Freshmen Pre session Strategic Thinking Assignment · Assignment Leadership Beyond Management: ......

Freshmen Pre‐session Assignment:Asset Size Comparison

Graduate School of Banking 2017: Leadership Beyond Management

Compiled by Wipfli LLP. 1

Freshmen Pre‐session Strategic Thinking

Assignment

Leadership Beyond Management:

Graduate School of Banking 2017

Asset Size Comparison

Percent Responding:

194 of 198* = 98%

*Based on number of enrollees at time of online assessment, excluding 6 non‐bank students


Participation




My age category is . . .

Group # Respondents %

26‐30 29 15%

31‐40 100 52%

41‐60 65 34%

61‐70 ‐ ‐

Total 194 100%

Note: Percentages have been rounded throughout this report


Demographics

I work primarily for / at . . .


Holding Company 7 4%

Main Office 120 62%

Local Branch 24 12%

Branch location / separate community

38 20%

Branch location / different state 4 2%

Total 193* 100%

*1 participant did not respond to this demographic question

Demographics





Asset size of current institution . . .


< 100MM 13 7%

101 – 250MM 50 26%

251 – 500MM 47 24%

501MM – 1B 33 17%

1B – 5B 34 18%

> 5B 17 9%

Total 194 100%

Demographics


My institution’s performance last 5 years . . .


Has never been stronger! 63 33%

Is above average, relative to peer 94 49%

Has been impacted by a lack of infrastructure to support growth

20 11%

Has suffered due to asset quality issues

13 7%

Total 190 100%

*4 participants did not respond to this demographic question

Demographics





I have worked for my current institution for . . .


Less than 5 years 72 37%

5‐10 years 70 36%

11‐15 years 34 18%

16‐20 years 8 4%

More than 20 years 10 5%

Total 194 100%

All of my career* Yes: 52 (27%) No: 141 (73%)

*1 participant did not respond to this demographic question

Demographics


Number of banking institutions worked for . . .


Only my current institution 72 38%

2 47 24%

3 40 21%

4 17 9%

5 or more 16 8%

Total 192* 100%*2 participants did not respond to this demographic questions

Had previous career** Yes: 70 (36%) No: 123 (64%)**1 participant did not respond to this demographic question

Demographics





Interpreting the Report

Ratings Scale

Explanation of Survey Results


Agreement ScaleStrongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

Importance ScaleExtremely Important Important Neutral

Relatively Unimportant

Not Important

% Neutral% Favorable Response % Unfavorable Response

45 3 2 1

% Neutral% FavorableResponse

% UnfavorableResponse

45 3 2 1

Note: Percentages throughout this report have been rounded and may not total 100%.

Ratings Scale





The bar graph depicts percentage response of each strategy. Sorts are: Favorable (5/4),

Neutral (3) or Unfavorable (2/1).

Example:

Favorability Mean – Shows how well participants believe their Bank is doing on each strategy,

with Neutral (“3”) as the anchor.

Importance Mean – Shows how important participants consider each strategy, with Neutral

(“3”) as the anchor (mean of Importance rating scale).

Difference – Represents the difference between the Favorability and Importance mean scores

for each strategy.

Aggregate: 20% Unfavorable(Disagree and Strongly Disagree, represented by yellow bar)

Aggregate: 70% Favorable(Strongly Agree and Agree, represented by blue bar)

Aggregate

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

70%

65%

10% 20%

Aggregate: 10% Neutral(represented by white bar)

Interpreting Results


Overall Summary





6 Categories – 34 Strategies Assessed:

1. Leadership / Management (6)

2. Employee Engagement (4)

3. Customer Relationship Opportunities (7)

4. Delivery Channels and Marketing (7)

5. Loan Portfolio Management (4)

6. Risk Management (6)

Overall Summary


34 Strategies Assessed

24 (71%) Ranked > 4.00

According to Importance Mean

Overall Summary





34 Strategies Assessed

7 (21%) Ranked > 4.00

According to Favorability Mean

Overall Summary


Highest Rated StrategyOur financial institution is currently well capitalized according to the

“new” guidelines.

Favorability Mean: 4.40(Scale of 1 to 5)

Overall Summary





Lowest Rated StrategyElectronic banking, or the “e‐bank,”has a line sales manager role similar to a branch or location manager.


Overall Summary


2nd Lowest Rated StrategyOur financial institution has invested in

CRM (Customer Relationship Management) to analyze customer profitability and depth/breadth of

customer relationship.


Overall Summary





Most Important StrategyOur financial institution’s credit philosophy balances soundness,

profitability and growth.

Importance Mean: 4.67(Scale of 1 to 5)

Overall Summary


Greatest Differential Gap*Our financial institution’s technology

is a strength (core system and networks/electronic delivery).

