Bankacılıkta değişim yönetimi
Change management in banking
- Tez No: 97124
- Danışmanlar: PROF. DR. NAZIM EKREN
- Tez Türü: Doktora
- Konular: Bankacılık, İşletme, Banking, Business Administration
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Belirtilmemiş.
- Yıl: 2000
- Dil: Türkçe
- Üniversite: Marmara Üniversitesi
- Enstitü: Bankacılık ve Sigortacılık Enstitüsü
- Ana Bilim Dalı: Bankacılık Ana Bilim Dalı
- Bilim Dalı: Belirtilmemiş.
- Sayfa Sayısı: 273
Özet
Özet yok.
Özet (Çeviri)
252 SUMMARY CHANGE MANAGEMENT İN BANKING Change process is redefining working environment and the relationship styles within the organizations and bringing out significant elf eels âl the macro and micro level. It forces organization leaders to cope with these serious problems, in order to adapt these changes, new methods, new skills and new structures or to put it shortly, a new organization is needed. Salomon Brothers interviewed witn more than 50 banks in 11 major banking markets to“evaluate the industry's success in controlling costs and to determine how performance might improve in the future.”They concluded that: Cost management hâs become â dominant strategic theme throughout the banking world. Buffeted by asset quality- problems, weak loan demands and difficulty of building reliable non-interest income streams, bank management has almost universally turned to cost reduction as öne öl the principal drivers of earnings growth. The major lesson from the handful of successful low cost producers is that a cultural commitment to cost management, invariably. driven forcefully throughout the organization by the chief executive, is the most important success factor. Cost reduction runs counter to the culture of most banking organizations, and the will to maximize profits trough what effectively constitutes staff reduction and repositioning in necessary to achieve durable results. If this culture is in place, the techniques of successful cost management are proven and sraight forward. Most such efforts are summarized under the heading -business process reengineering.“ The use of these techniques is spreading rapidly as banks in one market after another acknowledge.253 Cost management is one the Few realistle means öf achieving profit growth. Ân imperative to redesign fundamentally the way in which bankers operate is a worldwide phenomenon. Previously discrete financial service industries are converging and competing aggressively on each other's turf. Regulatory barriers, which had impeded both inter-bank competition and non-bank entry into the most lucrative of banking markets, have crumbled. Ever- âeeelerâtihğ product and technological innovation are requiring quick responses and huge bets on the future. That is what reengineering is: the redesign of processes from scratch. It is acknowledging that the way things have done in the past is hot sâerosâhet, and â hew competitive environment and new technologies, require radical new ways of doing things of the past, at lower cost or in better ways. ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE: CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK By any objective measure, the amount öf significant, often traumatic, change in organizations has grown tremendously over past two decades. Although some people predict that most of the reengineering, restrategizing, mergers, downsizing, quality efforts, and cultural renewal projects will sees, disappear, that is highly unlikely. Powerful macroeconomics forces are at work here, and these forces may grow even stronger over the next few decades. As a result, more and more organizations will be pushed to reduce costs, improve the quality of products and services, locate new opportunities for growth, and increase productivity. To date, major change efforts have helped some some organizations adapt significantly to shifting conditions,”have improved the competitive standing of others, and have positioned a few for a far better future.254 Need for Change in today's competitive business environment, learning about, planning for, and implementing major organizational change must be considered the highest priority for an organization's long- term survival and prosperity. Today's businesses face challenges so complex that even a few years ago they would have been unimaginable. Now, at the twenty-first century, the one thing we can be sure of is that the challenges will become even more complex in the days to come. To help us sort through this tangle of problems and challenges, let us focus our attention on two overriding forces that affect virtually ali organization: increased competition and increased customer demand lor quality. Either öne âlöhe can tremendous changes in an organization; when they coexist -as they usually do- their combined impact on a company increases geometrically. The proper metaphor for managing change is balancing a mobile. MosH organ.Lzat.iohs today find themselves undertaking a number of projects as part of their change effort. Ân organization ma simultaneously be working on TQM, process reengineering, employee empowerment, and several other