerful in developing targeted
sLraLeqies. For example, LliLes qenerally Lhink LradiLional
banks are differentiated, but the advantage is slight on
lndinq new ways Lo improve how cusLomers conducL
Lheir business. Civen Lheir lrequenL use ol remoLe
channels, continuing to enhance these capabilities
could be imporLanL Lo Lheir reLenLion. 1he same is Lrue
ol Upwardly Mobiles where Lhere is acLually a 137
delciL. ln Lhis case, innovaLive approaches LhaL increase
convenience for certain segments could pay off for all
segments and also be more cost effective for banks
Lo manaqe.
Fiqure ^3. Ccmpetitive aps fcr tcp hve enaement drivers
30%
20%
10%
0%
-10%
-20%
Safety Seekers
Total Balancers
SellSullcienLs
Elites
Upwardly Mobiles
Traditionalists Unhappy and Unmovinqs
New World Adopters
#1 Invests in your
lnancial well beinq
#2 Provides a plan
to help you reach
your lnancial qoals
#3 Always lnds new
ways to improve how you
conduct your business
#4 Rewards you for
being a loyal customer
#5 Finds ways Lo
save you money
Fiqure ^2. Competitive advantage of traditional banks vs. new type of bank
30%
257
20%
157
10%
57
0%
Upwardly
Mobiles
Elites Total New World
Adopters
Balancers Safety
Seekers
SullcienLs
Unhappy and
Unmovinqs
Top 10 engagement driver average 31benelL averaqe % Assets under management
Segment-based strategies are crucial to success in
emerqinq markeLs. BuL consumer dynamics in developinq
markeLs are specilc Lo each counLry and rapidly evolvinq.
That makes strategic planning hard, and banks operating
in Lhese markeLs require sLraLeqic lexibiliLy and rapid
chanqe capabiliLy in servicinq Lheir LarqeL seqmenLs. 1his
survey brings insight to this challenge by getting to know
cusLomer seqmenLs wiLh similar prolles and bankinq
behaviors. CeLLinq Lo know your cusLomer is criLical. Civen
customers very wide disparities in generational behavior,
wealLh/income and bankinq experience, decidinq "where
and how to play with ones investment capital is a tough
challenqe lor every reLail execuLive. Based on observed
segment behavior in emerging markets, we believe banks
operating in these markets need to invest in the following
capabiliLies in parLicular.
Advocacy ol alluenL cusLomers especially Upwardly
Mobiles, LliLes and New World AdopLers. AlluenL
customers in these segments provide the bulk of
asseLs under manaqemenL and revenues. Our resulLs
show that emerging markets have an especially
hiqh represenLaLion ol New World AdopLers. Banks
targeting these segments must work hard to sustain
and improve advocacy and crosssellinq Lo cusLomers.
Managing customer data and analytics, and delivering
its insights to target and serve customers better
across all channels, are ol key imporLance. As our
survey shows, excellence in digital distribution is
another means to improve advocacy, in emerging
markeLs even more so Lhan in developed markeLs.
Spotlight on
emerging markets
Innovation for mass market customers especially
Balancers, SaleLy Seekers and 1radiLionalisLs. Lmerqinq
markets have a high representation of Safety Seekers
and 1radiLionalisLs. Our survey hiqhliqhLs LhaL, overall,
customers in emerging markets value innovation
more Lhan Lhey do in developed markeLs. Findinq
the magic operating model to serve mass customers
prolLably is a key qoal ol consumer bankinq. From
our Emerging Markets Barometer, we know that there
are untapped opportunities for providing low-cost
retail banking products to the underbanked and mass
market segments, which require innovative product
developmenL and deep risk skills. Lspecially lor Lhe
younger customer generation, emerging market banks
are investing in the innovations to deliver low-cost, high-
Louch bankinq and reachinq cusLomers 2^/7 wiLhouL
exLensive branch neLworks. ln mosL emerqinq markeLs,
mobile technologies can make the biggest difference in
reachinq and inLeracLinq wiLh Lhese cusLomers prolLably.