Difference: 90 basis points(*Favorability minus Importance)

Overall Summary





High / Low Ranking


Favorability Importance Difference

30. Our financial institution is currently well capitalized according to the "new" guidelines. (RM) 4.40 4.55 -0.16

25. Our financial institution's credit philosophy balances soundness, profitability and growth. (LPM) 4.27 4.67 -0.40

32. Our financial institution effectively manages interest rate risk through prudent asset/liability management policies and procedures. (RM) 4.22 4.45 -0.23

1. A documented, multi-year strategic plan has been developed and implemented by Senior Leadership at our financial institution. (LM) 4.13 4.48 -0.35

27. The leadership of my financial institution has developed credit monitoring systems including a method to stress the loan portfolio, perform loan review and monitor the ALLR. (LPM) 4.12 4.45 -0.33

18. Electronic banking, including mobile banking, is functional, reliable and maximized as a key delivery channel. (DCM) 4.08 4.47 -0.39

6. Our Senior Leadership understands and believes it is a "new world" for the financial services industry since 2008. (LM) 4.02 4.28 -0.27

31. Our financial institution effectively defines its risk appetite and monitors tolerance against risk appetite. (RM) 3.99 4.31 -0.32

4. The majority of our financial institution's Board consists of qualified, outside independent directors. (LM) 3.98 4.27 -0.29

Ranked by Favorability Mean





(Continued) Favorability Importance Difference

26. The Board of Directors of my financial institution provides strong credit quality governance. (LPM) 3.96 4.33 -0.37

28. Our financial institution has set loan portfolio concentration limits and adheres to the limits even if it means less growth. (LPM) 3.93 4.17 -0.25

29. Our financial institution has developed/updated a formal capital plan. (RM) 3.93 4.21 -0.28

24. Our bank utilizes at least one social media network for customer communication and/or marketing. (DCM) 3.90 4.03 -0.14

19. We have effectively developed an "omni-channel approach," ensuring the customer can access and utilize banking services when, where and how they choose on their schedule/time. (DCM) 3.89 4.28 -0.39

2. In recent years, our financial institution's leadership has created and implemented innovative strategies for long-term profitable growth. (LM) 3.85 4.36 -0.51

11. Our financial institution uses a customer-centric model in its approach to the marketplace. (CRO) 3.85 4.17 -0.31

5. Our financial institution has a track record of successful execution of the "right" strategies. (LM) 3.79 4.29 -0.50

7. The bank's Senior Leadership demonstrates consistent commitment to employee development, employee coaching and employee mentoring. (EE) 3.79 4.36 -0.57




14. Our financial institution identifies its most profitable customers. (CRO) 3.68 4.12 -0.44

15. Our financial institution effectively utilizes differential pricing based on profitability and/or risk of the overall customer relationship. (CRO) 3.66 3.96 -0.30

34. Our financial institution effectively utilizes risk-based pricing. (RM) 3.62 4.03 -0.41

33. The function of enterprise-wide risk management (ERM) is in place at our financial institution. (RM) 3.59 3.94 -0.35

17. Our financial institution has a clearly defined competitive advantage that differentiates us from our competitors. (CRO) 3.56 4.20 -0.64

12. Our financial institution has identified high-priority market segments of focus/concentration based on their revenue potential. (CRO) 3.55 3.90 -0.35

8. Our financial institution has the appropriate organizational structure, aligned with our strategic priorities. (EE) 3.53 4.11 -0.59

3. Incentive compensation program(s) align performance goals to the bank's strategic/annual plan. (LM) 3.43 3.91 -0.48

16. We know, on average, the number of products/services our customers have with our financial institution. (CRO) 3.43 3.85 -0.41







9. Our financial institution identifies our "A" (top talent) employees and has strategies in place to retain them. (EE) 3.34 4.21 -0.87

10. Our financial institution conducts meaningful annual performance reviews that are aligned with our culture and strategic priorities. (EE) 3.34 3.92 -0.58

13. Our financial institution regularly and objectively measures the satisfaction and loyalty of our customers. (CRO) 3.27 3.89 -0.62

21. Our financial institution's technology is a strength (core system and networks/electronic delivery). (DCM) 3.23 4.13 -0.90

20. Marketing strategies are differentiated by market segments or market niches. (DCM) 3.18 3.58 -0.41

22. Our financial institution has invested in CRM (Customer Relationship Management) to analyze customer profitability and depth/breadth of customer relationship. (DCM) 2.95 3.62 -0.68

23. Electronic banking, or the "e-bank," has a line sales manager role similar to a branch or location manager. (DCM) 2.85 3.16 -0.31













Ranked by Importance Mean

























Ranked by Difference Gap















Category Summary






Category Summary

Percent RespondingFavorability

MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between

Favorability Mean and

Importance Mean

Leadership/Management (Agreement) 3.87 4.27 -0.40

Employee Engagement (Agreement) 3.50 4.15 -0.65

Customer Relationship Opportunities (Agreement) 3.57 4.01 -0.44

Delivery Channels and Marketing (Agreement) 3.45 3.90 -0.46

Loan Portfolio Management (Agreement) 4.07 4.41 -0.34

Risk Management (Agreement) 3.97 4.26 -0.29

CATEGORIES

73%

58%

60%

54%

79%

74%

14%

20%

21%

23%

15%

19%

13%

22%

19%

24%

8%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Total Comparison





1. A documented, multi-year strategic plan has been developed and implemented by Senior Leadership at our financial institution.

