Shareholder V Staff

[BayView]

Went into my local CBA branch yesterday and was in an idle discussion with one of the tellers as she was processing my deposit.

The CBA have cut back this branch's "work hours" after a review was done and found that the branch's overall turnover and productivity was below expectations.

So, some staff have gone, and others have been cut back on hours.

And the last quarter profit was; how much?

 

[Rolf Latham]

Went into my local CBA branch yesterday and was in an idle discussion with one of the tellers as she was processing my deposit.

The CBA have cut back this branch's "work hours" after a review was done and found that the branch's overall turnover and productivity was below expectations.

So, some staff have gone, and others have been cut back on hours.

And the last quarter profit was; how much?

Against a cap value of?

Corporates need to keep skinny to have any hope of making a buck, and staffing is always an easier mark than quantum product improvement

Ta
rolf

 

[Corey Batt]

"Those greedy landlords jacked up my rent even though they already have like 5 properties!!!"

Businesses are there to make money as efficiently as possible. In a corporate environment at such multitudes need to have razor gangs to make they don't have ballooning costs.

Because in the end, they are there purely for the benefit of the shareholders who've risked their funds in the company, not the staff.

 

[Terry_w]

"Those greedy landlords jacked up my rent even though they already have like 5 properties!!!"

Businesses are there to make money as efficiently as possible. In a corporate environment at such multitudes need to have razor gangs to make they don't have ballooning costs.

Because in the end, they are there purely for the benefit of the shareholders who've risked their funds in the company, not the staff.

Excellent point!

These are not charities or government departments..

 

[Norwester]

BV,

and was in an idle discussion with one of the tellers as she was processing my deposit.

More than likely this person will not be there next time.........Talking to the customers slows productivity...

Businesses are there to make money as efficiently as possible.

Because in the end, they are there purely for the benefit of the shareholders who've risked their funds in the company, not the staff.

Fail.

Or should I say..........."to big too fail"??.......


Ciao

Nor

 

[datto]

Because in the end, they are there purely for the benefit of the shareholders who've risked their funds in the company, not the staff.

No, not purely for the shareholders. The board gets the cream, then shareholders, then staff.

 

[Waldo]

And the last quarter profit was; how much?

I would definately argue that this is the reason why their quarterly profit was so good.

Its like an investment portfolio - if the particular property (or bank branch) isn't pulling its weight financially; its like to look at either cutting it lose or making it perform better (in property we may do this by adding a granny flat, renovation, development, ect).

 

[BayView]

I guess they are moving ever closer to no "over the counter" staff...

I'm sure the shareholders will be happy with that as their share div rockets upwards.

More than likely this person will not be there next time.........Talking to the customers slows productivity

She's the senior staffer, been there a fair while, is very good, and when I was there I was the only customer in the queue. She knows when it's time for a chat, and when it's time for work....seen her in action plenty of times.

I try to time my visits when no one else (or at least; way less folk) are around.

The staff at my branch are very personable and helpful. The Manager and I go running together from time to time...it's the type of branch that everyone wants I would say.

 

[geoffw]

I used to encourage my staff to have a short chat with customers. It doesn't decrease productivity, it increases it- customers are happy to come back where there's a smile and some friendliness and rapport, and staff feel more relaxed.

My wife works in a workplace where conversation even between fellow workers is positively discouraged. She comes home tense and uptight. This can't be good for her work performance. There is a place in the workplace for friendliness and chatting within bounds. Treating people like robots is not a good way towards a productive workplace.

 

[BayView]

I would definately argue that this is the reason why their quarterly profit was so good.

Its like an investment portfolio - if the particular property (or bank branch) isn't pulling its weight financially; its like to look at either cutting it lose or making it perform better (in property we may do this by adding a granny flat, renovation, development, ect).

The branch does make a profit - just not a big enough profit, apparently.

