Are You Advertising or Marketing?

Let's face it the majority of marketers in the financial industry work for smaller organizations. If you are in this category we have lulled ourselves into believing we are “Marketing”, when it really comes down to it, it is advertising and event planning.

Don’t get me wrong these aspects of the position need to be accomplished and to be quite frank are the most interesting and fun, however are you strategically positioning the organization based on analytics or just what seems to be fun or intuitive.

Here are two observations I’ve seen and ask yourself each if you have fallen victim of either. I know I have.

First: Marketing from a community, your board, and staff idea is, you are doing your job if they can see the organizations name in the public. This is accomplished either by advertising or the sponsorship of an event.

This first example is where a small shop gets trapped into shying away from being analytical because data for the most part can’t be seen by the public. Marketers receive their kudos from these three groups that see the ads or a sponsorship. So if you direct their attention to these two elements, even if strategically they are wrong, everyone believes you are doing your job.

Listen to yourself the next time you are in a senior meeting where everyone discusses what he or she is working on. 9 times out of 10 times when marketing speaks they fall back into what I call is the pretty paper and colored pen presentation. You discuss the upcoming events, ads, and how many balloons you have ordered. I've seen this even in $10 billion organizations. I’m not saying this information is entirely wrong, but I am saying the discussion should be centered on target markets and profits to strategically achieve a specific goal.

You must elevate yourself and the position to play on the same playing field as finance, mortgage, deposits, and treasury.

Second: Most marketing individuals think they are analytical, however it is only surface. They may say or have heard the correct words, but have they really looked and understood what they are reading.  Analysis really comes about through behavior sciences or how an individual’s brain functions. Marketing individuals can normally be classified as creative or right brain thinkers where analytical individuals are left brain, the part that focuses on reasoning functions. It is rare when someone has both. So if you fall in the creative right brain group just be aware its brain function and not just a lack of knowledge.

Don't stop learning to be an analytical shop just because it makes your head hurt, which I have heard. If you work hard it is possible to train your brain to even enjoy it.  Take a little time to read each of my blogs, go back to school, or just research the subject on the net.  There are some very simple tools or at least knowledge components that can help you become an analytical marketing professional and more desirable in the work place.

This blog is here to help you focus on this other side, the analytical marketer, to go back to the basics of what marketing positions itself should be, however using the fun aspects of the position to execute the strategies that will differentiate your organization from your competition…and to be quite honest differentiate yourself for a brighter future.

If you have additional questions please feel free to e-mail me or just leave a comment.

Single Service Households

If you have spent the time to read a prior article on Service Per Household you will find a case study that notes it is not prudent to use the measurement of SPH to drive your institution. However by collecting this data there is a portion of the information that is extremely important to all institutions.

Single Service Households or those clients that only have one product type with you have a more likely chance to leave your organization.  So likely that a single service client has an 80% more likely chance of leaving your institution within the first 12 months.  It is very important to begin an engagement program as soon as possible.

However before we get to marketing programs let us first work to determine what percentage of clients you have that are single service.

Most if not all MCIF systems will have built in reporting tools that will extract this data quickly and efficiently.  If you know how build it, and more importantly building in a batch function that will allow you to obtain the data each month, go for it.  But if not my suggestion is to contact your vendor or read your manual.  The best results will be by company and then by branch, then the most important, monthly trends along with branch ranking.  Each of these will serve a very important role in your analysis.

As a NOTE: If you are proficient with your MCIF you should run some preliminary cleansing filters prior to finishing the output.  I have learned from experience that data is never clean and if you are going to obtain accurate information sometimes you must dig deep to understand what is being provided and even if it is correct.  

Take for instance single service households that just look odd.  Review those products that must have an association with another just to be legitimate.  For example: Single Service Bill Pay, Internet Banking, an ATM or Debit Card.  Each of these must have an association with another account and if they are not then some type of anomaly has occurred.

Run a simple household report extracting these very products and services by household where total services = 1 and service type = any of the above.  What are the counts? Try to determine how this could have occurred.  For us this was a normal occurrence and here is why.

Say a spouse comes in and changes the address on several accounts.  If there are two names on the account on of the individuals has authority to make the change.  As for these other types of accounts ATM, Debit, etc., they are owned by a single individual and federal regulations require a signature of the change for each. .  Was a signature card ever given?  Was one given but never returned?  These two scenarios result in all other information being changed with the exception of the other spouses because of the lack of a signature.  The next time you update your MCIF the addresses will not match and a new household is created for the orphaned account, making it a new single service household.

Anomalies will occur and they need to be fixed, however they will continually plague you data.   Make your group aware of the issues, and then move on.  The best resolution is to exclude these from your data.  Add this exclusion criteria in your batch.

Once the data is available you may find some very staggering results.  I've heard of organizations with single service households compiling more than 60% of their over all client base.  Going back to what I noted earlier that single service households have an 80% greater chance in leaving your organization within the first 12 months.  Unless you just love to do nothing but acquiring accounts getting a handle on this number by branch will be extremely important.

I'd say the average should be from 40% to 50%, however with a concentrated effort over years that number can come down.  With my prior employer we had managed to get that number in the low to upper 20's.

So how do you go about fighting these numbers?  First clean up your messes and second begin a sales culture that requires associates to ask for the business.  Third as a marketer that owns an MCIF system simple mailings to new and existing clients on an array of your product offerings will get the ball rolling.

I would suggest you build reports and begin sales initiatives that look at SS households with checking.  These should be offered, ATM or Debit Cards, or even Internet Banking or Bill Pay.  These may not produce revenue for your organization, however it will produce a sticky value that will retain that customer longer.

New households no matter if they are single service or not should always be contacted to increase cross-sell.  If you own a Matrix Mailing component make sure you set this tool up to monthly or quarterly contact your single service clients.

If you are diligent over time these numbers will come down and your associates will begin to understand their work will become easier.    

Once you have a year or so under your belt, trend results hopefully will see improvements.  Ranking branches can be very important to determine those locations that have issues.  Take the bottom 25% and dig into the data more.  See why there are issue.  One of the best ways to analysis your branch network is by observation.  Hang out at the branch, watch the interaction, see if other services are offered to the client, help where you can.  If you can bring the bottom 25% up your averages will climb at a good pace.

Good luck!

If you have additional questions about this or any other topic please send me an e-mail or leave a comment below 

Service Per Household-Is it the best Measurement?

Services Per Household or (SPH) has been a staple term in the MCIF industry since the inception of the tool, however is it or should it be a standard to compare your institution to your peers?

