15.06.2014 Views

Cost reduction in the European Banking sector - Roland Berger

Cost reduction in the European Banking sector - Roland Berger

Cost reduction in the European Banking sector - Roland Berger

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

1<br />

<strong>Cost</strong> <strong>reduction</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>European</strong> Bank<strong>in</strong>g <strong>sector</strong><br />

Presentation<br />

Paris, July 2012


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

2<br />

Our experts<br />

FABRICE ASVAZADOURIAN<br />

SENIOR PARTNER<br />

CO-HEAD OF GLOBAL FINANCIAL SERVICES COMPETENCE CENTRE<br />

STEPHANE POTIER<br />

PARTNER<br />

FINANCIAL SERVICES CC / HEAD OF OPERATIONS AND IT PRACTICE<br />

EMMANUEL BONNAUD<br />

SENIOR PARTNER<br />

OPERATIONS CC / HEAD OF THE TRANSFORMATION AND RESTRUCTURING PRACTICE


Leverag<strong>in</strong>g its <strong>in</strong>dustrial consult<strong>in</strong>g roots, <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> is<br />

a recognized lead<strong>in</strong>g practitioner <strong>in</strong> cost management<br />

ROLAND BERGER'S OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY OFFERING<br />

COST MANAGEMENT IS THE MAIN ACTIVITY FOR<br />

OUR FS CC<br />

>20%<br />

Targeted cost sav<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

RESTRUCTURING<br />

LONG TRANSFORMATION<br />

PROGRAM<br />

Orga. streaml<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

F<strong>in</strong>ancial Services Competence Center Revenues<br />

100%<br />

100%<br />

10 à<br />

20%<br />

5-<br />

10%<br />

FIT OPERATIONS<br />

(Fast Impact<br />

Transformation)<br />

BUDGET<br />

CUTS<br />

Short term<br />

(6-18 months)<br />

Outsourc<strong>in</strong>g/offshor<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Shared service centers<br />

Process simplification<br />

IT Turnaround<br />

LEAN / CONTINUOUS<br />

IMPROVEMENT<br />

Long Term<br />

(24-36 months)<br />

Sav<strong>in</strong>g realization<br />

timeframe<br />

68%<br />

32%<br />

2010<br />

43%<br />

57%<br />

2012 ytd<br />

Efficiency<br />

enhancement<br />

projects<br />

Source: <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> Strategy Consultants<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

3


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

4<br />

Syn<strong>the</strong>sis<br />

> Industry <strong>in</strong>flexion po<strong>in</strong>t on cost : from cost adaptation to cost transformation<br />

> Start<strong>in</strong>g po<strong>in</strong>t: Not all banks equal … but too many still unprepared<br />

> New frontier: Performance from simplicity<br />

– Axis 1: Fit operations to remove local <strong>in</strong>efficiencies<br />

– Axis 2: Simplify and delayer organization for stronger accountability<br />

– Axis 3: Simplify bus<strong>in</strong>ess model (offer / manufactur<strong>in</strong>g) for greater agility<br />

> Two-tier approach<br />

– Accelerate/Amplify/Align traditional levers<br />

– Re-<strong>in</strong>vent post-crisis cost models<br />

> Implementation challenges<br />

– Challenge 1: attack<strong>in</strong>g front-office cost-<strong>reduction</strong><br />

– Challenge 2: master<strong>in</strong>g social eng<strong>in</strong>eer<strong>in</strong>g<br />

– Challenge 3: address<strong>in</strong>g each bank's governance and leadership issue<br />

– Challenge 4: root<strong>in</strong>g a culture of frugality<br />

> Banks ability to prepare cost model for tomorrow will differentiate w<strong>in</strong>ners from losers


Agenda<br />

Page<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

From cost adaptation to cost transformation 6<br />

It's time for simplicity <strong>in</strong> bank<strong>in</strong>g 15<br />

Make it happen: key lessons learnt and success factors 23<br />

© <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> Strategy Consultants<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

5


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

6<br />

1. From cost adaptation to cost transformation


<strong>Cost</strong> <strong>reduction</strong> is a key driver for restor<strong>in</strong>g ail<strong>in</strong>g profitability<br />

Average ROE of ma<strong>in</strong> Western <strong>European</strong> Bank<strong>in</strong>g groups<br />

