Citibank: Performance Evaluation Essay

In 1996, Citibank was an emergent banking institution attempting to increase its market ploughshare in the matched Los Angeles area. In order to do so, the banks strategy was to focus slightly less on their fiscal growth, and much(prenominal) much on providing a high completelyot of service to its guests. steering viewed this paradigm shift as critical to the long term winner of the franchise. To implement these changes, a new Citibank employee per clayance judgment plug-in was created, briefly tried and quickly implemented.Though I believe it was a much improved and broader way to gauge individual performance, there was sure agency for improvement. The scorecard was composed of fiscal, strategy implementation and control goals which had the gain of clearly, objectively and transparently footmark a coiffers maneuver. These measures were readily accessible though the general accounting system, and left little (if any) room to argue over a motorcoachs performance.H owever, all lead measures focused primarily on the upcoming quarter(s) and how those numbers compared quarter-over-quarter and family-over-year, make them a short-term or lagging indicator of triumph. The remaining measures on the opinion scorecard (client satisfaction, people, and standards) were all noticeably subjective, yet viewed as sound semipermanent indicators and therefore crucial in evaluating the foundation of the incoming success of the arranging.Obviously, the node is (and will al ways be) the most important part of the equation, as it is customer business that allows banks to conduct theirs. People and standards measures are both especially probative measures, as they address the character, personality and perceived image of individuals, management and the organization as a whole. A more specific analysis of the valuement scorecard is as follows Financial Measures Financial goals are clearly and clearly the most important measure in the assessment scorecard.In this fussy case, the per year fiscal targets are the result of a course of study-wide process that overwhelms the division President himself, all the area tutors and respective secernate managers. For any financial institution, I believe this to be the most objective measure of a managers short-term performance. However, discrete short-term accomplishment measures rarely shed light on the bigger picture and, therefore, on the coming(prenominal) direction of an organization. This is easily correlated to many other businesses and organizations including my own.I manage an orthopedic research laboratory at the University of Pittsburgh, and star of the items on our yearly evaluation form is the total dollar amount of our grants. Being awarded n number of grants for x million dollars in any given year provides little information ab step forward future funding opportunities. I view been at the University for over 4 years and bring on seen several PhDs have to close their labora tories unexpectedly after failing to attain the essential funds to maintain their staff and continue their research.Having various items on a performance assessment scorecard can certainly help nullify situations like those. Strategy Implementation This is another objective, transparent, easily quantifiable financial measure. As it stands on the Citibank performance scorecard, this measure focuses exclusively on financial achievement. However, I believe Citibank management should change its strategy implementation goals to include some of the customer satisfaction goals as well.If Citibanks strategy in California is, truly, to provide a high level of service to its customers, I would add relevant questions from the independently conducted telephone interviews to customers who visited the starting timees during the past month to this measure, as it is an essential component of the organizations strategy, and certainly influenced by the actions and leaders approach of the respective branch managers. Internal Control Processes This measure is an added form of financial evaluation done by the internal auditing team that follows in line with the two previously discussed.For Citibank this measure was helpful in assessing the level of awareness and involvement of the managers with compliance problems. Customer Satisfaction The most enigmatic and subjective measure on the scorecard, happens to be highly regarded by Citibank leadership as a vital gauge of the long term success of the organization. I look at this measure as having 2 truly distinct elements. In the telephone survey previously mentioned, there were questions regarding service provided at the actual branch, and questions oncerning other Citibank services such as 24 hours phone banking and ATM services. I believe questions pertaining services offered at the branch belong with the Strategy Implementation measures, as management clearly say customer service as a top priority and the branch managers acti ons should be closely linked to services provided at their own topical anesthetic office. All other questions, ones related to additional Citibank services and seemingly out of a branch managers control, should be eliminated from their performance scorecard. beneath the current format, there is information that I deem crucial to making this decision that is not provided with the case study. Being that this Customer Satisfaction measure is new in the assessment scorecard (which was unless briefly tested before being implemented) I would like to cognize more round the performance of other/all branch managers. That way I would be able to compare Mr. McGarans performance to that of the other managers.I perplex it somewhat unusual that someone as highly regarded as Mr.McGaran seems to be, with so much banking experience, scored so poorly in Customer Satisfaction, yet performed so strongly in all other areas of his yearly assessment for quaternion consecutive years, all while managi ng the most important and most competitive Citibank branch in the Los Angeles division. People and Standards The final two measures on the yearly assessment scorecard go hand in hand, as they upkeep the way branch managers value their own career advancement opportunities as well as their growth as leaders and map-models not only for employees, that also within the communities which they serve.As subjective as these measures talent be, they are essential for any organization, and could have a tremendous encroachment on an individuals career. In this particular case, Ms. Johnson used these sections to trace Mr. McGaran as an excellent people manager (), a team-builder that motivates his people to go above and beyond. She enthusiastically referenced his involvement within the community, his focus, discipline, availability, effectiveness and effort among many other things.These are all intangibles that are difficult to assess otherwise (i. . financial measures), but could make a significant deviation for the organization as well as the individual. In our laboratory we work with many medical students and young residents. Once they complete their projects in the lab, this is the case of subjective assessment I am responsible for presenting to the attending physicians. How do students/residents perform when the attending physicians are not around? How do they dope with this new environment and how do they perform outside of their comfort zona? How well do they interact with the staff?Do they attempt to take on leadership roles even in the limited time they have at the lab, or are they comfortable just going along? I have been doing such evaluations for about 3 years and, as students start getting into residency programs and residents move onto fellowship programs, its stupefying how some of the answers to such simple questions seem to strongly correlate with their future expectations and opportunities. After carefully analyzing all 6 assessment measures, w ith the information available, and if I were asked to make a recommendation on Mr.McGarans overall performance, I would have to give him a par range. The instructions regarding overall year-end performance scores were very clear without par ratings in all the components of the Scorecard, a manager could not get an above par rating. Citibank management, in particular the California Division, had been strongly emphasizing the importance of customer satisfaction for quite some time, even going as distant as changing the performance assessment scorecard to reflect this. Mr.McGaran is the manager of the most important and most competitive Citibank branch, and he is a role model and a reference to many other branch managers.What credibility would we have as management, if we deviated from the rules regarding that very specific measure in the head start year of its implementation? Mr. McGaran was an outstanding employee, and I would do everything within my actor to let him know that his incredibly strong overall performance had been tell and that we, as management, were aware of his concerns regarding the validity of the telephone survey.I would let him know that the year-end performance evaluation team is always looking for ways to enhance and improve the assessment scorecard, but in accordance with the one currently in place, he could disagree, but had to accept his rating, and continue to improve his customer satisfaction numbers just as he did during the stand firm quarter. Obviously, such evaluation process serves not only to assess employees but also the system in place to do so.With that in mind, I would propose some changes to the year-end assessment scorecard, starting with an evaluation to the center of the telephone survey and its soundness in assessing a branch managers performance. I would also suggest that the rating system be adjusted, so that instead of 3 categories, there were 5. Hopefully, these changes would create a more flexible assessme nt scorecard, and a yearly performance such as that of Mr. McGaran would be properly distinguished and rewarded.