Conclusion
Banks are poised for growth and well positioned to continue the
recenL momenLum in buildinq cusLomer conldence. Focusinq on Lhe
customer experience is paramount to establishing complete trust and,
in turn, creating customer advocates who will both refer business and
expand Lheir own relaLionships.
It will be essential to preserve the competitive advantages that banks have in delivering
Lhose benelLs which are lundamenLal Lo bankinq and hiqhly valued, includinq proLecLion
ol cusLomer inlormaLion and increasinq convenience across channels. BuL Lhe compeLiLive
landscape demands LhaL invesLmenLs be made in oLher benelLs, qenerally Lhose LhaL
will increase enqaqemenL Lhrouqh cusLomized advice and soluLions. Lach seqmenL
has different priorities, so developing targeted strategies requires careful attention to
experience benelLs, channel prelerences, prioriLies and behaviors.
WiLh Lhese parameLers in mind, insLiLuLions should zero in on Lhe Lhree areas idenLiled
through the customer input received and discussed throughout this report:
1. Make banking simple and clear through transparency of fees, simplicity of offers and
communication, and delivery of an omni-channel experience
2. Help cusLomers make Lhe riqhL lnancial decisions in a complex environmenL Lhrouqh
more and better advice and through greater use of data and digital channels to
empower customers
3. Work with customers when problems arise and become their advocate through
improved problem resolution capabilities
Customer and revenue growth Channel effectiveness Customer experience
Acquisition strategy
Customer retention and cross-sell
Customer segmentation
Customer analytics
DisLribuLion channel sLraLeqy
Salesforce effectiveness
Branch ellecLiveness/redesiqn
Contact center transformation
DiqiLal LranslormaLion
Social media
Customer experience design
Customer communications
Issue and complaints management
Advisory operating model
LY helps lnancial insLiLuLions develop and implemenL cusLomerlocused sLraLeqies and soluLions. We
bring an integrated perspective on many aspects of becoming a more customer-centric organization
and consisLenLly deliverinq Lhe desired cusLomer experience. Armed wiLh Lhis survey's insiqhLs and
a comprehensive understanding of your organizations needs, we can assist in developing a strategy
and road map Lo deliver resulLs based on cusLomer needs and orqanizaLional sLraLeqy. We would be
pleased to talk with you and your organization about our capabilities in the following areas:
Winning through customer experience 41
Research
methodology
LY surveyed 32,6^2 reLail bankinq cusLomers.
1o qualily, respondenLs had Lo own aL leasL one lnancial producL as delned in Lhe survey and have
access Lo Lhe inLerneL.
1he survey was LranslaLed inLo local lanquaqes and conducLed online in ^3 counLries.
1he survey insLrumenL was preLesLed in Brazil, China, lndia, Spain and Lhe UniLed SLaLes Lo ensure
the survey questions were understood and captured relevant aspects of customers banking
behaviors and experiences.
All lnancial quesLions relerenced each counLry's local currency and were sLandardized inLo US dollars
based upon the purchasing power parity conversion factor as reported by The World Bank for 2011
for all countries except Argentina, for which data was not available; the Big Mac index for July 2013,
as developed and reporLed by 1he LconomisL, was used as an alLernaLive lor ArqenLina.
1he LarqeL quoLas were esLablished based on aqe and qender in each counLry.
All daLa was weiqhLed Lo relecL each counLry's populaLion based on aqe and qender, as well as each
counLry's qlobal represenLaLion. LxcepLions included Lhe counLries ol LqypL, Kenya and Saudi Arabia
where prevalence of male decision makers in the household resulted in the data being weighted by
aqe only. LsLimaLes used in weiqhLinq were drawn lrom 1he World Bank's lnLernaLional Comparison
Proqram daLabase, which provides demoqraphic indicaLors lor counLries and areas ol Lhe world wiLh
a populaLion ol 5,000 or more.
1he averaqe inLerview lenqLh was 16 minuLes.
1he daLa was collecLed lrom 25 July Lo 7 OcLober 2013.