17%<br />

MANAGEMENT ACTIONS:<br />

7%<br />

3%<br />

-2 / -3%<br />

4-6%<br />

9-11 %<br />

> Short term cost improvement<br />

and long term simplification<br />

> Diversify fund<strong>in</strong>g solutions and adapt to<br />

domestic r<strong>in</strong>g-fenc<strong>in</strong>g of deposit<br />

TODAY'S<br />

FOCUS<br />

4%<br />

> Redef<strong>in</strong>e bus<strong>in</strong>ess models of each<br />

activity and adjust bus<strong>in</strong>ess portfolio to<br />

new regulatory constra<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

2007<br />

2010<br />

2011<br />

Nonrecurr<strong>in</strong>g<br />

events<br />

Regulatory<br />

rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

impacts<br />

Management<br />

actions<br />

2015<br />

Source: Annual reports, 2011 results presentation, <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> Strategy Consultants analysis<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

7


2 scenarios were projected<br />

BASE SCENARIO<br />

> Gradual recovery of <strong>the</strong> bank<strong>in</strong>g environment<br />

– Gradual recovery of economic growth<br />

– Progressive implementation of new regulation<br />

– Limited political impact on taxation and activity<br />

constra<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

– Return to a more stable and fluid fund<strong>in</strong>g<br />

environment<br />

STRESS SCENARIO<br />

> Persistence of a deteriorated bank<strong>in</strong>g<br />

environment<br />

– "Lost decade" of economic growth<br />

– Rigid implementation of new regulation<br />

– Multiplication of political <strong>in</strong>itiatives with F<strong>in</strong>ance<br />

seen as <strong>the</strong> "enemy"<br />

– Persistence over time of market stress<br />

Source: <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> analysis<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

8


Announced plans reflect a turnaround from cost conta<strong>in</strong>ment<br />

to active cost <strong>reduction</strong><br />

Evolution of <strong>European</strong> Banks <strong>Cost</strong>: Income Ratio<br />

70<br />

69%<br />

65<br />

60<br />

Actual CIR<br />

55<br />

-0.5 pt/year<br />

Expected CIR<br />

61%<br />

-1.5 pt/year<br />

55%<br />

0<br />

1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016<br />

In a different top l<strong>in</strong>e growth context !<br />

NBI growth/year 3 to 5% +/-1%<br />

Base case :<br />

-10% COSTS<br />

OVER 2012-2016<br />

-40 Bn EUR<br />

Stress case: -17% (-68 Bn EUR)<br />

<strong>Cost</strong> growth/year<br />

2 to 4% -0.5 to.-2.5%<br />

Source: Bloomberg, Broker reports, Annual reports, <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> Strategy Consultants analysis<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

9


Many banks have announced cost <strong>reduction</strong> plans…<br />

<strong>Cost</strong> <strong>in</strong>come ratio performance overview & cost <strong>reduction</strong> objectives<br />

CIR evolution<br />

[pts; 2010; 2011]<br />

6<br />

5<br />

4<br />

3<br />

2<br />

1<br />

0<br />

-2<br />

-3<br />

-4<br />

Santander<br />

BBVA<br />

> 6% headcount <strong>reduction</strong><br />

> By end of 2012<br />

> 2.5-3.5 Bn USD<br />

by 2013<br />

Nordea<br />

HSBC<br />

BNPP<br />

Unicredit<br />

Barclays<br />

0 45 50 55 60<br />

65 70<br />

> 770 M€ by 2013<br />

> 8 000 FTE<br />

> Targeted CIR:<br />

> 43% by 2015<br />

Intesa<br />

ING<br />

RBS<br />

> 800M€ by 2015 (300 M€ from purchas<strong>in</strong>g)<br />

> Targeted CIR: 50-53% by 2015<br />

SG<br />

> 1.5 bn€ by 2013-15 (560 M€ from mass lay-offs)<br />

> Targeted CIR: 50% by 2015<br />

> 3.5 bn€ (2009-2011)<br />

> Targeted CIR: 55% by 2013<br />

> 2 bn GBP by 2013<br />

75<br />

> 1,6 Bn€ achieved <strong>in</strong> 2011<br />

> Additional 1.3 Bn€ ga<strong>in</strong>s<br />

through <strong>in</strong>tegration<br />

DB<br />

80<br />

Ø 1.8pts<br />

COI<br />

Source: Annual reports, <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> analysis<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