Since there are no standards in the industry as to what makes up a service, institutions are free to build, bring together, or break apart as many product categories as they choose fragmenting a standard that was once the norm.

A past organization I had worked with had about 44 different service categories and I was the individual that lobbied hard to get all of them. Now you may be saying that is just way too many, however to my defense the majority were from the commercial world where no standards are set and the litany of products are very unique and diverse. As for the retail world there were standards we adhered to.

Through a lot of discussions we’d determine checking should be broken down to interest and non-interest, savings and money markets, internet banking and bill pay. There were strong cross-sell considerations for each of our categories.

My intention was to increase services per household in a methodical way to build a stronger bond with the customer. As with most organizations the overall count of accounts and household numbers were declining, however those that remained were higher balance and multi service households and better for the organization.

Within your MCIF system there should be a function that will allow you to review your SPH. Do this as a company, however more importantly do this at the branch level. After you have obtained a reading for each, review your service categories make adjustments then run again.

If your system has the ability to stratify your services do so by branch and look for the percentage of clients that are single service, 2 services, 3 services and 4 or greater. The organization that I was with we looked at these components for both existing accounts and new since the last update. The trends were very interesting. New branches consistently had clients come in to the institution with 2 or more services and then built from there, however the more established branches had low initial services for new accounts and lower than normal existing SPH numbers.

The biggest difference between the two were existing locations had a lower number of new households establishing relationships compared to new locations. The sales culture in a new location is just different. They were hungry for the business. In addition, most new locations were built in more affluent areas where a single account would bring a checking, savings, debit card, and all internet services without even blinking an eye.

Services per household is an important measurement, however it should never be the measurement to run your institution. In a later blog I will address how focusing on single service households could be one of the best projects for any marketing group, however for now we will continue to work through SPH.

As said above SPH is a good measurement tool, however a more accurate measurement that one could compare against peer is APH or Accounts Per Household. You just can’t mess that one up. It is what it is.

I’d like to provide you with one of the biggest and most detrimental case studies that was conducted that proved the very point never to run your sales culture on a single measurement, and more importantly never SPH.

Early on in 2000 I had a boss who in my mind was a great man. He knew how to motive his work force and worked hard to implement new measurements and pushed hard to change the culture of the bank. We had always had SPH as a part of our measurements, however is was not THE measurement. As a part of a new initiative he established a goal of obtaining an SPH of 3.55 within a year. On average the company had an SPH of 2.37.

Although a formidable goal we at that time had no idea as to what we started in motion. Marketing plans were drawn, reports were built to monitor the progress BI-weekly. Not known by us at the time was how large and dirty this project became for the organization.

To lay more ground work the company had established a new sales culture to increase cross-sell ratios helping associates break out of their comfort zones to begin truly helping the customers with their financial needs. It was working great, there was a resurgence in people helping people and associates were made accountable for their actions.

The project of monitoring SPH was both a next sales step and something that market makers had been asking Senior Management for years. As the months progressed very little progress was being seen in the numbers. Additional sales training was provided and the pressure started building. In the mean time a number of things were taking place which ended up in an entire restructure of the organization, the CEO, my boss, and others were let go. This came as a shock to everyone.

However what came next was even worse. The incentive compensation models for retail were changed to a point system with point values and incentive payouts based upon average balances and types of accounts. It was my job to run the numbers with past data to determine if the payouts were to be the same and that those that were doing the work were compensated for it. With a few minor adjustments we put the program into play. I was handicapped with one additional issue in that the money for the development of the tracking tool, which had an ancillary benefit of decreasing on boarding time by 75% was cut from my budget. The argument that was provided to me was, “If we reduced the entry times associates would fill it doing something non-productive instead of contacting additional clients.” Strike 2!

Here is one more component I was not prepared for. The new Senior Management team picked up where the others had left off. SPH became THE driving factor in their sales program. This number was the only thing. The funny thing was, there were only three individuals in the entire bank that knew how it was built, knew the issues with it, and knew how important clean data was to connecting households correctly, however we were so far removed from Senior Management we couldn’t nor were allowed to pass the information on.

The pressure was strong at the weekly management meeting about SPH, regions and branches were getting beaten up bad. It was almost like a pressure cooker getting ready to blow. Some locations had it easier than others, however it was very apparent the larger number of households a branch had the more difficult it was to turn the ship.

I must also note that at the time I was still in marketing, the place with the pretty paper and colored pens.

After the first month I felt we had a problem. I made the incentive compensation committee aware. We were a little above our projected payouts, but I had made a few changes in the software program that tracked the data to close down some holes that we found where fraud was occurring. The second month solidified the problem. The payout doubled and toped out the incentive compensation payout in month two for the quarter. At that point the flood gates had opened and I found entire branch locations manipulating the systems to get their SPH numbers up an in turn we were paying associates to do it.

I went in to fraud prevention mode and found hole after hole. Multiple entries into the system, accounts with zero or negative balances, you name it. There were still a lot of good associates out there and they brought these issues to my attention. I was able to quickly write programs to stop or monitor the action. I even had an argument with a manager who just couldn’t understand why we wouldn’t pay incentives on a negative or zero balance/non-funded accounts.

Here is one of the best ones; I sat in on a sales conference call where a regional sales manager was providing best practices for increasing branch SPH. It was take a $1 out of petty cash and open an account for a customer. I also heard of branches that just automatically opened debit cards for those that didn’t have or requested one.

It was so hard for me to believe that a bank that was trusted with individuals life savings was not unlike any other organization, if the door was open and the pressure to succeed was high enough things would find their way gone. By the end of the third month I had closed all of the doors and those that were in the wrong were either let go or reprimanded. I was confident that the program was going to be successful.

However it was determined by the new CEO, it was best to walk away from the damage that was created and start a new program based not on individual accomplishments, however the branch as a whole. The new program was put into place, but the pressure on SPH still remained.

It was about six months later that in one of my regular meetings with regional Sales Managers and Presidents about reporting that a Sales Manger asked me how do we get the pressure of SPH off them. I looked at the regional president who had weekly contact with the CEO, and said he was the one that should take the recommendation. His response was that I should sit in one of those meetings to see how brutal it was.

I took a deep breath and told him that I would take care of it. Believe me I was no body in the organization, however I was the head of the MCIF group and had to tell the CEO why running a company based on the single measurement of SPH was detrimental. Besides what did I have to lose?

I figured a face-to-face meeting was the best, however after more thought I figured I’d just put my thoughts in an e-mail and hope for the best. It took me about two days to get it right and I just sent it directly to him. I informed my boss about what I had done, and his response was that I had just committed suicide. My heart sank, however I was the only person in the company that had the data, that knew the data, and knew why it was wrong. If I was to soon die I knew it was for the best for the company.