Leadership / Management


Strongly Agree

Agree Neutral DisagreeStrongly Disagree


MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 40% 43% 8% 7% 2% 4.13 4.48 -0.35

<100MM 50% 33% 0% 17% 0% 4.17 4.00 0.17

101-250MM 40% 36% 10% 12% 2% 4.00 4.42 -0.42

251-500MM 33% 50% 9% 9% 0% 4.07 4.44 -0.37

501MM-1B 47% 28% 13% 6% 6% 4.03 4.59 -0.56

1B-5B 42% 52% 6% 0% 0% 4.36 4.70 -0.33

>5B 38% 63% 0% 0% 0% 4.38 4.50 -0.13

83%

83%

76%

83%

75%

94%

100%

8%

10%

9%

13%

9%

17%

14%

9%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

2. In recent years, our financial institution’s leadership has created and implemented innovative strategies for long-term profitable growth.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 27% 44% 18% 12% 0% 3.85 4.36 -0.51

<100MM 25% 25% 33% 17% 0% 3.58 4.25 -0.67

101-250MM 27% 43% 14% 16% 0% 3.80 4.27 -0.47

251-500MM 19% 49% 19% 14% 0% 3.72 4.30 -0.57

501MM-1B 30% 30% 21% 18% 0% 3.73 4.53 -0.80

1B-5B 38% 44% 15% 3% 0% 4.18 4.47 -0.30

>5B 18% 71% 12% 0% 0% 4.06 4.29 -0.23

70%

50%

69%

67%

61%

82%

88%

18%

33%

14%

19%

21%

15%

12%

12%

17%

16%

14%

18%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




3. Incentive compensation program(s) align performance goals to the bank’s strategic / annual plan.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 16% 40% 18% 22% 4% 3.43 3.91 -0.48

<100MM 8% 46% 15% 31% 0% 3.31 3.62 -0.31

101-250MM 14% 40% 18% 22% 6% 3.34 3.62 -0.28

251-500MM 12% 40% 23% 21% 5% 3.33 3.81 -0.49

501MM-1B 19% 41% 13% 25% 3% 3.47 4.32 -0.85

1B-5B 27% 42% 12% 15% 3% 3.76 4.12 -0.36

>5B 12% 35% 29% 24% 0% 3.35 4.06 -0.71

56%

54%

54%

51%

59%

70%

47%

18%

15%

18%

23%

13%

12%

29%

26%

31%

28%

26%

28%

18%

24%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

4. The majority of our financial institution’s Board consists of qualified, outside independent directors.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 35% 41% 13% 11% 1% 3.98 4.27 -0.29

<100MM 23% 39% 15% 23% 0% 3.62 3.77 -0.15

101-250MM 36% 30% 22% 12% 0% 3.90 4.06 -0.16

251-500MM 26% 49% 6% 19% 0% 3.81 4.48 -0.67

501MM-1B 38% 41% 22% 0% 0% 4.16 4.41 -0.25

1B-5B 50% 38% 3% 6% 3% 4.27 4.44 -0.18

>5B 29% 59% 6% 6% 0% 4.12 4.12 0.00

76%

62%

66%

74%

78%

88%

88%

13%

15%

22%

22%

11%

23%

12%

19%

9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




5. Our financial institution has a track record of successful execution of the “right” strategies.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 21% 50% 17% 11% 1% 3.79 4.29 -0.50

<100MM 31% 31% 15% 23% 0% 3.69 4.15 -0.46

101-250MM 20% 50% 20% 8% 2% 3.78 4.28 -0.50

251-500MM 13% 56% 13% 16% 2% 3.62 4.13 -0.51

501MM-1B 12% 42% 24% 21% 0% 3.46 4.41 -0.95

1B-5B 29% 59% 12% 0% 0% 4.18 4.32 -0.15

>5B 35% 47% 18% 0% 0% 4.18 4.53 -0.35

71%

62%

70%

69%

55%

88%

82%

17%

15%

20%

13%

24%

12%

18%

12%

23%

10%

18%

21%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

6. Our Senior Leadership understands and believes it is a “new world” for the financial services industry since 2008.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 31% 50% 10% 8% 1% 4.02 4.28 -0.27