10


… yet not all banks are equally prepared<br />

# of banks amongst <strong>European</strong> Top 25 <strong>European</strong> Banks<br />

NOT CLEAR<br />

> Short term cost adaptation plan<br />

announced end 2011<br />

– 2 pts <strong>reduction</strong> target <strong>in</strong> CIR<br />

– Short-term vision (2012-13)<br />

40%<br />

24%<br />

36%<br />

PREPARED<br />

> Ambitious cost transformation plan<br />

announced<br />

– 6-7 pts <strong>reduction</strong> target <strong>in</strong> CIR<br />

– Medium-term vision (2014-15)<br />

PREPARED / WILL IT BE<br />

ENOUGH?<br />

> Modest cost transformation plan<br />

announced<br />

– ~2-5 pts <strong>reduction</strong> target <strong>in</strong> CIR<br />

– Medium-term vision (2014-15)<br />

Source: Annual reports, <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> analysis<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

11


Target cost <strong>reduction</strong> varies by country depend<strong>in</strong>g on stress level of<br />

each domestic bank<strong>in</strong>g system as well as social constra<strong>in</strong>ts<br />

TARGET COST REDUCTION PER COUNTRY<br />

Social constra<strong>in</strong>t (Proxy : OECD Employee Protection Index)<br />

KEY LEVERS PER COUNTRY<br />

Concentration<br />

Levers<br />

-5// -10%<br />

-10 -10/ /-15%<br />

Low<br />

> Restructur<strong>in</strong>g, mergers, branches<br />

closure<br />

(338 ; 2.9)<br />

(441 ; 3.0)<br />

(na; 2.8)<br />

Medium<br />

> Mergers, outsourc<strong>in</strong>g, organizational<br />

<strong>in</strong>tegration<br />

(196 ; 2.4)<br />

OECD Average : 2.1<br />

(547; 2.4)<br />

High<br />

> Organizational <strong>in</strong>tegration, carveouts/outsourc<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

branches closure<br />

(201 ; 1.6)<br />

Very high<br />

> Offshor<strong>in</strong>g, out-sourc<strong>in</strong>g, Front-office<br />

productivity <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> City of London<br />

-10 / -15% -15 / -20%<br />

-10 / -15% (251 ; 1.1)<br />

-15 / -20%<br />

Low<br />

> Productivity, carve-out/outsourc<strong>in</strong>g,<br />

<strong>in</strong>terbank alliances<br />

Stress level (Proxy : 5Y CDS)<br />

X / Y %<br />

<strong>Cost</strong> <strong>reduction</strong> target to be achieved<br />

(xxx ; x.xx) Average CDS 5Y by country base on Banks' headquarter / OECD Employee Protection Strictnes Index (0-6 scale)<br />

Source: <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> analysis<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

12


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

13<br />

<strong>Cost</strong> <strong>reduction</strong> targets and ma<strong>in</strong> efficiency levers to activate varies<br />

accord<strong>in</strong>g also to bus<strong>in</strong>ess l<strong>in</strong>e<br />