The next morning I received a response from the CEO, thanking me for the insight, along with an agreement on the issues and for my very reasons from that day forward the program was stopped.

I had won this little battle of misinformation and felt good. I did spend some additional research time to really see where the mistakes were made. Most tried to blame the head of retail that was no longer employed with the bank, however I was able to see his plans of direct mail campaigns to existing clients aggressively offering additional services. Multiple campaigns to help drive cross-sell, however when he left the supporting campaigns left with him and no one picked up the ball to make the program work.

I use this as a strong case study not to use SPH as the only measurement tool. The company suffered from it. It forced trusted individuals to do distrusted acts. I even feel that earnings and the company’s’ stock price was affected because even though there were a lot more accounts, those accounts came at a price that cost the bank hundreds of thousands of dollars. Zero balance, negative balance accounts that did nothing for revenue, they cost, and in addition the company paid incentives. Try closing 24,000 bill pay accounts that were put on the books and then finding out they had not been used for over 13 months. Even today I shake my head that all of this took place in only 3 months.

In conclusion, use review Services Per Household as a measurement. It will provide you a consistent look at those problem branches or even ones that have it right, however what ever you do don’t drive your company with it.

If you have additional questions on this or any other topic please e-mail me or leave a comment below.

Super Householding, Do we need it?

The answer is; We all need it.  However is your organization ready for it?  There are so many aspects at this level that must be considered before implementation could even begin to work.  The good thing is I'm not aware of any company that has been successful at it at all.  There is the process of collecting the data, the matching, and then behavior changes needed in an organization.

What is super householding anyway?  If you are a part of the MCIF world you will understand how important householding can be.  (See my previous blog about Householding.) Super householding take the process one step further.  It combines businesses owned by the same client, as well as, their personal accounts.  Each group has very different characteristics that don't allow any system to automatically combine the two.  You could even go a little further and bring in ancillary households or individuals that could be influenced by the account, however not roll up into a super households balances.  These could be accountants, lawyers, boards, other family members, etc.

The one thing Super Householding does is builds an individuals center of influence.  What all does the account holder influence across you institution.

Let us quickly review how households are built then how Super Household enhance the data.  After that we will get into the best way to collect, report, and maintain the data.  Then on to how to distribute the information.

Households are made up from multiple accounts with the same social security numbers which becomes an individual.  Individuals that share the same short name and address make up a household.

Super Households take this process further by combining all households that have something in common.  However determining that commonality becomes one that only a portfolio manager can determine.


Here is the reason none of these are successful.  It seems most vendors that have played around with the process go right to the line of Super Householding but never cross it to make it  viable to use.


When I made the reference to a portfolio manager being the only one that would understand how a super household is made, that is because only they are the one that touches the client.


Some companies have built the tool so that the operator of the MCIF physically makes the match.  There are multiple issues why this process has lead to the failure of it ever catching on.  First who has the time to enter the information? Second how are you going to consistently squeeze the data from a co-workers brain?  It complicates it more if you have 10, 20, 50, 100 or more managers. And three what do you do if the manager leaves or if you leave?  The process dies right then and there.  So why start it to begin with?


The collection of this data if pushed to the front line or to commercial officers can be invaluable for cross-sell opportunities.  The better you know somebody the better service you or even someone disconnected from commercial, brokerage, wealth management, insurance or the front line can act knowledge to a customer at all times.


So really there are multiple fronts that must be attacked with Super Householding that must be addressed to make the program successful. However, let us look at, for this example, the collection of the data and leave the behavior and delivery changes to someone else for now.


As I said earlier some vendors expect the individual that runs the MCIF to connect the dots on Super Household.  I'm here to tell you this is not nor will it ever happen.  Take any organization of size that has over 50,000 households and you have a full time position on your hands, however what if you pushed the data collection out into the field were you would have had to ask in the first place and require them to enter it?  The managers who will receive the most benefit from the data, would be in control.


I'm going to provide some high level software development here so if their are any vendors that read this, here is your freebie.

Each household is given a number that is permanently fixed to the group. This is system driven already.   Each portfolio manager would have the ability to view MCIF data along with the household number.  A function within the viewing table would allow for multiple household numbers to be entered.  So If the primary household is 855 and the client also owns two separate businesses that have different TIN numbers and their own household numbers are different,  all one has to do is enter the additional HH numbers.  All households would be connected when the Super Household tab is selected.

Now to go one step further once a household number is entered a relationship code would have to be selected.  These could be owner, attorney, accountant, relation, etc.  These centers of influence selections would correspond to reporting function that would provide instant totals for  balances and services.  Those outside relationships would not be counted in the totals.


In addition, most organization have established officer or employee codes.  It would be necessary to build reports within the tool to monitor and be able to make changes when an employee has been terminated, the portfolio manager has changed, or even if incentive compensation models are built.


So if there are vendors out their that push household information to the front line taking this next step can be very important.


This process is not something that can happen over night.  It will take time for each portfolio manager to understand and bring together all the households they can.  It is an on going process that will never stop.


This is only a high level resource guide into how Super Household can be successful, however there are many more aspects of the process, reporting structure, behavior issues, software development and senior manager acceptance that still must be addressed.


If you have additional questions or would like to see additional topics discuss, e-mail me or make a comment.

Householding Accounts in MCIF

Householding has got to be one of my most favorite subjects because it is constantly changing. There are a lot of good companies that combine accounts to individuals to households well, however can anyone ever get it correct?

Just so we are all on the same page I'll provide a simple definition of householding and how they are built. This methodology is one used most by MCIF systems that have detailed data about a client.

Systems combine individual accounts based on social security numbers, those that match are brought together as an individual. So if you are missing or have incorrect SS data this first part will fail. This is one of the first anomalies that if you are serious about your data you will begin fixing.

Most MCIF systems will provide discrepancy reports based on social security numbers and addresses. I highly recommend you pull these reports and hand them off to someone who can clean the data.

Cleansing will be very important to reducing mailing costs, as well as, having an accurate view of your clients, household profit, reporting, or even incentive compensation programs if they have a component focused on household.

Most organizations outside of marketing don't understand the importance of clean data and just won't dedicate the time to it, so be prepared to fight this battle long and hard.

Review everything,  you may even have to review your on boarding process if you constantly find re-occurring errors. In one of my investigations at an institution we found that even though the front line was taught to look for an existing client the process was faster and easier to create a new CIF key then to grab the information from a prior account. And as a result data was continually pushed into the system that had great potential to be dirty. Now this may not be a challenge to smaller institutions, but when you open 25,000 to 40,000 accounts a month 10% error is a lot. Just think what happens over 6 months, a year, 5 years.