<100MM 8% 92% 0% 0% 0% 4.08 4.08 0.00

101-250MM 40% 50% 2% 6% 2% 4.20 4.36 -0.16

251-500MM 22% 44% 20% 13% 2% 3.70 4.11 -0.42

501MM-1B 30% 55% 12% 3% 0% 4.12 4.41 -0.28

1B-5B 32% 41% 15% 12% 0% 3.94 4.32 -0.38

>5B 41% 47% 6% 6% 0% 4.24 4.35 -0.12

81%

100%

90%

65%

85%

74%

88%

10%

20%

12%

15%

9%

8%

15%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




7. The bank’s Senior Leadership demonstrates consistent commitment to employee development, employee coaching and employee mentoring.

Employee Engagement


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 27% 43% 14% 14% 2% 3.79 4.36 -0.57

<100MM 31% 46% 15% 8% 0% 4.00 4.46 -0.46

101-250MM 34% 30% 20% 16% 0% 3.82 4.34 -0.52

251-500MM 26% 40% 9% 23% 2% 3.64 4.17 -0.53

501MM-1B 15% 58% 12% 15% 0% 3.73 4.47 -0.74

1B-5B 38% 44% 12% 3% 3% 4.12 4.47 -0.35

>5B 6% 53% 24% 12% 6% 3.41 4.47 -1.06

70%

77%

64%

66%

73%

82%

59%

14%

15%

20%

9%

12%

12%

24%

16%

8%

16%

26%

15%

18%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

8. Our financial institution has the appropriate organizational structure, aligned with our strategic priorities.

Employee Engagement


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 12% 47% 23% 16% 2% 3.53 4.11 -0.59

<100MM 23% 23% 46% 8% 0% 3.62 3.85 -0.23

101-250MM 18% 54% 16% 12% 0% 3.78 4.12 -0.34

251-500MM 2% 55% 23% 17% 2% 3.38 4.04 -0.66

501MM-1B 12% 30% 30% 18% 9% 3.18 4.31 -1.13

1B-5B 18% 50% 18% 15% 0% 3.71 4.09 -0.38

>5B 6% 53% 18% 24% 0% 3.41 4.18 -0.76

60%

46%

72%

57%

42%

68%

59%

23%

46%

16%

23%

30%

18%

18%

18%

8%

12%

19%

27%

15%

24%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




9. Our financial institution identifies our “A” (top talent) employees and has strategies in place to retain them.

Employee Engagement


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 18% 30% 26% 20% 6% 3.34 4.21 -0.87

<100MM 31% 15% 23% 23% 8% 3.39 4.31 -0.92

101-250MM 16% 41% 20% 20% 2% 3.49 4.25 -0.76

251-500MM 13% 28% 28% 23% 9% 3.13 4.04 -0.92

501MM-1B 18% 24% 24% 24% 9% 3.18 4.38 -1.19

1B-5B 29% 35% 24% 9% 3% 3.79 4.21 -0.41

>5B 0% 18% 53% 24% 6% 2.82 4.18 -1.35

48%

46%

57%

41%

42%

65%

18%

26%

23%

20%

28%

24%

24%

53%

26%

31%

22%

32%

33%

12%

29%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

10. Our financial institution conducts meaningful annual performance reviews that are aligned with our culture and strategic priorities.

Employee Engagement


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 15% 38% 18% 23% 6% 3.34 3.92 -0.58

<100MM 31% 15% 23% 15% 15% 3.31 3.77 -0.46

101-250MM 6% 50% 18% 18% 8% 3.28 3.92 -0.64

251-500MM 11% 32% 19% 32% 6% 3.09 3.60 -0.51

501MM-1B 18% 36% 15% 27% 3% 3.39 4.03 -0.64

1B-5B 27% 36% 18% 15% 3% 3.70 4.34 -0.65

>5B 12% 47% 18% 24% 0% 3.47 3.94 -0.47

53%

46%

56%

43%

55%

64%

59%

18%

23%

18%

19%

15%

18%

18%

29%

31%

26%

38%

30%

18%

24%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




11. Our financial institution uses a customer-centric model in its approach to the marketplace.

Customer Relationship Opportunities


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 26% 43% 25% 6% 1% 3.85 4.17 -0.31

<100MM 8% 15% 46% 23% 8% 2.92 3.54 -0.62

101-250MM 23% 51% 23% 2% 0% 3.96 4.17 -0.21

251-500MM 14% 48% 32% 7% 0% 3.68 3.98 -0.30

501MM-1B 30% 46% 18% 6% 0% 4.00 4.31 -0.31

1B-5B 41% 32% 24% 0% 3% 4.09 4.24 -0.15

>5B 35% 41% 6% 18% 0% 3.94 4.71 -0.77

68%

23%

75%

61%

76%

74%

77%

25%

46%

23%

32%

18%

24%

8%

31%

7%

18%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

12. Our financial institution has identified high-priority market segments of focus / concentration based on their revenue potential.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 9% 52% 25% 13% 1% 3.55 3.90 -0.35