POSITIONING OF BUSINESS LINES DEPENDING<br />

ON THE ENVIRONMENT<br />

Social constra<strong>in</strong>t<br />

-5 / -10%<br />

Retail<br />

Support<br />

functions<br />

-10 / -15%<br />

KEY LEVERS PER BUSINESS LINE<br />

Retail<br />

SFS<br />

> Delayer<strong>in</strong>g, carve-outs/JVs, branch<br />

clos<strong>in</strong>g<br />

> Offer simplification, IT consolidation,<br />

merger<br />

Asset & Wealth<br />

Management<br />

SFS<br />

CIB<br />

> Front Office productivity,<br />

offshor<strong>in</strong>g/carve-outs, front-to-back<br />

process streaml<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

CIB<br />

-10 / -15% -15 / -20%<br />

Asset &<br />

Wealth Mgt<br />

Support<br />

functions<br />

> Front Office productivity, BO<br />

outsourc<strong>in</strong>g, <strong>in</strong>dustrialization<br />

> Renunciation, organizational<br />

consolidation and shared services,<br />

offshor<strong>in</strong>g<br />

X / Y %<br />

<strong>Cost</strong> <strong>reduction</strong> target to<br />

be achieved<br />

Stress level


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

14<br />

Pressure will be primarily put on support functions and external<br />

suppliers<br />

Source of sav<strong>in</strong>gs and relative effort by cost nature<br />

Effort 1)<br />

HR - Support<br />

10%<br />

15%<br />

-15%<br />

(-20%)<br />

BANK HR COSTS : 50% OF SAVINGS<br />

HR - BO/FO<br />

48%<br />

35%<br />

-7%<br />

(-15%)<br />

(-55% <strong>in</strong> Stress Scenario)<br />

vs. 58% of cost base<br />

IT<br />

Real Estate<br />

External expenses<br />

15%<br />

12%<br />

15%<br />

19%<br />

10%<br />

22%<br />

-12%<br />

(-20%)<br />

-8%<br />

(-12%)<br />

-15%<br />

(-20%)<br />

EXTERNAL COSTS : 50% OF SAVINGS<br />

(-45% <strong>in</strong> Stress Scenario)<br />

vs . 42% of cost base<br />

<strong>Cost</strong> structure<br />

1) % of cost base –Base Scenario (Stress Scenario)<br />

Source of sav<strong>in</strong>gs


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

15<br />

2. It is time for simplicity <strong>in</strong> bank<strong>in</strong>g


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

16<br />

In many o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>in</strong>dustries, <strong>the</strong> <strong>reduction</strong> of complexity has been<br />

a major performance enhancer<br />

INCREASING COMPLEXITY<br />

IN FINANCIAL SERVICES<br />

EXAMPLE OF A COST TRANSFORMATION JOURNEY - TELECOM<br />

> Successive phases <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g<br />

complexity<br />

– Before 2008 : "Growth" (new<br />

products, new geographical<br />

areas, new activities)<br />

– After 2008 : "Regulatory<br />

Response" (staked <strong>in</strong>itiatives,<br />

budget cuts, <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g<br />

resources)<br />

> Internal organization more and<br />

more complex<br />

– Additional standards<br />

– Matrix form of organization<br />

– Stack of managerial levels (HQ,<br />

activities, entities, bus<strong>in</strong>ess<br />

units, …)<br />

– …<br />

1<br />

Productivity<br />

Achieved (2004)<br />

> OPEX sav<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

EUR 2 bn<br />

> Headcount<br />

<strong>reduction</strong><br />

26,400 FTE<br />

2<br />

Simplify<br />

Achieved (2007)<br />

> OPEX sav<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

EUR 1.8 bn<br />

> Headcount<br />

<strong>reduction</strong><br />

20,000 FTE<br />

3<br />

Sp<strong>in</strong>-off<br />

Achieved (2010)<br />

> OPEX sav<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

EUR 3 bn<br />

> Sp<strong>in</strong>-off of<br />

45,000 FTE


LEVERS<br />

New frontier: The quest for simplicity to reach <strong>the</strong> next level of<br />

structural cost performance<br />

PERFORMANCE FROM SIMPLICITY<br />

1<br />

FIT<br />

2<br />

STREAMLINE<br />

3<br />

OPERATIONS<br />

ORGANIZATION<br />

> Renunciation<br />

> Productivity<br />

> Skills alignment<br />

> Delayer<strong>in</strong>g<br />

> Suppress<strong>in</strong>g<br />

overlaps<br />

> Elim<strong>in</strong>at<strong>in</strong>g<br />

“embedded<br />

support”<br />

REFOCUS<br />

FOOTPRINT<br />

> Reduction of<br />

Product / Channel<br />

variety<br />

> Carve-outs and<br />

outsourc<strong>in</strong>g<br />

> Consolidation<br />

& shared services<br />

EFFICIENT ACCOUNTABLE AGILE<br />

Source: <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> Strategy Consutlants<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

17


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

18<br />

1<br />

FIT OPERATIONS<br />

FIT Operations: high level of cost <strong>in</strong>efficiencies rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g at a "shop<br />

floor" level<br />

KEY FIT SPECIFIC LEVERS<br />

ILLUSTRATION - FIT OPERATIONS PROJECT<br />

Renunciation<br />

> Not do<strong>in</strong>g it<br />

Illustration - Source of sav<strong>in</strong>gs of a FIT Operations project (%)<br />

Streaml<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g<br />

Standardization<br />

Simplification<br />

Skills alignment<br />

Self care<br />

> Do<strong>in</strong>g it once<br />

> Do<strong>in</strong>g it one way<br />

> Do<strong>in</strong>g it simpler<br />

> Do<strong>in</strong>g it cheaper<br />

> Let <strong>the</strong> user /<br />

customer do it<br />

Automation<br />

Mutualization<br />

Renunciation<br />

Process simplification /<br />

Standardization<br />

Skills adjusmtent<br />

26<br />

6<br />

33<br />

TOTAL 100<br />

18<br />

17.4%<br />

cost sav<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

16<br />

1/3 with classic<br />

levers<br />

(18-36 months)<br />

2/3 with FIT<br />

specific<br />

levers<br />

(6-18 months)