One other thing to note is do you have a large foreign population that are not U.S. citizens and do not hold a social security number. Most if not all systems create their own SS number if one is not entered. This SS number is system generated and thus can not make the connection between individual accounts. So this is anomaly number 2. The system I'm familiar with you can either run a discrepancy report, or just run an account by account report looking for social security numbers that contain the character "?" in them.

You may not be able to correct them, however you'll find out how many you have. These will inflate your household counts.

The next process is really not as logical or as hard as the individual. It begins to use a series of algorithms that look for similarities between the individuals. This is the process where it becomes very important to have clean data. The cleaner the better. The good thing about this process is if your system allows for multiple CIF keys for a client as long as the data is clean, householding will bring them together.

First the system will bring an individual together by short name. If it is a retail client it looks at the last 8 characters, or if it is a business the first eight characters. Here is where clean data and what I call one of the bigger issues of household that in my opinion should be the very reason the research should begin to rebuild the householding methodology. 

Clean data on businesses is simple. Always enter the exact name on each of the business clients accounts. Beat this into the brains of the front line. It is very important.

As for the short names of individuals here is the thought process. A sad fact is that over 50% of marriages end in divorce. And with that there are remarries creating blended family's or even spouses with different last names from each other, or even from kids. This becomes the first break down in the name build or anomaly number 3.

After the system combines by name it moves to the address. Most systems use a complex algorithm of every other letter or some formulation that will use a fuzzy logic to bring them together. However if the address is spelled incorrectly for example W. Ashbrook Lane or Washbrook Lane, it will not household. Your discrepancy report will help with these, but before you make changes on your clients accounts check with your compliance officer and follow your guidelines.

For most institutions the regulations are if you need to make a change to a customers accounts they must be notified in writing and agree to the change. Marketing can push their data to the postal group to standardize addresses, however they can't be changed without consent. This paralyzes some organizations and nothing gets done. Anomaly number 4. 

Your discrepancy report will try to bring together apartment complexes, however won't.  So you will see these.  Ashbook Lane Apt 1, Apt 3 etc. Just disregard these.   As for the standard words of Street, St, Route, Rt, etc, your system should accept these automatically, however if it doesn't most systems will allow for tweaking these standards as a function within the system.  If you have not done it talk with your vendor.  You will need to think of everything that some one at the front line would enter.  P.O. Box POBox, post office box, etc.  So just how clean your data is will affect the systems ability to household correctly.

Remember dirty data can also affect response rates.  If they aren't matching with your original file, they aren't being counted.

Unless your system has Super House Holding capabilities you will never be able to combine business and retail clients together.  This is due to the Social Security numbers of individuals and TIN numbers of the business.  You won't be able to even combine different businesses owned by the same client.

Now there have been some attempts at this, however because of the administration of the process it really is a nightmare.  I'll dedicate an article in the near future on how the process could be solved.  Super householding can be one of the strongest tools for any institution that deals with commercial clients.

Getting back to standard householding and If you have ever wondered how outside mail firms who you contract with do it for non-client lists, they just obtain your list of new accounts standardize both then run a fuzzy logic algorithm to match them.

For the longest time I had always wondered and to be honest really never liked a vendor providing an ROI on a campaign they helped with and we paid them.  My feeling was they were too close to the program and wanted nothing more than to make themselves look good, and thus inflated the response rates.  Just be sure you review what they do.

It is hard enough marketing numbers aren't trusted, be careful you can justify your vendors.  If you don't Senior Management will.

In closing, work hard to get clean data from the start.  Systems can only do so much with what you can provide them. Also start asking your MCIF vendors about Householding and how they work around blended families or even if they can.  The problem will just get worse over time.

If you have additional questions or would like to see others articles on the subject of your choice feel free to send me an e-mail or leave a comment.  

Importance of Product Profitability

This is one subject in the financial world that I have yet to figure out. Not how or why profit is important, however why is it that organizations that managed hundreds of thousands or even billions of dollars don't feel the importance of Product Profitability or even worst want to just bury their heads in the sand if they can't come to a conclusion as to if a model is at least directionally correct?

Being in marketing for as many years as I have, and then moved to the finance world four years ago I found that one of the reasons was "If it didn't come from finance, then it can't be trusted."  And the other is if it came from Marketing it is laughed off because that's the place with the colorful pens and paper they don't understand the numbers. Well after four years on the other side I'm here to tell you there is as much if not more voodoo science there than in marketing.


So then why is it that the financial world, where everyone is suppose to be financially savvy 60% to 75% of the products offered lose money?  And if it loses money, how heck can an operation stay in business.  There are a few reasons for it... and a lot has to do with a simple 80/20 rule, where 20% of your clients produce 80% of the profits, however it is more like 20% or less of your clients produce over 150% of the profits.

I always seem to answer a question that leads to more questions; 150% how can that be?  Well it's simple; somebody has to make up for those that are a drain to your institution or those that cost you money just to keep them around.

Here is an example:  Your Senior Management demands your branch increase the number of accounts in non-interest checking accounts, no balance requirements are given so what does marketing do? They run ads, provide give-a-ways, any thing to promote traffic.  At the end of the month your branch, which was producing 30 accounts, produced 60 accounts, twice your normal.  When reporting comes out everyone declares the program a success.

Now the real research begins, you find out the average balance of these accounts are $75 far below the $1,500 average balance your MCIF system says you have.  I will get in to product balance stratification a little later, however let's review a single account.


Here are a few more parameters; Besides being non-interest, the program provides free checks, you give a small gift valued at $5, there are no minimum balances or fees. NSF charges are at $35 each.  There are costs associated with opening an account which conservatively we will set at $25.


We can then get into a debate on whether the costs to maintain the account should be fully allocated or only relevant.  Fully Allocated would be a portion of all expenses related to the operation and salaries.  Relevant would be salaries and brick and mortar are just part of doing business and it will not be counted.  The real costs should be a combination of the two.

For this example we will use a fully allocated profit model which for a non-interest bearing account would cost right around $225 annually.  Also since a non-interest checking account provides the highest spread we will make the return at 5.34%.

Income is figured $75 X .0534 = $4.00 in annual interest  income.  The average NSF fee assessed to each account annually is 2.5 X $35 = $87.50.  Saying the average person will bounce 2.5 checks a year. The income for this account is $91.50 annually.