North America Western Europe Eastern Europe Asia-Pacific
Canada
United States
503
1,516
Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Norway
Portugal
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
406
406
127
128
793
808
410
764
124
402
128
400
533
128
400
767
Czech Republic
Poland
Russia
Turkey*
Ukraine
415
508
1,806
872
507
Australia
China
Hong Kong
Indonesia*
Japan
Malaysia*
Singapore
South Korea
Vietnam*
414
2,776
472
1,504
1,503
504
405
514
776
Latin America
Argentina
Brazil
Chile*
Columbia*
Mexico*
502
1,684
400
518
1,875
Middle East
Egypt*
Saudi Arabia
753
500
Africa India
Kenya*
Nigeria*
South Africa*
502
1,500
512
India 2,177
Numbers represent the respondents per country
*Emerging markets
(SAR)
Country
contacts
Argentina
Juan CarIcs Aquique
1el: +5^ 11 ^875 ^820
Lmail: |uan.aquiquear.ey.com
Australia
James Saretta
1el: +61 3 9655 2686
Lmail: |ames.sareLLaau.ey.com
Austria
Gunther Reimoser
1el: +^3 1 21170 1032
Lmail: qunLher.reimoseraL.ey.com
Belgium
Philippe Desombere
1el: +32 2 77^ 95 01
Lmail: philippe.desombere
be.ey.com
Brazil
Rafael Schur
1el: +55 11 2573 3299
Lmail: ralael.schurbr.ey.com
Canada
Paul Battista
1el: +1 ^16 9^3 3820
Lmail: paul.a.baLLisLaca.ey.com
Chile
Ariel Koch
1el: +56 2 2676 1^^8
Lmail: ariel.kochcl.ey.com
China (MainIand)
Dong Xiang Bo
1el: +86 10 5815 2289
Lmail: xianqbo.donqcn.ey.com
Colombia
Edgar Sanchez
1el: + 57 1 ^8^ 7250
Lmail: edqar.sanchezco.ey.com
Czech Republic
Pavel Riegger
1el: +^20 225 335 11^
Lmail: pavel.rieqqercz.ey.com
Denmark
Henrik Axelsen
1el: +^5 5158 2663
Lmail: henrik.axelsendk.ey.com
Egypt
Ehab Azer
1el: +20 2 2726 0260
Lmail: ehab.azereq.ey.com
Finland
Antti Hakkarainen
1el: +358 ^0 592 ^^33
Lmail: anLLi.hakkarainenl.ey.com
France
Pierre Pilorge
1el: +33 1 ^6 93 59 79
Lmail: pierre.pilorqelr.ey.com
Germany
Ulrich M. Trinkaus
1el: +^9 6196 996 25173
Lmail: ulrich.Lrinkausde.ey.com
Hcn Kcn (SAR)
May Knight
1el: +852 28^9 9518
Lmail: may.kniqhLhk.ey.com
India
Murali Balaraman
1el: +91 226 192 0^90
Lmail: murali.balaramanin.ey.com
Indonesia
Fariaty Lionardi
1el: +62 21 5289 ^00^
Lmail: lariaLy.lionardiid.ey.com
Ireland
Brian Binchy
1el: +353 1221 2326
Lmail: brian.binchyie.ey.com
Italy
Fabio Gasperini
1el: +39 06 6753 5203
Lmail: labio.qasperiniiL.ey.com
Japan
Koichi Iwasa
1el: +81 3 3503 195^
Lmail: iwasakchshinnihon.or.|p
Kenya
Amaha Bekele
1el: +25^ 20 271 2366
Lmail: amaha.bekeleke.ey.com
Luxembourg
Bernard Lhoest
1el: +352 ^2 12^ 83^1
Lmail: bernard.lhoesLlu.ey.com
Malaysia
Chow Sang Hoe
1el: +603 7^95 8696
Lmail: sanqhoe.chowmy.ey.com
Mexico
Juan Pablo Garcia Galardi
1el: +52 55 5283 863^
Lmail: |uan.qalardimx.ey.com
Netherlands
Robert-Jan Hagens
1el: +31 88 ^07 2119
Lmail: roberL|an.haqensnl.ey.com
Nigeria
Colin Daley
1el: +23^ 703 910 6008
Lmail: colin.daleynq.ey.com
Norway
Erik Klausen
1el: +^7 2^ 00 27 76
Lmail: erik.klausenno.ey.com
Poland
Iwona Kozera
1el: +^8 22 557 7^91
Lmail: iwona.kozerapl.ey.com
Portugal
Mrio Trinca
1el: +351 217 912 28^
Lmail: mario.LrincapL.ey.com
Russia
Thomas Martin
1el: +7 ^95 660 ^887
Lmail: Lhomas.marLinru.ey.com