<100MM 8% 23% 23% 46% 0% 2.92 3.39 -0.46

101-250MM 6% 60% 19% 15% 0% 3.58 3.80 -0.21

251-500MM 5% 43% 39% 11% 2% 3.36 3.73 -0.36

501MM-1B 16% 50% 22% 9% 3% 3.66 4.29 -0.63

1B-5B 15% 53% 27% 6% 0% 3.77 4.06 -0.29

>5B 6% 75% 13% 6% 0% 3.81 4.00 -0.19

61%

31%

67%

48%

66%

68%

81%

25%

23%

19%

39%

22%

27%

13%

14%

46%

15%

14%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




13. Our financial institution regularly and objectively measures the satisfaction and loyalty of our customers.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 15% 32% 22% 28% 4% 3.27 3.89 -0.62

<100MM 15% 23% 23% 39% 0% 3.15 3.39 -0.23

101-250MM 10% 31% 18% 37% 4% 3.06 3.86 -0.80

251-500MM 7% 24% 26% 37% 7% 2.87 3.59 -0.72

501MM-1B 24% 36% 18% 21% 0% 3.64 4.41 -0.77

1B-5B 12% 41% 29% 12% 6% 3.41 3.77 -0.35

>5B 35% 41% 12% 12% 0% 4.00 4.41 -0.41

47%

39%

41%

30%

61%

53%

77%

22%

23%

18%

26%

18%

29%

12%

31%

39%

41%

44%

21%

18%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

14. Our financial institution identifies its most profitable customers.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 22% 44% 17% 13% 4% 3.68 4.12 -0.44

<100MM 8% 54% 23% 15% 0% 3.54 3.92 -0.39

101-250MM 26% 42% 16% 10% 6% 3.72 4.08 -0.36

251-500MM 13% 50% 13% 20% 4% 3.48 4.09 -0.61

501MM-1B 33% 36% 21% 9% 0% 3.94 4.44 -0.50

1B-5B 24% 38% 18% 15% 6% 3.59 3.94 -0.35

>5B 24% 53% 18% 6% 0% 3.94 4.29 -0.35

66%

62%

68%

63%

70%

62%

76%

17%

23%

16%

13%

21%

18%

18%

17%

15%

16%

24%

9%

21%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




15. Our financial institution effectively utilizes differential pricing based on profitability and / or risk of the overall customer relationship.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 20% 44% 20% 14% 2% 3.66 3.96 -0.30

<100MM 0% 54% 39% 8% 0% 3.46 3.69 -0.23

101-250MM 29% 35% 21% 8% 6% 3.73 4.02 -0.29

251-500MM 18% 40% 22% 20% 0% 3.56 3.82 -0.27

501MM-1B 19% 53% 16% 9% 3% 3.75 4.00 -0.25

1B-5B 18% 47% 15% 21% 0% 3.62 4.09 -0.47

>5B 24% 47% 18% 12% 0% 3.82 4.06 -0.24

64%

54%

65%

58%

72%

65%

71%

20%

39%

21%

22%

16%

15%

18%

16%

8%

15%

20%

13%

21%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

16. We know, on average, the number of products / services our customers have with our financial institution.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 20% 36% 14% 26% 4% 3.43 3.85 -0.41

<100MM 15% 23% 23% 39% 0% 3.15 3.39 -0.23

101-250MM 16% 34% 12% 32% 6% 3.22 3.68 -0.46

251-500MM 19% 35% 14% 30% 2% 3.37 3.86 -0.49

501MM-1B 25% 34% 19% 22% 0% 3.63 4.23 -0.60

1B-5B 24% 38% 9% 21% 9% 3.47 3.77 -0.29

>5B 25% 56% 13% 6% 0% 4.00 4.13 -0.13

56%

39%

50%

54%

59%

62%

81%

14%

23%

12%

14%

19%

9%

13%

30%

39%

38%

33%

22%

29%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




17. Our financial institution has a clearly defined competitive advantage that differentiates us from our competitors.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 20% 36% 28% 16% 2% 3.56 4.20 -0.64

<100MM 23% 8% 31% 39% 0% 3.15 3.77 -0.62

101-250MM 20% 44% 18% 18% 0% 3.66 4.26 -0.60

251-500MM 4% 34% 36% 23% 2% 3.15 3.89 -0.75

501MM-1B 15% 33% 46% 3% 3% 3.55 4.38 -0.83

1B-5B 32% 35% 21% 9% 3% 3.85 4.35 -0.50

>5B 41% 41% 12% 6% 0% 4.18 4.53 -0.35

55%

31%

64%

38%

49%

68%

82%

28%

31%

18%

36%

46%

21%

12%

17%

39%

18%

26%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

18. Electronic banking, including mobile banking, is functional, reliable and maximized as a key delivery channel.

Delivery Channels & Marketing


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 41% 38% 11% 9% 2% 4.08 4.47 -0.39