As for the costs, we use the Fully Allocated costs of $225 + $5 gift + 2 check orders at $8 + and a one time on boarding cost of $25 = an annual cost of $263.

($263.00) Expense
 $91.50     Income
($171.50)


For each account at $75 you lose $171.50 annually.  This is something you just can't make up in volume.


Now going back to a few things said earlier.  The average account balance for the product group was $1,500, you increase the interest income by $80, however your results are still negative.  You really need to look for those clients that will maintain an average balance of $3,300 or more just to break even.


Here are a few suggestions to look at your clients a little closer.  Most MCIF systems will allow you to look at a group of accounts and then stratify the balances of the accounts.  Once you do this you will see that although your average may be higher, you could have 60% or higher of clients that fall far below that average.


Now this piece here is what I've tried for years to get financial institutions to understand.  If you stratify your accounts, it should follow pretty true to what a client will maintain in their accounts.  So look at your break-even point and see what percentage falls below.  Budgets should be built on the majority.


Secondly NSF fees are one of those interesting facts that everyone has to look at now.  My preliminary research indicates if you have a new customer or one new within the first year and you assess an NSF fee on them one of three things will happen.  They pay the fee get ticked off and then close the account and bad mouth your company for the rest of their lives: Two they pay it and move on and most likely it will never happen again.  And three you council the client, wave the fee and hope you did the correct thing.  In all examples the one that happens the most is the client is assessed the fee and then they leave.  Producing a churn that strains budgets and staff.

I look at myself and it has only happened twice in my life.  The first stupid me I got mad at the bank and closed the account and then a few years back when I asked a teller to transfer money from my money market to my checking and for some reason it was moved from my money market back into my money market.


So don't rely on NSF fees in the future.  If financial institution are doing what is fiduciary correct for the customer we would teach them how to be better stewards to their finances.  Now I know there are some that just love to pay NSF fees, however if they don't mind bring them on.   


This brings us to the question, If checking accounts cost the institution for the majority of clients then why are they offered?  The answer is the same as any other retailer.  It is for the most part a lost leader.  At times stores will offer a product at or below cost just to bring in customers.  For the financial industry if you ask a customer were they bank 98% of the time they will tell you the company that holds their checking account.

So if this is the case checking is the core account.  Now if you can break even from it all the better, however if not, additional products and services need to be cross-sold to obtain a profit.  That is the very reason we look at households for profitability instead of a single account.


Keep in mind the more account types you make profitable the more profitable the organization becomes and this is the Importance of knowing and understanding Product Profitability.

If you have additional questions please feel free to contact me. 
 

How to identify the real issues within a branch attrition rate.

If you have already built a strong retention/attrition program and have started to identify issues within your organization, it is now time to put in place a data collection tool that will allow you to understand what makes up your attrition rate.

It is one thing to reprimand associates for bad behavior, however another if you are doing it without any knowledge of how the issues occurred.  With any project I research it is not to call out anyone, but a way to look at a process, improve on it, then coach or redefine a new behavior to obtain the needed results.

Here is how to look at breaking down attrition: Accounts close all of the time for many many reasons, however of all of the reasons, can we determine if they are life cycle, process issues, relocation, death, divorce, a closing of a location, personnel, ingress, egress issues, NSF or anything that force the client or the institution to close an account.   

What you will find is that of the 10% to 25% of those clients that attrited, most are issues beyond ones control, however what this exercise will accomplish is of those that can be controlled if fixed can it change the retention rates.

I must add a simple note here.  At times depending on your clientele, attriting is not a bad idea.  I'll leave the deeper aspect of identifying profitable clients to a separate blog, however sometimes retaining clients just to retain them is not always a good thing.  That is why it is so important to research all aspects of attrition before coming to conclusions.  This information is to identify issues then to fix them...not a way to hang and burn people.

You are first going to have to find a way to collect data from the front line.  If your core system has the ability to collect reason codes that will be your best bet.  It may be as simple as an open field that you can use, however contact your IT group to find out.

Our sales group implemented the first go around and boy was that a failure.  The attempt was knowable, but the results were a mess.  In their defense they gathered the troupes and implemented the data collection process, however that is about a far as it went.  It got better, however keeping 1,500 associates capable of entering data informed as to the process, and the churn factor of employees just didn't help.

Keep this in mind when working with data and lots of it there has to be commonalities so one can work with and review the results quickly.  Problem #1 the sales staff chose a alpha numeric field to enter information in.  This is fine if you truely want to read about the issues, however disastrous if you have 4,000 closed accounts in a month and they all have different verbiage.  The only way to review the data is to look at it and try to match it in silos.  It is just not going to happen.

I quickly made a change to the input of data.  With the help of the sales staff I asked for as many common issues we could think of then I assigned a numeric code to each.

They were as follows:
1 - Rate
2 - Facility Closure
3 - Moving out of the market
4 - Account funds used for purpose intended
5 - Deceased
6 - Removal of name
7 - Dissatisfied with service
8 - Dissatisfied with product
9 - Competitors promotion
10 - Convenience - moving within the market
11 - Transfer funds to another account within the institution
12 - Divorced
13 - Other
14 - NSF/Overdraft
15 - Married
16 - Fraud
17 - Dormant
18- No longer needs accounts
19 - Lost job


If you are looking to implement such a program use these only as guidelines.  You may need to begin with a few then add as needed.  I provided a simple sheet that could be posted close so they could refer to it as often as needed.       

After implementing these new standards it became easier for both sides.  It was less work for the associates and for me I could now do something with the data.  We still struggled with even this part for some associates who felt they were being helpful would instead of just entering the number they would enter "#12" or "number 12" instead of just "12."  If I had the capabilities to change the field to just numeric I would have.  If you can, do it.

I was able to identify those associate issues and then passed that information on to their branch manager.  After some time it got better.

The results in graph form allowed myself and associates to quickly see where the issues were.

Once a month in the core system I had a query run in periodic options that would collect the information I needed to build the report.  I was able to through Excel build a path through an ODBC function with iSeries that after building macros would shake hands with the query grab the data then bring it back and configure the report they way I wanted to see it and deliver it in graphic form for the company and by branch.  This report could be built in seconds each month.

The report provided results in three multiple ways:  1. Numerically providing numbers associated with a graph.  2. The same results, however in graph form.  3. The numeric data was broken down by branch. 4. Each code was given a factor as to if an associate could have changed the behavior of the client which became "issues."  A percentage was provided as to of all the closed accounts what percent was the branch in control of. 5. Where and who the data came from.  