Saudi Arabia
Thomas Abraham
1el: +966 11 215 9^16
Lmail: Lhomas.abrahamsa.ey.com
Singapore
Nam Soon Liew
1el: +65 6309 8092
Lmail: namsoon.liewsq.ey.com
South Africa
Hendrik Geyser
1el: +27 11 502 0965
Lmail: hendrik.qeyserza.ey.com
South Korea
Young Suk Kim
1el: +82 2 3787 ^278
Lmail: younqsuk.kimkr.ey.com
Spain
Arturo Derteano Maraa
1el: +3^ 91 572 79 60
Lmail: arLuro.derLeanomarana
es.ey.com
Sweden
Karin Sancho
1el: +^6 70 318 97 67
Lmail: karin.sanchose.ey.com
Switzerland
Achim Bauer
1el: +^1 58 286 35 53
Lmail: achim.bauerch.ey.com
Turkey
Murat Hatipoglu
1el: +90 212 368 5868
Lmail: muraL.haLipoqluLr.ey.com
Ukraine
Kostiantyn Neviadomskyi
1el: +380 ^^ ^99 2025
Lmail: kosLianLyn.neviadomskyi
ua.ey.com
United Kingdom
Omar Ali
1el: +^^ 7951 1789
Lmail: oali1uk.ey.com
United States
Heidi Boyle
(Clobal consumer bankinq
survey 201^ sponsor)
1el: +1 312 879 3820
Lmail: heidi.boyleey.com
Jim Neckopulos
1el: +1 ^15 89^ 81^8
Lmail: |im.neckopulosey.com
Vietnam
Nguyen Thuy Duong
1el: +8^ 90^ 892 799
Lmail: duonq.nquyenvn.ey.com
^5 Winning through customer experience
EY | Assurance | Tax | Transactions | Advisory
About EY
EY is a global leader in assurance, tax, transaction and
advisory services. 1he insiqhLs and qualiLy services we
deliver help build trust and confidence in the capital
markeLs and in economies Lhe world over. We develop
outstanding leaders who team to deliver on our promises
Lo all ol our sLakeholders. ln so doinq, we play a criLical
role in building a better working world for our people, for
our clienLs and lor our communiLies.

EY refers to the global organization, and may refer to
one or more, of the member firms of Ernst & Young
Clobal LimiLed, each ol which is a separaLe leqal enLiLy.
LrnsL & Younq Clobal LimiLed, a UK company limiLed by
quaranLee, does noL provide services Lo clienLs. For more
inlormaLion abouL our orqanizaLion, please visiL ey.com.
About EYs Global Banking & Capital Markets Center
In todays globally competitive and highly regulated
environment, managing risk effectively while satisfying an
array of divergent stakeholders is a key goal of banks and
securiLies lirms. LY's Clobal Bankinq & CapiLal MarkeLs
Center brings together a worldwide team of professionals
to help you succeed a team with deep technical
experience in providing assurance, tax, transaction and
advisory services. 1he CenLer works Lo anLicipaLe markeL
trends, identify the implications and develop points of
view on relevanL secLor issues. UlLimaLely iL enables us Lo
help you meeL your qoals and compeLe more ellecLively.
201^ LYCM LimiLed.
All RiqhLs Reserved.
LYC No. LK0237
13081120596 BOS
LD 0115
This material has been prepared for general informational purposes only and is
noL inLended Lo be relied upon as accounLinq, Lax, or oLher prolessional advice.
Please reler Lo your advisors lor specilic advice.
ey.com

EY Global Consumer Banking Survey 2014

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EY Global Consumer Banking Survey 2014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Winning through

You might also like