programs designed to improve performance. But the Key to the change effort is hot attending to each piece in isolation ; it's connecting and balancing all pieces.. In managing change, the critical task is understanding how pieces balance off one another, how changing öne element changes the rest, how sequencing and pace affect the whole structure. The need for change presents itself in various forms or symptoms. ît can require a small, first-order change or a large, second-order change. It can affect öne small part öf the organization or involve an entire corporation. The ne'e d for change may come from a powerful external source that throws the255 entire ergâhiiâtlöh Into turmoil er from ân Internal demand made by GEO or another key leader. Leading Cfiange Leadership might be defined as the process of using one* s power tö influence the behavior öf others. Implicit in this definition are several important concepts. First is personnel power. Influence does not just happen. It is an outcome of the leader's ability to establish credibility and to use that credibility as a tool to persuade. Second is direction: leaders use their personnel power to influence others to do something. Leaders have confidence in their ideas and the competence to get others to understand and believe in them. Finally the definition suggests that leadership is evident only when it leads to a change in the behavior of others. Leadership, therefore, implies a certain relationship between the leader and the follower. The critical leadership tasks in managing change appear to be much more fragmentary and incremental than the popular preoccupation with business wizardry. Leading change requires a flow of actions, which are appropriate to their context. Put simply, different eras produce the need for different types öf leadership. Such requirements do not necessarily imply a single leader. The need may be more than a one leader over time if performance is to be maintained. Equaiiy important may be the creation öf collective leadership ât â senior level“which may then be supported by the development of a sense of complementary leadership at lower levels. Leading change involves action by people at every level of the business. Personnel attributes necessary for leaders tö make change happen can be listed as follow:. Persuasive: A point constantly made was that the lead person be capable of convincing people to accept his or her way of256 thinking. Winning people over* was a frequently used expression. Apart from fundamental communication skills, the ability to inspire was the most common characteristic stated. Facilitating: Change leaders do not dictate: they direct. This means they must conduct, orchestrate and coordinate, not rule. Synergies between people are explored, found and mined. Infrastructures are provided to facilitate, not administrate. Consistent: Consistency in the message and in behavior is paramount. The change leader is thus seen as reliable, someone who ”makes consistent decisions which Follow â pattern and so are predictable, coherent, reassuring and ^rnake people feel' a phrase used often. Visible: Öne person or, in some instances, a team must be identifiable as the rallying point for the ehânge. The simple use of guidelines and directives is insufficient - people need the personnel touch. Anonymity is fatal for a change process. Those responsible must be personally involved, be seen to take risks and drive the process. Integrity: The person leading the change process must be perceived as doing it for the common good of the organization, and not simply for the sake of personnel ago. Straightforward, upfront and truthful, even when the tirllth, or its consequences, are painful were expressions used. REENGINEERING : ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK *Re' words started to shake companies up; in particular, Recession, Reaction, and Reengineering. Recession pushed companies to brink; customer' s reaction was to vote with their feet, joining companies with superior service; reengineering advocates continually moving forward through the continuous improvement öf people, process and systems. Milch öf the. hype associated with reengineering implies immediate transformation and success.257 Practitioners would argue that very few companies have truly reengineered, as proof of success lies in the results. If companies discussing reengineering can prove that they really have achieved market domination; really have innovated; really have moved from functional hierarchy to process ownership, with the management delayering this implies; really have empowered and trusted their people; really have achieved ten-fold improvements in productivity and service levels; reduced costs; and have used the latest enabling technology to facilitate and support such change; then they can claim reengineering. But this is not always the case. So, what are companies doing, if not reengineering? Many are implementing process redesign, or process improvement programs. This is a pragmatic, focused change applied to one process at a time, and differs significantly from the radical thinking of reengineering. Definition Reengineering doesn' t mean tinkering with what already exists or making incremental changes that leave basic structures intact. It isn't about making patchwork fixes - jury-ringing existing systems so that they work better. It does mean abandoning long-established procedures and looking afresh at the required to create a company' s product, or service and deliver value to the customer. It means asking this question:“If I were re-creating this company today, given what I know and given current technology, what would it look like?”Reengineering a company means tossing aside old systems and starting over. It involves going back to the beginning and inventing a better way of doing work.