% of managers<br />

% of managers<br />

2<br />

STREAMLINE ORGANIZATION<br />

Many banks are now flatten<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir structure<br />

MANAGEMENT WEIGHT FOR SUPPORT FUNCTIONS<br />

Span of control [# of employees per manager]<br />

HIERARCHICAL LEVELS WITHIN SUPPORT<br />

FUNCTIONS<br />

Width of hierarchy [# of hierarchical level]<br />

84% 16%<br />

0%<br />

20%<br />

15%<br />

10%<br />

5%<br />

0%<br />

55% 23% 21%<br />

2%<br />

Average ratio = 5,1<br />

Targeted ratio= 7 - 9<br />

5 10 15 20<br />

Ratio<br />

40%<br />

35%<br />

30%<br />

25%<br />

20%<br />

15%<br />

10%<br />

5%<br />

0%<br />

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10<br />

Hierarchical levels<br />

Workforce : 2020<br />

Weighted average= 4,4<br />

20%+ of potential <strong>reduction</strong> <strong>in</strong> # of managers<br />

Simplification by remov<strong>in</strong>g one hierarchical level<br />

Source: <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> Strategy Consultants experience<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

19


3<br />

REFOCUS FOOTPRINT<br />

Product portfolio simplification: reduc<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> complexity of <strong>the</strong><br />

offer<strong>in</strong>g to slim down <strong>the</strong> value cha<strong>in</strong><br />

MAKING PRODUCTS EASY TO EXPLAIN<br />

FOR EMPLOYEES...<br />

> Products are clearly dist<strong>in</strong>guished and have little overlap<br />

> Employee is able to give <strong>the</strong> customer good advice<br />

Example: strong <strong>reduction</strong> <strong>in</strong> mortgage offer<strong>in</strong>g complexity<br />

by look<strong>in</strong>g at all parameters<br />

... AND EASY TO CHOOSE FOR CUSTOMERS<br />

Example : ABN AMRO<br />

> Product characteristics and differences between products are easy<br />

to understand<br />

> Customer can make an <strong>in</strong>dependent choice when desired<br />

Reduction from 10% to 90% across product<br />

silo's will be achieved<br />

Loans<br />

Down payment<br />

methods<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

From 9 to 1<br />

type<br />

From 7 to 5<br />

methods<br />

17<br />

-24%<br />

13<br />

10<br />

-10%<br />

9<br />

9<br />

-56%<br />

4<br />

8<br />

-13%<br />

7<br />

9<br />

-89%<br />

1<br />

7<br />

-29%<br />

5<br />

Interest period<br />

<br />

<br />

From 14 to 6<br />

periods<br />

Current<br />

Account<br />

Package<br />

Before<br />

Sav<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

After<br />

Securities<br />

Loans<br />

Mortgages<br />

Fiscal Sav<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

Source: Producten Anno Nu presentation, March 2011<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

20


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

21<br />

6<br />

REFOCUS FOOTPRINT<br />

Expect off-shor<strong>in</strong>g, outsourc<strong>in</strong>g, carve-out, sp<strong>in</strong>-off to be high on<br />

CEO agenda<br />

Type of carve-out model<br />

MODEL<br />

Competence<br />

shar<strong>in</strong>g Sourc<strong>in</strong>g<br />

optimization<br />

DESCRIPTION<br />

> A bank leverages technical know how of<br />

an IT/ vendor partner<br />

> Industrial JV with access to cheaper<br />

resources<br />

EXAMPLE<br />

> IT Infrastructure<br />

> Retail bank<strong>in</strong>g services<br />

Outsourc<strong>in</strong>g<br />

to a Third Party<br />

Volume<br />

Consolidation<br />

Commercial JV<br />

: High<br />

: Low<br />

> A bank sells its assets and teams to a<br />

provider benefitt<strong>in</strong>g from scale effect<br />

> <strong>Cost</strong>s variabilization and access to best of<br />

breed systems and processes<br />

> Two bank<strong>in</strong>g groups jo<strong>in</strong>t forces to share<br />

