Financial industry leaders talk about competition with an emphasis on differentiation. Add to the conversation the many threats to survival of small financial institutions, and in that context we hear rhetoric that has bombarded the industry since the mid-1990s merger boom and upsurge in start-up community banks.
Recently a friend and mentor, herself a senior financial executive, confirmed that today's financial industry conferences frequently focus on how to differentiate. So I conducted a bit of research.
Merriam Webster Online defines differentiation as: 1 : to obtain the mathematical derivative of; 2 : to mark or show a difference in : constitute a difference that distinguishes; 3 : to develop differential characteristics in; 4 : to cause differentiation of in the course of development; 5 : to express the specific distinguishing quality of : discriminate.
But it's not that easy. Let's start with the basics of competition.
Momentarily put aside the top two competitive factors most often touted: location and convenience. Banks and credit unions can offer only so many different products and services. Each has access to the same delivery options. It’s the consumer who has to wade through products, services and promises to make a decision on who, where, what and how to conduct their banking services.
When you add in competition from insurance agents, investment houses and big box retailers (is everyone saying Wal-Mart?), consumers have the daunting task of digging further into the pile. When they search on the Internet, the results are overwhelming -- check out the number of Google results for commonly searched financial terms:
That's a lot of information for everyday people to wade through. And it's a lot for any given financial institution to try to stand out from. When you think about differentiation, do you:
I chose No. 4 because it's not about differentiation at all. It's about relevance. It's about the issue or matter at hand. It's the ability to provide information that satisfies the needs of the user. Better yet, relevance is practical, socially applicable and simple.
It isn't about making your service relevant. It's about making the customer relevant. Once your organization is aligned with this approach, service will become relevant and result in an effective alignment of strategy, people, process and technology.
I set aside discussion of locations and convenience earlier. Here's why.
Relevance is largely a local state of mind. This is validated by the employees you hire and the customers you serve within each community. Community is defined as city or suburb, not region or state. Analyze rural vs. metro performance any day of the week and you'll understand why. Simply having more locations will not guarantee success if your customers do not feel or believe they are relevant to the organization. Financial investment in branch locations is significant, so why not focus on matching the customer with the right mix of employees, products, marketing and community involvement?
The most important component of relevance is knowledge. The circle of knowledge includes customers, employees, and boards. You have to connect the dots with people, process and technology. Success requires an understanding of not only the products your customers want but why they need those products. You then have to make sure that your entire financial organization understands the "why." You can never invest too much in educating your employees, nor too much in "marketing knowledge" -- both what they can learn and what you have learned -- to your customers.
So consider taking a few initial steps toward creating relevance.
Create a customer-centric organization with knowledgeable employees that know how to listen and offer solutions and service that are exactly what the customer needed and expected.
Then your customers will know they matter. They will know they are relevant. And your products and services will be relevant to them.