“Reengineering, ”properly, is“the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes to achieve dramatic improvements in critical, contemporary measures of performance, such as cost, quality, service, and speed.”258 Reengineering in a Comparative Perspective Business Process Reengineering and Business Process Redesign both trade under the same acronym, BPR. Hence, every company claims to be reengineering, when many are actually achieving improvements through process redesign. Business Process Redesign may be defined as a pragmatic, focused change to a single process, end-to-end, resulting in organizational and technological changes that simplify, delete or change the way in which that single process delivers value to the customer. Whereas reengineering is revolution, redesign is evolution. This does not necessarily mean that the company has been transformed, only that the process undergoing redesign has, hopefully, been improved. If these concepts are extended to cover Total Quality, then these techniques can be complementary. Three things are, therefore, clear: first, the approaches are complementary; second, any improvement to the way in. which a company looks after customers has to be good; and third, the choice of approach is often based upon the urgency of the need to change. Specific Goals of Reengineering Reengineering has five goals. The following paragraphs explain these goals.. Increasing- productivity. Reengineering seeks to increase productivity by creating innovative and seamless processes that have an interrupted flow and occur in natural order, with a natural velocity. The paradigm of vertical“silos”of ta*şks and responsibilities is broken down and replaced with cross- functional, flatter, networked structure. The classical,259 top-down approach to control and decision making is replaced with an approach that is organized around core processes, is characterized by empowerment, and is closer to the customer.. Optimizing- value to shareholders. Reengineering strives to optimize value to shareholders through doing things differently. Innovations in such functions as product design, manufacturing, and customer service are examples. Employees who are involved with reengineering recognize its benefits and develop a profound sense of ownership that helps the organization to achieve greater long-term growth and competitiveness.. Achieving quantum results. Reengineering sets out to achieve at least a 50 percent improvement; if the yield is not at least 50 percent, then the achievement, although it may be an impressive one, is not reengineering.. Consolidating functions. Reengineering seeks to create an organization that is leaner, flatter, and faster. The ability to rapidly assimilate innovations, market needs, technological developments, customer trends, and competitor initiatives is trademark of the reinvented organization.. Elim i na. ting unnecessary levels and -work. Reengineering constructively challenges and analyzes the organization' s hierarchy and activities in terms of their value, purpose, and content. Organizational levels and activities that represent little value to shareholders or contribute little to competitiveness are either restructured or eliminated. Reinvention requires the continual assessment of -'.th'e '“? organization, its management practices, its people,, its--. systems, its customers, and the environment in which it operates..ii;;;260 Succeeding At Reengineering Many companies that begin reengineering don't succeed at it. They end their efforts precisely where they begun, making no significant changes, achieving no major performance improvement, and fueling employee cynicism with yet another ineffective business improvement program. Unscientific estimate is that as many as 50 percent to 70 percent of the organizations that undertake a reengineering effort do not achieve the dramatic results they intended. As with chess, so with reengineering: The key to success lies in knowledge and ability, not in luck. If you know the rules and avoid making mistakes, you're extremely likely to succeed. In reengineering, moreover, the same mistakes get made over and over. The first step to reengineering success, therefore, is to recognize these common failures and learn to avoid them. The following five factors common to successful reengineering efforts:. Set an aggressive reengineering performance