I must bring back once again how important it is for you to learn Excel.  This report on its own could take several hours to build, however once set up it takes longer to open the report than it does to run it.  Learn your core or find someone in IT to work with you.  Have them look into iSeries or ODBC in Excel to connect with your core system.  Learn how to build macros in both your core and Excel.  And also learn how and understand pivot tables. 


It will be hard at first, however once you get the hang of it you will be able to understand the data, build it quickly and start spending more time analyzing it. 


If you need additional help please feel free to contact me through e-mail

Retention - Attrition

Retention; What does it really mean to a financial organization?  To most, if not all, it is your life-line, it is the way you stay in business.  It is the difference between knowing your customer and producing life-time or even generational value for your organization or constantly looking for new customers.

Here is a simple example:  If I bring 100 new customers to the company in January and then 12 months from then I look at these same customers and only 75 remain, my retention rate is 75%.  The inverse of this or 25% is the attrition rate or those customers that have left.

Taking this example one step further; If a branches goal was to increase clients by 10% of the prior year and the total number of customers was 100, a manager would have to work hard to bring in 35 new clients because 25% would attrite throughout the year.

I actually worked at a financial institution that for years didn't understand why their managers could not even come close to meeting their annual goals.  It was because their models were flawed, they just didn't account for attrition.

So what does one look at for a retention rate?  If you ask most MCIF vendors the likely answer with be household retention. However there is one fundamental flaw in that analogy.  If your organization offers Loans, certificates of deposit, or even mortgages you will never know for sure, or you will get a false sense of security because of their terms.

What you want to understand is, are you losing customers and how many.  Take for example a mortgage; Because of the time and cost commitment if I get upset at the organization I would keep this product there and possibly move the rest.  If I was looking at household retention the household from my report would not show a change.  This would also occur with any other loan or even the length of a certificate of deposit.

This is the  reason why I look at transaction accounts.  Interest, non-interest checking, savings, and money market accounts.  Now I don't look at these individually, however as a group.  I would however always split out business from retail.

Now you may be saying to yourself why not separate them and look at a retention rate for each? Well I found this out the hard way, I did just that for a period of time and I found that depending on the interest rate paid clients would shift their deposits if one would pay a higher amount.  It was always interesting getting list requests when rates would change.  Branches as a part of what they felt was a fiduciary responsibility to the client would call them and tell them about the new program.  This of course would increase their sales numbers, however increase the interest expense to the company.

Those issues were to be handled by senior management, my job was to correctly identify how well we retained the customer.  By grouping these products or services I could circumvent all of the issues and provide a single retention number no matter what happened based only on the account.

Here could be your second question; Why are you looking at transaction account retention instead of household retention?  Here is the simple answer; If I'm upset a the organization what would be the first accounts that I would close and move?  Any or all of my transaction accounts.  The other accounts would follow only when they matured or were paid off.

So it is very important to determine which branches have the highest attrition rates.  If you are looking for an average it will be some place around 86%.  We had locations any where from 64% up to the high 90's.

My suggestion would be to use this rate to find issues or bright spots within the organization.  Those that have high retention rates find out what they are doing right.  Those that don't will require additional research.  Is there a personnel issue?  Is there a process issue?  Look at everything and work hard to fix it.  


We posted ours by trend each month for each branch then for that month ranked each branch.  You didn't want to be at the bottom.

Going back to the first example, if I can control my retention or attrition rate I will one have to not work as hard to reach my goals and two increase revenue to the organization.

Although I've answered these questions I'm sure you are asking more.  How do I create a retention rate.  I'll provide you with two examples, however each will require either equipment or an advanced knowledge in Excel.

The first is to deploy the use of your MCIF system if you have one.  You will need a research file account by account of those products or services that will make up your transaction group.  You will have to obtain this information in a historical time period 12 months prior to the current date for comparison.  Now you can use a different period of time, however your results will not be comparable with peer averages.  

Each month obtain this information by branch and either build a trend line from history or start now.  The information will tell you where your issues are and once fixed you will begin to see a change in the trend line.  Hopefully upwards.  Just remember if you fix the problem, you will not see results the next month.  Since you are looking at 12 months each month will get you closer but the full affected results will be after a year.


The second option requires you to begin now gathering the data, however it will be a year before you can begin reviewing the results.  Unless you can get point in time historical data from your core system.  

Either by query or asking your IT group obtain a list of account numbers of your service or product group you are going to review.  Ask for the output to be in Excel providing only the account number and branch number.  Do this for each month until a year passes.  Keep each file separate and date them.

When your starting month comes up 12 months later ask for the same information.  Save this information for you will use it once again 12 months later, so save it.

What you are going to do is build a Vlookup table comparing one months year to the next.  I could explain this function in Excel, however it would be best to obtain an Excel book or Google Vlookup and begin understanding them.  If an account is still there indicate the presence by an "X" in another column.  Once finished count the "X's."   With Excel functions this can be completed in seconds, so it will be worth your time to familiarize yourself with software.  

So if you have a month end total of 1,000 accounts, July 2009 and you compared these against a new month end total of 1,200 accounts, you may have 850 accounts from the original 1,000 that remained.  850 /1,000 = .85 or 85% where retained or the inverse, attrition of 15% lost.

This should be completed for each branch and then trended every month.

Excel has some great functions that will allow you to build the branch distribution.  Just push yourself to figure them out. Get the book Excel 2003 or 2007 or what ever version you are working with.

If you do have issues and would like help working through the above information please feel free to contact by e-mail.

Just in closing, Retention is extremely important to the organization.  It can tell you where your brightest stars are and those that are not.  Use it to help coach those that are in need of help.

I've created retentions rates for retail and business transaction accounts, CORE accounts where a client must have a Savings, Checking, and a Loan product, then Checking and Internet Banking and Checking and Bill Pay Accounts.

The last ones were to provide a point on how important cross-selling is.  We consistently saw a 10% lift in transaction account retention if combined with and the client used Bill Pay.

Look for the continuation of this blog "How to identify the real issues within a branch attrition rate."   This blog will help you identify what percentage of attrition is affected by the organization and what could be affected by your facility, the area, products, or personnel.

New Account Trending

Is it possible to predict the future by looking into the past?  I'm here to tell you if created properly you can gain a lot of knowledge by doing so and I have the data and years to prove it.  However there will always be skeptics that will argue the point, but if given enough data over a long enough period of time it is amazing what one can see.

Let's make this example simple, however one that could have a very powerful impact that can also prove a point.  

You first need to either befriend an individual in IT or have available the use of an MCIF system.  The MCIF system will be the best tool for data for with most historical data is saved within a time frame.  Most legacy systems will only provide you with a point in data.  I don't want you to discount this process if you do not have an MCIF, however it will take much longer, years of data collection to produce the same results.

