Collaboration is seen as the way that smaller players can deliver service levels that would normally be reserved for much larger organizations. This is a great idea in theory, but is practice it carries with it a more complexity to navigate. The article outlines an instance of shared-branching that created lower levels of customer satisfaction for their own members. In order for shared branching to work, it has to function as a team of equals, because larger players can disproportionately bear the brunt.
Binkley said the CU and its staff “tried our hardest to notify people” in advance of the Nov. 29 cutoff, offering 60 days’ advance notice of the upcoming change while emphasizing Altura still would be participating in CO-OP’s shared ATM network. Those who entered an Altura branch on or after Nov. 29 are being directed to the nearest shared branching location that does not belong to Altura.
Mercator Advisory Group understands a certain level of “tiering” of participants may have to be incorporated to level the playing field, with smaller players ultimately paying a use fee to the larger players that are delivering the convenience of service. It appears that in this particular case the quid pro quo was not materializing for the larger player. With data analytics more readily available, it is increasingly likely larger players will be seeking concessions from those CUs whose members are consistently going “off the reservation”.
Overview by Joseph Walent, Associate Director, Customer Interactions Advisory Service at Mercator Advisory Group
Read the quoted story here
