THE

TORONTO
DOMINION
BANK
CASE ANALYSIS

CASE ANALYSIS BY
Akash Vashishtha

FT161009

Amal Goswami

FT161012

Ankush Ballal

FT161019

Utkarsh Sethi

FT161099

Vineet Khandelwal

FT161105

Problem
The

existing Branch Work Measurement

(BWM) report, measured productivity
based on efficiency, volumes, numbers
of accounts and Green Machine activities
and not on quality of service. This often
led to development of an attitude totally
contradicting customer service.

After

changes in Bank Act in 1980,

customers became much smarter and
more demanding, thus just product
based differentiation between banks was
not possible and service was of

The Toronto Dominion Bank

Formed

as an amalgamation between Bank of

Toronto and The Dominion Bank in 1955.

One

of the few banks to get a AAA rating from

Moodys.

Each

region, and every branch within each

region, operated as a separate profit center.

Current Issues

The changes in Bank Act in 1980, has increased the

competition of well established banks from growing
financial institutions.

Customers moved from well accept whatever you

offer mentality to more sophisticated and service
oriented demands.

The BWM did not support the service approach as the

parameters on which the report was made were
contradictory to customer service.

Decentralized complaint handling system led to more

complaints being escalated to head office and lesser
complaints resolved at the branch offices leading to
customer dissatisfaction.

The present shopping survey results were rejected

Customer Service Index

Robin Drake and Lisa Ritchie headed the formulation

of the CSI.

The need to shift from measuring just productivity to

measuring service was felt across the bank.

Intended to measure each branchs performance and

provide a detailed feedback to the branch managers.

Aim was to enhance customer service and provide

distinctive advantage over the financial institutions.

Initially a list of 30 attributes was obtained and after

clustering this was reduced to 20 attributes that the
customers felt important in terms of service.

Initially CSI was of 6 pages and after

miscommunication from Marketing Department to the
branches, was reduced to 4 for more clarity.

What CSI Measured?

Branch

Performance

Quality

of Service: Quick response, Accurate

Convenience:

Hours

Location, Parking, Working

Employee

Interaction: Friendly Staff,

Managers availability

Physical

Environment: Branch is Spacious and

Uncluttered

Performance
Customer
Type

compared to competition

Loyalty and satisfaction

of accounts customers held and for how

Advantages of CSI
There

is a positive correlation between service

measurement and productivity measurement

CSI

helps in identifying the core issues that are

increasing dissatisfaction and helps in improving.

CSI

helps in Quantifying , qualitative aspects of

Service.

CSI

takes feedback and based on that changes can

be done to improve customer satisfaction.

If

customers compared them to other banks that

meant they were looking elsewhere this was a heads
up for the branch managers to recheck their
performance.

Can

give red flags for poor customer service.

Implementation of CSI
Tested

in the Atlantic region, with

approximately 30 branches on 400 customers.

Floated

as a mail survey.

Approximately

20% response rate in the

testing phase, better than the industry norms.

Target

of 25% customer base.

Results
The

were tabulated region-wise.

results reflected the branch performance

which the local staff could relate to.

Learnings from the Case

A

metric is required to measure the service

quality.

With

shift of focus from product to service, the

generic performance measurement isnt enough.

Differentiation

can be done based on service as

product can be easily matched by competitors.

Though

the metric is in place, it is important to

train the staff to understand the results and then
improve where they lack.

The

metric should be standard and reflect the

reality to which every member of the
organization can relate to.