CITIBANK: PERFORMANCE

EVALUATION
GROUP NO-:17
ANUSHA N -: MBA19178
DANIYAL ANSHARI-: MBA19185
DEVANSH SHARMA-: MBA19189
DHARMENDRA KUMAR-:MBA19190
RAKESH T-: MBA19221
 James as a Branch Manager:
◦ James is a charismatic leader, who had shown his skills of leadership by motivating and
inspiring his employees.
◦ There is also an improvement in the customer satisfaction at the end of the year which shows
the effort James had put in.
Evaluation method and its drawbacks:
◦ Lack of clear objective criteria for the ratings related to people and standards.
◦ Bias of the supervisor that may affect on evaluating the factors of people and standards.
◦ Application of uniform rating in customer satisfaction in all the branches does not seem viable
owing to the diverse customer base.
◦ Unavailability of more performance ratings which were limited to only below par, par and above
par.
◦ Lack of proper surveying methods as there were no fixed questionnaires designed for the survey.
◦ Evaluation of customers included also the ATM services and mobile banking which does not
directly come under the control of the branch manager.
◦ Customer feedback evaluation was limited to only 25 customers.
CRITICAL
EVALUATION
 As mentioned earlier, the customer satisfaction varies for different
branches of the Citibank as it involves a diverse set of customers for each
branch.
Evaluating customer satisfaction and control measures on uniformity in
scorecard was wrong.
Instead the customer evaluation should have been branch specific
during the design of this rating scale because each branch has diverse
customer base.
USE IN
OTHER
BRANCHES
 ◦ In the performance scorecard there should be a weightage given to each
parameter because each parameter has different impact in different
branch so these weights should be branch specific.
◦ Rating should be made numerical based in order to apply the weighted
average method and it will also make it for more accurate and less
vague.
◦ Proper set of questionnaire to be designed to evaluate the customer
satisfaction. This ensures the proper evaluation by the customers on the
criteria the bank require.
◦ Increasing the sample size for the survey of customer satisfaction.
◦ Inclusion of 360 degree feedback method in the process of rating of
employees.

ALTERNATIVE
EVALUATION
 James should be given the bonus owing to his above par performance in
almost all the other criteria other than customer satisfaction.
Even with customer satisfaction, from the exhibits, the increase in the
rating indicates that he had put in efforts to improve the customer
satisfaction as well.
If James had not been given the bonus it would result in demotivating the
efforts he had put in so far.
Thus, a full bonus must be given to James on the demand of the required
customer satisfaction in the next evaluation.

SHOULD
JAMES BE
GIVEN
BONUS?
THANK YOU