target. The target must span the entire business unit to ensure sufficient breadth. For example, aim for a USD 250 million pretax profit increase to result from a 15% cost reduction and a 5% revenue increase.measured across the business unit as a whole.. Commit 20% to 505 of the chief executive's time to the project. The time commitment may begin at 20% and grow to 50% during implementation stage. For example, schedule weekly meetings that inform the top manager of the project's status.. Conduct a comprehensive review of customer needs, economic leverage points, and market trends. For example, customer interviews and visits, competitor benchmarking, analysis of best practices in other industries, and economic modeling of the business.26İ. Assign an additional senior executive to be responsible for implementation. The manager should spend at least 50% of his or her time on the project during the critical implementation stage.. Conduct a comprehensive pilot of the new design. The pilot should test the design's overall impact as well as the implementation process, while at the same time building enthusiasm for full implementation. REEN?ÎNEERÎN? THE BANK: OPERATIONAL FRAMEWORK Ân imperative to fundamentally redesign the way in which bankers operate is thus a word-wide phenomenon. Once discrete financial service industries are now converging and competing aggressively on each other's turf. Regulatory barriers, once impeding both interbank competition and non-bank entry into the most lucrative of banking markets, have crumbled. Ever- accelerating product and technological innovation are requiring quick responses and huge bets on the future. The leeway to price in an unsophisticated, ”bundled“ fashion has disappeared, as customers shop for each of their individual product needs. All of these trends are creating an environment for the banking industry where the margin of error for under-performance is continually narrowing - as evidenced by global impact of misconceived real estate lending and the rapid penetration by product-specific suppliers, such as mutual funds, credit cards, captive auto finance companies, and commercial paper underwriters. Reengineering is not arbitrary, across-the-board cost-cutting, as is often disguised behind euphemisms like ”restructuring,“ ”total quality control,“ downsizing,”or“horizontal management.”Arbitrary programs do not work. Since the volume' and nature of tasks has not been reduced or changed,. costs creep back through temporary employees or overtime. Staff262 members become disgruntled, as they know that reasonably efficient departments are penalized for the sake of those that have been mismanaged in the past. Customer service suffers because the easiest areas to reduce are often the“variable”costs of front-line employees. Nore does reengineering always result in staff reductions in all areas. Costs in banks are dominated by personnel expenses. Therefore, fundamental economic redesign does often result in substantially lower employee numbers. Such reduction is selective, however, reflecting the relative value-added of the processes served by each position. Moreover, the level of natural attrition in banks, if properly harnessed as part of a comprehensive human resources strategy, enables the cost side of the reengineering process to be managed humanely and equitably. No redesign can be totally painless, but“anesthetics”are available. Reengineering the bank is an intense organizational experience, pitting the whole staff against demanding and inviolable deadlines. Nonetheless, it is manageable without compromising service or the bank's strategic objectives. Because the reengineering approach is perceived as fair, and results in the creation of a truly new bank, employees become enthusiastic and involved. They put in the extra effort to cover their normal duties, as well as the demands of the program. They want to be part of making their bank a winner. The goals of reengineering are to create an institution with superior customer service, with the highest focus on profitable sales opportunities, and with a culture of“can do,”not“can't do, because.”If properly structured, and led by committed senior management, these objectives are achievable and fundamentally enhance bank economics through sustainable annuity earnings.263 Factors Behind Change The traditional deposit-taking and lending activities are being de-emphasized, as bankers search for fee-generating market niches that will supply as much as one half of their operating income. This shift in focus is necessary because top- tier corporate clients have found it much easier to access.money and capital markets directly and by-pass the banking system. Regulatory constraints limit bank access to many potentially profitable fee-generating lines of business such as securities and insurance. In spite of the obvious challenges, this is one of the most exciting periods in commercial banking history. Long-standing barriers are falling on many fronts. The line between commercial banking and securities activities in the United States is blurring as the rest of stopgap