Are the items assessed in the performance scorecard fair? Do they fit Citibank’s stated goals & culture? Should measures that have “hard” data be treated differently from those that are more subjective? Why or why not?
Are the items assessed in the performance scorecard fair?
YES, they include important factors to the bank that should be understood by the professional managers and if they know the rules in advance then it is fair. Particularly scorecard template is clear and easy to understand. 7 specific blocks of targets (financial, strategy, customer satisfaction, control, people, standards and finally overall evaluation) shows what is most important for Citibank in this year. Except figures and data (Key Performance Indicators – KPIs) there is also a place for comments and opinions which is very important to evaluate managers and employees. In addition to 4 quarterly performance assessments McGaran has received year-end performance as a summary of all KPI and supervisor’s opinions. We think that in this matter scorecard is clear and fair. However, the way of measurement of customer satisfaction can be questioned (the sample is too small, 25 seems to be not representative). 80% satisfaction target also seems to be high for this specific branch (it assumes that in 1996 McGaran’s branch must improve customers’ satisfaction from around 66 to 80 per-cent on diversified and demanding customer portfolio) – however, it was almost reached in Q4. In order to avoid any doubts related to the customer satisfaction indicator, it is advised to exclude in the next year the ATMs and other services centrally managed from the customers’ survey (otherwise it should be well explained that customer satisfaction from all services is joint responsibility of all employees and that goals of central team responsible for e.g. ATMs include customer satisfaction).
Do they fit Citibank’s stated goals & culture?
“Citibank’s strategy in California was to build a profitable...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document