<100MM 39% 46% 8% 8% 0% 4.15 4.54 -0.38

101-250MM 36% 42% 12% 8% 2% 4.02 4.38 -0.36

251-500MM 45% 36% 15% 4% 0% 4.21 4.36 -0.15

501MM-1B 42% 36% 9% 9% 3% 4.06 4.66 -0.60

1B-5B 35% 35% 9% 18% 3% 3.82 4.41 -0.59

>5B 53% 35% 6% 6% 0% 4.35 4.71 -0.35

79%

85%

78%

81%

79%

71%

88%

11%

8%

12%

15%

9%

9%

10%

8%

10%

12%

21%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




19. We have effectively developed an “omni-channel approach,” ensuring the customer can access and utilize banking services when, where and how they choose on their schedule / time.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 29% 43% 19% 8% 2% 3.89 4.28 -0.39

<100MM 31% 39% 23% 8% 0% 3.92 4.31 -0.39

101-250MM 27% 44% 19% 10% 0% 3.88 4.04 -0.17

251-500MM 19% 55% 21% 4% 0% 3.89 4.17 -0.28

501MM-1B 33% 33% 27% 3% 3% 3.91 4.56 -0.65

1B-5B 29% 38% 12% 15% 6% 3.71 4.29 -0.59

>5B 47% 35% 12% 6% 0% 4.24 4.71 -0.47

71%

69%

71%

74%

67%

68%

82%

19%

23%

19%

21%

27%

12%

12%

9%

8%

10%

21%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

20. Marketing strategies are differentiated by market segments or market niches.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 9% 29% 35% 24% 3% 3.18 3.58 -0.41

<100MM 8% 31% 39% 15% 8% 3.15 3.62 -0.46

101-250MM 9% 27% 33% 29% 2% 3.11 3.22 -0.11

251-500MM 5% 28% 37% 28% 2% 3.05 3.58 -0.53

501MM-1B 17% 27% 33% 20% 3% 3.33 3.83 -0.50

1B-5B 9% 38% 29% 21% 3% 3.29 3.77 -0.47

>5B 12% 24% 41% 18% 6% 3.18 3.75 -0.57

38%

39%

36%

33%

43%

47%

35%

35%

39%

33%

37%

33%

29%

41%

27%

23%

31%

30%

23%

24%

24%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




21. Our financial institution’s technology is a strength (core system and networks / electronic delivery).


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 12% 35% 25% 21% 7% 3.23 4.13 -0.90

<100MM 8% 31% 23% 31% 8% 3.00 3.92 -0.92

101-250MM 12% 37% 27% 22% 2% 3.35 4.04 -0.69

251-500MM 9% 39% 26% 22% 4% 3.26 4.07 -0.80

501MM-1B 21% 27% 24% 21% 6% 3.36 4.44 -1.07

1B-5B 6% 32% 21% 21% 21% 2.82 4.12 -1.29

>5B 12% 47% 29% 6% 6% 3.53 4.12 -0.59

47%

39%

49%

48%

49%

38%

59%

25%

23%

27%

26%

24%

21%

29%

28%

39%

24%

26%

27%

41%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


22. Our financial institution has invested in CRM (Customer Relationship Management) to analyze customer profitability and depth / breadth of customer relationship.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 8% 30% 22% 29% 11% 2.95 3.62 -0.68

<100MM 0% 8% 31% 54% 8% 2.39 3.00 -0.62

101-250MM 6% 19% 21% 40% 13% 2.66 3.32 -0.66

251-500MM 2% 30% 27% 32% 9% 2.84 3.55 -0.70

501MM-1B 16% 34% 19% 19% 13% 3.22 4.07 -0.85

1B-5B 12% 44% 12% 21% 12% 3.24 3.82 -0.59

>5B 12% 41% 29% 6% 12% 3.35 3.94 -0.59

38%

8%

26%

32%

50%

56%

53%

22%

31%

21%

27%

19%

12%

29%

40%

62%

53%

41%

31%

32%

18%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




23. Electronic banking, or the “e-bank,” has a line sales manager role similar to a branch or location manager.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 9% 17% 35% 27% 12% 2.85 3.16 -0.31