regulatory measures and strategic alliances among banks, security firms, and investment companies. U.S. banks are universally recognized as the industry's most technologically advanced and innovative. The European market presents opportunities to take part in the privatization of enterprises in such varied industries as banking, insurance, telecommunications, transportation, utilities, mining and manufacturing. There are also long-term opportunities in trade finance, foreign currency transactions, corporate finance, and retail banking in Asia. Tfie Reeriğineeririğ Decision in Banking When should the CEO know that his core bank requires reengineering? The following are five telltale signs. Languishing- Stock Price. The market is telegraphing bankers that it is focusing on long-term earnings growth potential as the basis for its valuation of their stocks. A gradual264 declining market valuation of current earnings is a clear signal for dramatic action. Strategic Directions Conflict trith Market Valuation. To the extent that the board and GEO are committed to remaining independent and growing, either internally or through acquisitions, the market's signals test the viability of their strategy. Sub-Par Efficiency Ratios. Comparisons of ratios have their limitations due to differences in business mix and other factors. As a rule-of- thumb, the efficiency ratio is a leading indicator of competitive positioning. Small-to mid-sized bank should have an efficiency ratio of 50 percent if it is to be a major force in the future. Perceived Process Redundancy. The signal above are“hard, ”quantitative clues of the potential for reengineering. Even more important are the *xsoft“ indicators of process misdesign. These may be identified by asking such questions as:. Are turnaround times for loan applications and the like.slower than the market,, and becoming more protracted in peak demand periods?. Are customer complaints on the rise?. Have significant expenditures on new technology and systems failed to produce demonstrable cost savings or revenue improvement s ?. Are senior managers spending much of their time dealing with administration and crisis management, rather than setting strategic direction and getting out to see customers?. Do the paper-ridden desks of platform staff resemble rats' nests?. How many staff members report to the average middle-level manager? How many layers of management exist between the GEO and the platform staff?. With in the corporate culture, is success measured by number öf new sales ör by number öf problems' solved?265. Are employees aggressive and hungry for the bank* s earnings success, or passive ”“time-servers?'' Senior- Management Will and Skill. The CEO and his team also have to ask themselves the hard question, ”Do we have the stomach and capability to challenge everything we do from scratch?“ An honest answer to this is critical. Reengineering in true turnaround situations for weak banks is easier in one way -given the ”do or die'' environment- but can lead to management having a shorter-term perspective on customer service and risk. For a good performer to face the intensity and uncertainty of reengineering takes vision and guts. Outsiders can facilitate the program and provide thought-leadership from the past experience (the skills to help reengineer), but commitment and determination to succeed must come from within the bank. The Future of Banking Bankers have many competitive advantages on which to build: a unique distribution network coverage of branches, ATMs, and loyal, highly trained salespeople in what has essentially become a local retailing business; sophisticated payments, transaction processing, and securities and foreign exchange trading technology and skills; superior credit underwriting capabilities; and, most importantly, the exceptional loyalty and inertia of consumers, small business owners, and the iike. For the past 20 years, banking industry critics have been predicting the demise of banking. And in some ways, the industry has been its own worst enemy, whether because of developing country loans, highly leveraged transactions, a ^a;l estate credits, or other expensive product fads such as. discount brokerage, and, potentially, mutual fund acquisitions.266 Yet, based on its competitive strengths, the industry has always bounced back. If we iook at the effect of competition in other financial services, we see that consumers and businesses are the clear beneficiaries. Commercial firms are active in the securities business, credit cards, auto financing, money market funds, and saving and loans. These businesses are iarge and small, national and regional, independent and commercially owned, and competing on not just size and financial strength but also on service, cost, and innovative products. Increased competition from nontraditional institutions, new information technologies and declining processing costs, the erosion of product and geographic boundaries, and less restrictive governmental regulations have all played a role. But this now familiar list of factors provides neither a framework for understanding