large volumes<br />

> Scale effect / Investment shar<strong>in</strong>g<br />

> A bank carves-out a BO with a service<br />

provider that markets <strong>the</strong> service to banks<br />

> Banks br<strong>in</strong>gs bus<strong>in</strong>ess competence, partner<br />

provides <strong>in</strong>dustrialisation and commercial<br />

knowhow<br />

> Investor Services (SS, AM, Insurance)<br />

> Support functions<br />

> IT Ma<strong>in</strong>tenance<br />

> Investor Services<br />

> Payment (post-paid)<br />

> Consumer F<strong>in</strong>ance<br />

> Structured F<strong>in</strong>ance<br />

> Capital Markets<br />

> Payment (pre-paid)<br />

Monte Paschi di Senna just announced <strong>the</strong> outsourc<strong>in</strong>g of its entire Back-Office


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

22<br />

3. Make it happen: lessons learnt and success factors


Start<strong>in</strong>g po<strong>in</strong>t: significant hurdles to overcome<br />

BANKS HANDICAPS<br />

DIMENSIONS<br />

Handicap<br />

Neutral<br />

Accelerator<br />

COST CULTURE<br />

SOCIAL FACTORS<br />

COST VARIABILITY<br />

COST OF<br />

REGULATION<br />

LEVEL OF STRESS<br />

BANKS FACE A GREAT COST<br />

TRANSFORMATION CHALLENGE<br />

> High cost <strong>reduction</strong> ambitions (60/72% of banks<br />

with CIR decrease targets more than thrice/twice<br />

past 15 years achievements)<br />

> Start<strong>in</strong>g po<strong>in</strong>t with many handicaps compared<br />

o<strong>the</strong>rs<br />

> Limited time / High market pressure<br />

Banks Automotive Telco<br />

Source: <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> Strategy Consultants analysis<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

23


SAVINGS<br />

Th<strong>in</strong>k ahead: from cost adaptation to cost transformation<br />

ARE YOU WELL PREPARED?<br />

DESIGN A 3-STEP COST TRANSFORMATION JOURNEY<br />

Review of cost-related announcement<br />

of top 25 <strong>European</strong> banks<br />

UNPREPARED?<br />

WELL PREPARED<br />

High<br />

25%<br />

Re<strong>in</strong>vent<br />

<strong>the</strong> cost model<br />

38%<br />

38%<br />

Accelerate / Amplify /<br />

Align (AAA)<br />

conventional levers<br />

15%<br />

25%<br />

Remove local<br />

<strong>in</strong>efficiencies<br />

PREPARED BUT WILL IT BE ENOUGH?<br />

Low<br />

TIME<br />

Source : Annual reports, <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> analysis<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

24


Execution is k<strong>in</strong>g: The effective delivery of cost sav<strong>in</strong>gs will<br />

differentiate post crisis w<strong>in</strong>ners from losers.<br />

POST-MORTEM OF A COST PROGRAM ONE YEAR AFTER LAUNCH<br />

KEY SUCCESS FACTORS<br />

100<br />

5<br />

-36%<br />

> Relentless sponsor<strong>in</strong>g from <strong>the</strong> top<br />

management<br />

> Partial sav<strong>in</strong>gs recognition<br />

> Restriction of shar<strong>in</strong>g<br />

opportunities (shared<br />

services…)<br />

> Low mobilization<br />

27<br />

14 64<br />

> Mobilization of middle managers<br />

around a long term vision and clear<br />

action plans/priorities<br />

> Well designed social eng<strong>in</strong>eer<strong>in</strong>g to<br />

realize sav<strong>in</strong>gs<br />

Initial target<br />

> Limited <strong>in</strong>vestment capacity<br />

> Inadequate availability of resources<br />

> Insufficient social eng<strong>in</strong>eer<strong>in</strong>g<br />

> Inefficient governance<br />

Additional target<br />

Sav<strong>in</strong>gs to be<br />

validated by<br />

bus<strong>in</strong>ess units<br />

Delay<br />

Adjusted target<br />

> Change management to <strong>in</strong>still a cost<br />

culture<br />

> Rigorous program management and<br />

sav<strong>in</strong>gs track<strong>in</strong>g<br />

Source: <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> experience<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