The information we will be trending will be Checking Accounts.  Although we will look at only non-interest checking at this point, my suggestion to you is to build these examples into as many product categories as you would like to review.  Your portfolio should include both Business and Retail Checking, interest and non-interest accounts, Consumer Loans, Home Equity Loans and Lines, Money Market accounts, Internet banking, Online Bill Pay, etc.  

My suggestion would be to focus on checking first then once you become familiar with the process bring additional products online.

Automation by the use of queries, batch files, Vlookup functions in Excel can remove the time constraints on the collection and displaying of information.  However for this example how to collect the data will be the focus.  

The data that we will be trending will be all new accounts opened in each month in each of the categories.  So to collect data within your MCIF go to your current month and select all non-interest checking account that were new to the institution for the month ended.  Once ran you will want to push out a report of those new accounts by branch.  If at first you want to review the information by company that is fine, however what we are looking for are trends so the best level for now will be branch.

Here is a component that confuses some marketers, we really shouldn't care about how well we acquire new accounts from month over month, however year over year month to month.  So if in July a branch had 6 new non-interest checking accounts the comparison will be July of the prior years for the trend.

The philosophy is that we live our lives based on cycles.  Schools start the same time each years, season begin and end on cycles, holidays come and go, however these cycles will also predict buying patterns.  Now there are the occasional anomalies that occur that one must predict or take in account for adjustments.

If you can obtain historical data go back as far as you can.  I'm sure you will not be able to do this all in one sitting, however over time collect and log the information.

Although this example only shows a few years of data you can begin to see a cycle.  The more data the better you are able to see the trends

If you are proficient at using your MCIF set up a batch to run the data, however make sure you select the correct historical time frame.  With the Harland Touche' system this process is easy, however run the data and have it drop into an Excel file.  Once it is finished before running the next time frame grab it rename it or something, for each time you re-run the batch it will just overlay the data.

If you are a little more proficient at Excel you can build a main table to display all of the information that will allow you to graph the data, which becomes very helpful.

I pushed this process so that data collection through batch was automated each month dropping all of my monthly category data into Excel folders, then I build an extractor tool using macros in Excel that grabbed the Excel files put them into a proper format so that all I did was copy and paste the data into my product report.  By using Vlookup tables and other functions of Excel a end user would only have to select their branch and all of their new account data would be shown in both number a graph forms.  I provided the user with both the number of new accounts and total dollars for comparison.  

Now you might say that this looks like a lot of work.  Yes it was, however after I had built all of the tools it took a matter of seconds to build each.  Because this data is so important it is my opinion it should be built into the MCIF systems that you run.  However up until now these systems are more focused on the direct mail component of their services.

Now once you have a number of years worth of data, what is it telling us?  First you will be able to see where most of the accounts are being opened it and at what balance.  Do you have locations that produce a large number of account, however low balances?  Second if you are going to set goals for the upcoming year this is one great place to start.  You can quickly tell if a location could handle 45 new accounts a month, or which months the goals should be increased or decreased.

You will be able to even tell which managers are doing a better coaching job as it pertains to sales.

I was able to obtain 5 years of trended data and I began predicting the future "In my terms" as to what I should expect from a location.  Our finance group spent months throwing darts, however really when it came down to it they took a balance increased it by 10% then divided it by 12.  In the end when the first comparison months were review against actual, the finance group was off hundreds accounts accounts and I was off in one category by 1 account and others far closer by almost 2/3rds than their forecast.

It is just one step closer to predicting the future of account acquisition.  As a marketing individual if locations are held accountable for unattainable goals or goals that are set far below their expectations it was my position that someone needed to be aware of potential pit falls.  If the goals were set far above expectations then it was my job to develop the programs to get them there.

I'll leave you with one more category that will always be good to review monthly.  Utilizing the same categories, obtain the information for the total number of accounts at the end of the month.  What you are hoping for is a trend upward of additional accounts, however today what you may see is the overall run-off as a whole.  Finding those locations where the trend is a decrease in overall accounts will be one to review further.  These are normally personnel issues, however a number of other factors could be found as to the decline.  In either event it becomes a great coaching opportunity.

Next weeks post will focus on how to build a retention report and why having knowledge of branch retention is so important to the overall stability of an organization.

If you have other topics you would like for this blog to discuss feel free to e-mail me at Kovachthomas@gmail.com

Marketing Explotation

Isn't that what marketing is all about, "Exploitation?" Finding the needs and wants of a consumer and exploiting those needs to offer or sell a product or service.  We must determine the tools and pieces of knowledge  that will provide the greatest strategic impact and exploit them to the institutions favor.

I once had a boss that bestowed some very good wisdom to me years ago. "We will sell a customer every dime of product the customers needs, however not a penny they do not."  I still reflect on that quote even today, however with a twist by exchanging the word "sell" with "offer."   Although we may see the client will benefit from the service, the customer must still and always be in control.

Don't look at exploitation as a negative term, but one that focuses on the needs of the customer and how we can distinguish ourselves in the market place.  What are our distinctive capabilities and how can the institution differentiate itself?  Never forget or begin your journey to determine which relationships are profitable then educate your associates to find mirroring clients through Business Intelligence.

Now unless you have a great keen sense of intuition you will have to use analytics to find out what information really should matter to your business.  Before you start your exploitation journey you must first ask questions, then start on the most difficult step, obtaining that information.

Each week I will focus on a component of data that will allow you to take that step.  This is not an overnight journey, however one that will take years.  This is the coming age of a strong financial marketer who understands how analytics can contribute to the revenue of an institution. So, you can either stay in a comfort zone of being that place that develop ads, events, and orders balloons or you can add to your knowledge and become a strong player in the organization.

 

Welcome Introduction

First of all this blog maybe long.  I've had a long career and this will allow you to see the evolution of my experience.  Second, I don't consider myself a writer and after reading this some of you may agree, even though I have written and produced hundreds of print, radio, and television commercials, started writing a book on Marketing Analytics, have four YouTube channels, this past May registered my first screen play with the Screen Writers Guild in L. A. and had a documentary that I wrote and produce air on PBS July 2010.     Thanks to spell check half of my battles have been solved, however interesting content and delivery will always be a struggle.

Being a part of the marketing and financial community now for over 25 years I've seen a lot of changes in the industry, however I have also seen an interesting cycle. The FSLIC issues of the of the late 80's are reflected in today's problems in the industry.  Although a lot of institutions went through it once, lessons are sometimes hard to learn.   