What will happen is next they'll close down the branch and only have the one branch open in Rosebud - 10 mins away, or in Mornington - 15 mins away.

That might be fine, but human nature is to follow the path of least resistance. The locals (you know; those folk who give them the profits) will probably close their accounts ad open up a new one at the local Bendigo Bank, who I'm sure would love to take over the few thousand accounts.

To me; they've lost sight of the forest because of the trees....

They make profits off the money from the customers; all our loans are organised through speaking with a human first....they can then punch the figures into their computer model to approve the loan later, if they wish, and so on.

 

[santaslayer]

The branch does make a profit - just not a big enough profit, apparently.
.

It's just an opportunity cost I guess. If you are making a small profit in X, but you can make a bigger profit in Y, then you would sell X to release the dollars to fund Y. Just like the IP game.

 

[Dazz]

I reckon the whole problem stems from the title of the thread.

Shareholder V staff.

Why does it need to be V ??

------

The best outcome for all is delivered when the staff are the shareholders.

 

[BayView]

I reckon the whole problem stems from the title of the thread.

Shareholder V staff.

Why does it need to be V ??

------

The best outcome for all is delivered when the staff are the shareholders.

In the context of who does the Bank think they should cater to first - which group is the priority?

If all the shareholders vacated the ship tomorrow, would the business still be profitable?

 

[Rolf Latham]

If all the shareholders vacated the ship tomorrow, would the business still be profitable?

no

Thanks
Rolf

 

[Rolf Latham]

That might be fine, but human nature is to follow the path of least resistance. The locals (you know; those folk who give them the profits) will probably close their accounts ad open up a new one at the local Bendigo Bank, who I'm sure would love to take over the few thousand accounts.

and that is how commercial reality works.

In your industry as an example, if you need to shut your doors your customers will will simply go somewhere else, just as they would with mine.

a good analogy for mechanics workshop Tyre service place would be that you focus only on what you can make money on and don't worry about the rest............... As an example you don't do puncture repairs, that means this business will go elsewhere, as will some of the business that is allied to do puncture repair in the first place.

But you might find that you could be better off doing that.


ta

rolf

 

[whiteduck]

I agree with Geoffw

If I get good service and staff are friendly and pleasant I'm more likely to go back - that includes Banks. Last time I was in the bank the teller was most helpful with a problem and very pleasant and chatty, and that was ANZ which I believe turned a good profit recently.

 

[BayView]

I agree with Geoffw

If I get good service and staff are friendly and pleasant I'm more likely to go back - that includes Banks. Last time I was in the bank the teller was most helpful with a problem and very pleasant and chatty, and that was ANZ which I believe turned a good profit recently.

Exactly what I was saying; so why cull the assets? (It's a rhetorical question).

 

[Intrigued again]

If all the shareholders vacated the ship tomorrow, would the business still be profitable?

Very, profitable and very cheap.
That's what happen a few years ago

It would be a different story if customers vacated.

 

[willair]

In the context of who does the Bank think they should cater to first - which group is the priority?

If all the shareholders vacated the ship tomorrow, would the business still be profitable?

If you were to look into CBA and what it controls in a globally connected world and how it underpins competitiveness staff are only one item of the business,without the shareholders you don't have a business..

 

[Corey Batt]

I agree with Geoffw

If I get good service and staff are friendly and pleasant I'm more likely to go back - that includes Banks. Last time I was in the bank the teller was most helpful with a problem and very pleasant and chatty, and that was ANZ which I believe turned a good profit recently.

Conversly, I have a client wanting to move all their loans away from ANZ purely because of the poor service they have consistently received.

It all comes down to the staff member. Businesses can have processes in place to make things more streamlined, easier and positive for the customer, but there is no work manual out there which will create an army of happy, nice and pleasant workers.

BV, if you pulled all your money out of your business that you invested, would said business still exist? A shareholding is the same as a partnership divided into thousands/millions. I'm surprised to hear a business owner talking in these perspectives....