25


Front Office won't be "sacred cows"<br />

PERSPECTIVES BY ACTIVITY<br />

CIB<br />

Retail<br />

SFS<br />

W & AM<br />

> Pressure on compensation<br />

> Front office delayer<strong>in</strong>g<br />

> Branch network optimization<br />

> Leverage of remote channels<br />

> Acquisition costs decrease<br />

> Service level adjustment for<br />

partners<br />

> Productivity of front-office<br />

> Review of external distribution<br />

value shar<strong>in</strong>g scheme<br />

1) Based on total of ~240,000 branches <strong>in</strong> 2010 <strong>in</strong> Western Europe<br />

Source: ECB, EFMA, Febelf<strong>in</strong>, <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> analysis<br />

ILLUSTRATION: BRANCH NETWORK PER MILLION<br />

INHABITANTS IN WESTERN EUROPE [#]<br />

1,200<br />

1,000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

Selection of key countries<br />

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010<br />

Spa<strong>in</strong><br />

France<br />

Italy<br />

Germany<br />

Sweden<br />

Ne<strong>the</strong>rlands<br />

> 15-20,000 potential branch closures by 2016 <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> base case<br />

or -6/8% 1) (vs. -30-35,000 closures <strong>in</strong> stress case or -12/14%)<br />

– Inflexion po<strong>in</strong>t versus historic trend (+1.2% between 2000/10)<br />

UK<br />

Potential<br />

decrease vs.<br />

historic (est.)<br />

++<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

+<br />

+<br />

=<br />

=<br />

=<br />

=<br />

26


A complex social equation<br />

BANKS WORKFORCE IN WESTERN EUROPE ['000 EMPLOYEES]<br />

COMMENTS<br />

2.988<br />

2004<br />

1,1% p.a.<br />

2.983<br />

2005<br />

3.027<br />

2006<br />

3.084<br />

2007<br />

3.072<br />

2008<br />

-0,7% p.a.<br />

(-90 000)<br />

3.021<br />

2009<br />

2.994<br />

2010<br />

2.994<br />

2011<br />

2012<br />

Base case :<br />

-1.0% p.a.<br />

(-180,000)<br />

2013<br />

2014<br />

> Workforce will decrease back to early-2000 level<br />

> Indirect job losses at suppliers should be <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> same range<br />

> Stress-scenario would double <strong>the</strong> projected impact<br />

1) 380 000 bank employees <strong>in</strong> France, 18% 55+ years old <strong>in</strong> 2010<br />

2015<br />

2016<br />

> Pressure on compensation<br />

– Bonus pool<br />

– Base salary evolution<br />

> Pressure on suppliers<br />

– IT providers<br />

– Consultants<br />

– Facility/service providers<br />

– Employment agencies/Temps<br />

> Social eng<strong>in</strong>eer<strong>in</strong>g<br />

– Recruit<strong>in</strong>g slowdown /<br />

Non replacement of retirements<br />

– Internalization<br />

– Internal mobility promotion<br />

– Carve-out / Sp<strong>in</strong>-off<br />

– Social plans<br />

Source: <strong>European</strong> Bank<strong>in</strong>g Federation, <strong>Roland</strong> <strong>Berger</strong> analysis<br />

Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

27


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

28<br />

Which obstacles for change now ?<br />

"What makes us hesitate is not <strong>the</strong> difficulty of th<strong>in</strong>gs,<br />

but th<strong>in</strong>gs are difficult because we hesitate to tackle <strong>the</strong>m"<br />

Senèque<br />

"Social cohesion is done at <strong>the</strong> expense of truth"<br />

Jeff Bezos, Amazon CEO


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

29<br />

Our advice for <strong>European</strong> bank<strong>in</strong>g executives as <strong>the</strong>y are start<strong>in</strong>g<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir cost transformation journey<br />

> In <strong>the</strong> midst of a crisis, do<strong>in</strong>g noth<strong>in</strong>g is <strong>the</strong> worst possible choice<br />

> If you are <strong>in</strong> a bad situation, <strong>the</strong> right decisions often make th<strong>in</strong>gs worse before<br />

<strong>the</strong>y get better<br />

> Navigat<strong>in</strong>g out of a crisis requires courageous, non-consensus leadership<br />

> Once you have addressed <strong>the</strong> issue, th<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong>variably get better more quickly<br />

than you expect<br />

> If you prepare for <strong>the</strong> worst, surprises will generally be positive


Bank<strong>in</strong>g_cost_<strong>reduction</strong>_FINAL_270712.pptx<br />

30<br />

It's character<br />

that<br />

creates<br />

impact!

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!