Community

My career has so far spanned 22 years, half of which was in banking and the other half in Banking related IT. So I write this post more as a branch user than a banker.

I think you are all right in your own ways (Chris, Mihael, Alan) and perhaps what you are describing is differentiators between different banks, which all have their place. I have experienced banking from two aspects, one where I had money and one where I did not. My honest opinion, and personal experience, is if you have money, you never need to set foot in a branch and you are happy to go on-line. When you do not, and need to argue with someone about why you can't get an overdraft, that's when you want to go to your branch (not that anyone there is empowered enough to help you). If follows then that if a bank targets HNW, their branch networrk does not need to be extensive (e.g. like private banks) but when they target Joe Public, who let's face it don't have so much money and may not even have a computer, they need their customer service outlets (note I did not say sales!).

For completeness, with regards transactions, I live and work in Brussels and a lot of transactional banking here is done at hole-in-the-wall type terminals in banking lobbies. There are even such banking lobbies with no bank branch behind them. Separating these from the customer service aspects to me seems like a very good idea. Of course, they are IP based.

So my humble belief is that banks need to find out what their clients need from their branches before they make their decision on the position of the branch in the channel pecking order. Banks that target HNW will probably need far fewer branches than banks that target those needing to borrow.

Oh, and with my IT hat on, naturally IP should be the centre of the universe, let alone banks.