<100MM 0% 8% 54% 23% 15% 2.54 3.00 -0.46

101-250MM 6% 10% 33% 38% 13% 2.60 2.75 -0.15

251-500MM 5% 21% 35% 28% 12% 2.79 2.88 -0.09

501MM-1B 17% 13% 33% 27% 10% 3.00 3.77 -0.77

1B-5B 18% 21% 29% 21% 12% 3.12 3.56 -0.44

>5B 7% 33% 40% 13% 7% 3.20 3.25 -0.05

26%

8%

17%

26%

30%

38%

40%

35%

54%

33%

35%

33%

29%

40%

39%

39%

50%

40%

37%

32%

20%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

24. Our bank utilizes at least one social media network for customer communication and / or marketing.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 33% 42% 11% 9% 5% 3.90 4.03 -0.14

<100MM 0% 31% 23% 39% 8% 2.77 2.77 0.00

101-250MM 25% 55% 8% 6% 6% 3.86 3.98 -0.12

251-500MM 28% 39% 13% 13% 7% 3.70 4.04 -0.35

501MM-1B 36% 46% 6% 9% 3% 4.03 4.16 -0.13

1B-5B 53% 27% 15% 3% 3% 4.24 4.29 -0.06

>5B 53% 41% 6% 0% 0% 4.47 4.35 0.12

75%

31%

80%

67%

82%

79%

94%

11%

23%

8%

13%

15%

14%

46%

12%

20%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




25. Our financial institution’s credit philosophy balances soundness, profitability and growth.

Loan Portfolio Management


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 44% 42% 12% 1% 1% 4.27 4.67 -0.40

<100MM 39% 31% 31% 0% 0% 4.08 4.46 -0.39

101-250MM 55% 39% 4% 2% 0% 4.47 4.78 -0.31

251-500MM 32% 53% 13% 0% 2% 4.13 4.55 -0.43

501MM-1B 36% 45% 13% 3% 3% 4.07 4.80 -0.73

1B-5B 55% 33% 12% 0% 0% 4.42 4.67 -0.24

>5B 47% 41% 12% 0% 0% 4.35 4.65 -0.29

86%

69%

94%

85%

81%

88%

88%

12%

31%

13%

13%

12%

12%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

26. The Board of Directors of my financial institution provides strong credit quality governance.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 28% 48% 17% 7% 1% 3.96 4.33 -0.37

<100MM 31% 31% 31% 0% 8% 3.77 3.92 -0.15

101-250MM 33% 51% 10% 6% 0% 4.10 4.36 -0.26

251-500MM 26% 47% 11% 17% 0% 3.81 4.26 -0.45

501MM-1B 29% 42% 23% 7% 0% 3.94 4.47 -0.53

1B-5B 25% 59% 16% 0% 0% 4.09 4.58 -0.48

>5B 19% 50% 31% 0% 0% 3.88 4.00 -0.13

76%

62%

84%

72%

71%

84%

69%

17%

31%

10%

11%

23%

16%

31%

7%

8%

17%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




27. The leadership of my financial institution has developed credit monitoring systems including a method to stress the loan portfolio, perform loan review and monitor the ALLR.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 40% 41% 11% 7% 1% 4.12 4.45 -0.33

<100MM 8% 69% 15% 8% 0% 3.77 3.92 -0.15

101-250MM 51% 27% 12% 10% 0% 4.18 4.52 -0.34

251-500MM 28% 55% 13% 2% 2% 4.04 4.38 -0.34

501MM-1B 36% 48% 7% 10% 0% 4.10 4.60 -0.50

1B-5B 55% 24% 12% 9% 0% 4.24 4.52 -0.27

>5B 44% 44% 6% 6% 0% 4.25 4.44 -0.19

81%

77%

78%

83%

84%

79%

88%

11%

15%

12%

13%

7%

12%

8%

8%

10%

10%

9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

28. Our financial institution has set loan portfolio concentration limits and adheres to the limits even if it means less growth.



Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 25% 49% 20% 6% 0% 3.93 4.17 -0.25

<100MM 8% 62% 23% 8% 0% 3.69 4.00 -0.31

101-250MM 21% 46% 25% 8% 0% 3.79 4.17 -0.38

251-500MM 17% 59% 22% 2% 0% 3.91 3.98 -0.07

501MM-1B 32% 36% 19% 13% 0% 3.87 4.27 -0.40

1B-5B 41% 44% 9% 6% 0% 4.19 4.33 -0.15

>5B 29% 53% 18% 0% 0% 4.12 4.35 -0.23

74%

69%

67%

76%

68%

84%

82%

20%

23%

25%

22%

19%

9%

18%

8%

8%

13%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




29. Our financial institution has developed / updated a formal capital plan.

Risk Management


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 27% 47% 21% 5% 1% 3.93 4.21 -0.28