the changes under way nor a way to think about how the future might evolve. Banks must radically redesign their basic processes and business approaches to reflect the realities of competition in the 1990s, they must reengineer the bank in order to survive and thrive. CEQs with vision and guts to face the economic realities of their industry are empowering their staff to redesign the bank from scratch. They are using the resulting improvements to the value of their stock to fund acquisition, and then using the discipline instilled through-out the bank as a result of the reengineering process to realize the consolidation benefits so often lost in the past. True reengineering is not easy. ît involves challenging each precept of traditional banking, and remolding and institution's culture. Yet, if structured and managed wisely, it can be an exciting and reinvigorating experience that melds the267 institution more tightiy together, while returning its focus to that of customer sales and service. Implementation öf Cnarige Management in Banking: Garantibank Case Established in 1946 in Ankara as a privately owned commercial bank, Garanti is the second largest bank in Turkey with total assets of TL 7,952,002 Billions (US$12,871 Millions) according to the consolidated and inflation adjusted financial statements for the first half of 2ÖÖÖ. Garanti provides consumer, commercial and corporate banking services through a network of 238 domestic branches, 14 local offices, three overseas branches in Luxembourg, Dusseldorf and Malta, five representative offices in Moscow, London, Dusseldorf, Shangai and Geneva. Garanti owns subsidiary banks in the Netherlands; United Garanti Bank International and Russia; Garanti Bank Moscow, and is the 100% owner of the oldest bank in Turkey; Ottoman Bank. Since İ995, Garanti' s management has been implementing a strategy designed to strengthen the Bank's market position in a lower inflation environment. The“Nokta Project”, which will be completed by the end of 2ÖÖ1, is designed to tailor branch delivery channels to the 5 customer segments being targeted and to cover the 80 micro-markets identified by the Bank. Garanti will increase the number of its branches from 238 to 335 by the end of 2ÖÖİ without increasing the number of its employees.268 Investments in systems technology have made Garanti an automation leader. In 1992 Garanti Bank became the first Turkish bank to have all its branches real-time on-line. The Bank's advanced MIS not only facilitates asset-liability management but ables it to price products in the context of relationship banking. Other examples of the technological competitiveness include RÂRÖC for market risk analysis, internet banking services, and highly automated information systems that provide management with more quality information faster than available to its competitors. The Bank's state-of- the art if systems help the Bank to realize major improvements in efficiency and quality of service to customers, and effectively implement its policies and strategies. Garanti offers 24-hour banking services via Garanti Internet branch,“Alo Garanti”, full-function, live-agent telephone banking, and ATM network with five other banks having more than 3,000 ÂTM's. As the leader in internet banking with a market share of more than 50%, Garanti is the first bank to offer internet banking and e-commerce as well as telephone banking in Turkey. Âs of September 2ÖÖÖ, 60% of Garanti1 s banking transactions were undertaken through its alternative delivery channels, up from 47% in 1998 and 50% in 1999. The number of internet and telephone banking customers reached 2İÖ,ÖÖÖ and 260,000 as of September 2ÖÖÖ, up from 38,000 and 95,000 in İ998, respectively. Ât present, the bank has 172 "e-coimerc
Benzer Tezler
- Bankacılıkta riskler ve risk yönetimindeki değişim sürecinin kriz sonrası Türk bankacılık sisteminin yapısı açısından değerlendirilmesi
Risks on banking and a review on changing process of risk management in view of the structure of Turkish banking system after the crisis
ALPER SERDAR
- Müşteri ilişkileri açısından bankacılıkta kredi maliyetlerinin belirlenmesi
Determination of credit costs in banking for customer relationship
FATMA NİLAY ERGİN
Yüksek Lisans
Türkçe
2016
BankacılıkBeykent Üniversitesiİşletme Yönetimi Ana Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. SUDİ APAK
- Bankaların dijitalleşme süreçleri ve müşteri üzerindeki etkileri - Bir banka uygulaması
Digitization processes of banks and its effects on customers -A bank application
SELDA ARSLANER
Yüksek Lisans
Türkçe
2020
BankacılıkBahçeşehir Üniversitesiİşletme Yönetimi Bilim Dalı
PROF. DR. ÖZGÜR ÇENGEL
- Bankacılıkta müşteri ilişkileri yönetiminin müşteri sadakatine etkisi
The effect of customer relationship management on customer loyalty an empirical study at banking
FİKRET GÜMÜŞBUĞA
Yüksek Lisans
Türkçe
2015
BankacılıkKarabük Üniversitesiİşletme Ana Bilim Dalı
DOÇ. DR. ALİ ÇAĞLAR ÇAKMAK
- Bankacılıkta faiz ve kur riski yönetimi ve Türkiye uygulamaları
Interest rate and currency risk management in banking and practices in Turkey
CENGİZ UZUN