I started my career in advertising sales in the early 80's and during this time I was introduced to the financial world when I was elected to the board of the company I worked for Employee Federal Credit Union.  Although at this point I still felt marketing was all creative I began to understand how to manage people, be a part of a board, and eventually direct, reprimand, and coach individuals much older than myself, which at the time I was in my early 20's.  

Although not focused on marketing analytics I was forming opinions as to what individuals wanted and it was my job to meet those needs.  Within 5 years I had risen to the president of the board of the credit union and handled the largest book of clients producing close to 25% of the company's revenue. 


My marketing ability found additional outlets being chosen at the age of 26 to a committee that would develop and market a brand for the community in which I lived.  I look back and sometimes smile for I was the youngest of this group which included Senior Vice Presidents of fortune 100 companies, a University, Banks, and other organizations.  After a few weeks I was  elected to chair and guide this group of nine on this two year research project.  Some 25 years later city vehicles still carry the brand of "America's Hometown."

At a press conference attended by local and state media I was the presenter and after that day my life changed forever.

During this time I was in a three month interview process with a local bank to take over the position of Director of Marketing.  It seemed as though talks had stalled, however as soon as I arrived back to my office after that presentation I received a call from the president of the bank saying we needed to talk.  Soon after in my late 20's I was offered the position.

This position was all about being creative and exposure.  New brochures, 100th anniversary, billboards, radio, television I was able to learn it all.  I did get my hands in a new database process from NCR that would allow one to write a few parameters and produce mailings.  This was really new technology for the time.  Hey we were lucky to have computers and a personal one at that time was out of the question.

It must have been a number of years later the company was approached by a local commercial bank to merge.  After the agreement I became one of three individuals to oversee the process.  

Fast forwarding a few years I was promoted to marketing director after the banks director suddenly passed away.  This was a great shock for this gentleman had been mentoring myself and another individual who eventually took over human resources.  Here is the irony, my boss left on vacation on Friday, however before going he had spoken to the president telling him that we were ready and that when he returned he would like to start discussing retirement.

My phone rang early Monday morning at work and it was his wife telling me of his passing.  She had asked me to call his best friend to give him the news.  That was and still today was the hardest phone call I have ever made.

As the years passed it was a great time in my career, more campaign production of radio and television commercials, some winning advertising awards, and some getting national attention from trade magazines.  

The organization went through it's difficult times with poor earnings just like everyone else, however the strong leadership pulled the organization through.  It was a great time to own stock for they gave you a 25% discount for purchases and then the organization was providing greater than 35% annual returns.

In the late 90's I started to realize bank marketing was never going to change in the minds of Senior Management.  It was the place where the pretty color paper and pens were located.  No one ever took you seriously.

It was after being introduced to database marketing my mind was transformed.  The company was growing and with it a new corporate entity was formed to actively seek mergers to expand the organization.  In doing so a corporate marketing function was established where my position was to oversee two marketing positions and help with production.  Additional duties were development of presentations for the CEO and CFO.  A lot of the times I was asked to go along for the secret meetings because the presentation technology was new in those days.

Marketing Customer Information Files were the hot topic of the time and I was directed to look for one.  I had researched and brought in a number of companies and after 6 months we chose one.  It was not a great experience for the company we chose was in the development of a new windows product and after they missed their delivery date we were not happy campers.

However you talk about a company with integrity...they flew my boss and myself to their home office and spent the entire day with us explaining what had happened.  They did everything to win back our business.  At the end of the day we stayed still knowing it would be another 6 months until we would be up and running.

My job at this point was to oversee and be the go to individual at the corporate level on the system.  I didn't want to run it because of what the salesman told us.  "A trained monkey could run this."    I didn't want to be that monkey....


However quickly I determined that this tool was far more than what the salesman was providing.  It was the actual turning point in my career where I understood that financial marketing individuals were a dime a dozen and that by adding the skill set of being an Analytical Marketing Director I could have an impact on the industry.

That day in 1997 changed it all.  I had determined that our marketing directors for two banks either didn't have the skill set nor the time to use the system.  I took it on myself to read the manual, twice prior to attending training.  My boss came with me, however after a few hours he was toast...I was in heaven.

I never looked back and I was determined to become an expert, within a few years was being asked to present at national conferences as a subject matter expert.  

In 2000 our bank was merged with an organization nine times our size.  Boy talk about not seeing it coming.  I was as close to the merger process as anyone and the board didn't allow anyone to know.  Here was another interesting time.  I thought I didn't have a chance being a part of a $9 billion organization.  However after meeting them I knew I could contribute to their limited programs.

I was the first employee hired prior to the merger and was what I called having my salary laundered for six months.  So I was still being paid by my current company, however the new company was reimbursing the amount.

Talk about running into a company that was pretty out of touch.  Very quickly I was able to turn their MCIF system into a revenue producing tool.  

The organization was in need of an automated referral performance management system that could track over 1,100 employees on various metrics, report and, reduce tracking time. This mission was given to me to sort out.   I started out trying to find a company...however soon found nothing would do what was needed and if I did find something close the price tag ranged from $250,000 to $1.5 million.  Guess what...it was not going to happen.

So in an interesting twist of faith the IT group and myself set out on a new venture... to build one.  Now I had only one computer programing class in college and that was so long ago it meant nothing.  However what I did know was the process and how to work with those that coded.

Within three months myself a small group of those from IT and one outside coder we were able to develop, implement, and train 1,500 individuals on an AS/400 based operating system that once we flipped the switch took a process that was taking over 30 days after the end of the month to report and referrals taking over two weeks to get to the proper individual to a real-time living breathing system.  All for under $40,000.  When I presented this to the board I was given a standing ovation and what seemed like a blank check to do what ever I wanted.

I went on to enhance the system building a digital profile tool and over 35 incentive compensation programs.  By 2003 we had stopped the development of the system looking then for its replacement.  Some 7 years later in 2010 the tool is still being used because the organization just can't find a system that can produce the same results for a reasonable amount of money.

I could continue to provide the other tools I had built for the organization, daily measurement and reporting tools, however this blog will provide you with what you will need to begin evaluating your organization, your products, your ability to provide returns on your marketing dollars, trends, retention, and propensity.

I still do not consider myself an expert, however I have logged a ton of hours in the thought process.  I have built tools seven years ago that have out thought the industries needs where in 2010 banks are just starting to ask for.

I want to use this blog as a means to lift the financial marketing industry so that individuals can grow and contribute to your companies bottom line.       

If ever you have a question please feel free to make a comment or even to e-mail me direct and I will be glad to help you.

Thank you for taking your time to enhance your skills in Financial Marketing Analytics