<100MM 17% 42% 33% 8% 0% 3.67 4.08 -0.42

101-250MM 24% 39% 24% 12% 0% 3.76 4.17 -0.42

251-500MM 27% 54% 17% 2% 0% 4.05 4.17 -0.12

501MM-1B 33% 43% 17% 0% 7% 3.97 4.37 -0.40

1B-5B 30% 48% 22% 0% 0% 4.07 4.22 -0.15

>5B 20% 60% 13% 7% 0% 3.93 4.13 -0.20

74%

58%

63%

81%

77%

78%

80%

21%

33%

24%

17%

17%

22%

13%

8%

12%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

30. Our financial institution is currently well capitalized according to the “new” guidelines.

Risk Management


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 54% 35% 8% 2% 1% 4.40 4.55 -0.16

<100MM 25% 50% 17% 8% 0% 3.92 4.17 -0.25

101-250MM 49% 40% 6% 4% 0% 4.34 4.53 -0.19

251-500MM 46% 41% 11% 0% 2% 4.28 4.59 -0.30

501MM-1B 67% 27% 3% 3% 0% 4.57 4.60 -0.03

1B-5B 69% 25% 6% 0% 0% 4.63 4.69 -0.06

>5B 59% 29% 12% 0% 0% 4.47 4.47 0.00

89%

75%

89%

87%

93%

94%

88%

8%

17%

11%

12%

8%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




31. Our financial institution effectively defines its risk appetite and monitors tolerance against risk appetite.

Risk Management


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 32% 44% 16% 8% 1% 3.99 4.31 -0.32

<100MM 23% 39% 23% 15% 0% 3.69 4.00 -0.31

101-250MM 20% 41% 29% 10% 0% 3.71 4.18 -0.47

251-500MM 23% 55% 6% 13% 2% 3.85 4.28 -0.43

501MM-1B 42% 42% 13% 3% 0% 4.23 4.32 -0.10

1B-5B 49% 33% 15% 3% 0% 4.27 4.46 -0.18

>5B 47% 47% 6% 0% 0% 4.41 4.71 -0.29

76%

62%

61%

79%

84%

82%

94%

16%

23%

29%

13%

15%

8%

15%

10%

15%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

32. Our financial institution effectively manages interest rate risk through prudent asset / liability management policies and procedures.

Risk Management


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 40% 47% 11% 3% 0% 4.22 4.45 -0.23

<100MM 31% 39% 31% 0% 0% 4.00 4.23 -0.23

101-250MM 37% 51% 10% 2% 0% 4.22 4.43 -0.21

251-500MM 36% 55% 5% 5% 0% 4.23 4.46 -0.23

501MM-1B 40% 37% 17% 7% 0% 4.10 4.47 -0.37

1B-5B 50% 38% 9% 3% 0% 4.34 4.53 -0.19

>5B 41% 53% 6% 0% 0% 4.35 4.47 -0.12

86%

69%

88%

91%

77%

88%

94%

11%

31%

10%

17%

9%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




33. The function of enterprise-wide risk management (ERM) is in place at our financial institution.

Risk Management


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 18% 39% 29% 13% 1% 3.59 3.94 -0.35

<100MM 0% 18% 64% 18% 0% 3.00 3.36 -0.36

101-250MM 15% 38% 35% 10% 3% 3.53 3.85 -0.33

251-500MM 8% 46% 31% 15% 0% 3.46 3.69 -0.23

501MM-1B 24% 24% 28% 20% 4% 3.44 4.00 -0.56

1B-5B 32% 42% 19% 7% 0% 4.00 4.32 -0.32

>5B 21% 64% 7% 7% 0% 4.00 4.43 -0.43

57%

18%

53%

54%

48%

74%

86%

29%

64%

35%

31%

28%

19%

7%

14%

18%

13%

15%

24%

7%

7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

34. Our financial institution effectively utilizes risk-based pricing.

Risk Management


Strongly Agree



MeanImportance

Mean

Difference Between


Importance Mean

Aggregate 18% 42% 27% 11% 2% 3.62 4.03 -0.41

<100MM 8% 46% 31% 15% 0% 3.46 3.92 -0.46

101-250MM 22% 39% 27% 10% 2% 3.68 4.02 -0.34

251-500MM 16% 40% 28% 12% 5% 3.51 3.84 -0.33

501MM-1B 16% 48% 23% 10% 3% 3.65 4.17 -0.52

1B-5B 22% 44% 28% 6% 0% 3.81 4.13 -0.31

>5B 18% 35% 24% 24% 0% 3.47 4.19 -0.72

60%

54%

61%

56%

65%

66%

53%

27%

31%

27%

28%

23%

28%

24%

14%

15%

12%

16%

13%

24%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%




Questions?


Terry [email protected]

612.202.6313

Freshmen Pre session Strategic Thinking Assignment · Assignment Leadership Beyond Management: ......

Documents

Transcript of Freshmen Pre session Strategic Thinking Assignment · Assignment Leadership Beyond Management: ......