India Banking Overview
-
Upload
deepanshuchandra -
Category
Documents
-
view
11 -
download
0
description
Transcript of India Banking Overview
Financial Services Practice
Indian Banking:Towards Global Best Practices
Insights from industry benchmarking surveys
“The report is furnished to the recipient for information purposes only. Each recipient should conduct its own investigation and analysis of any such information contained in this report. No recipient is entitled to rely on the work of McKinsey & Company, Inc. contained in this report for any purpose. McKinsey & Company, Inc. makes no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy or completeness of such information and expressly disclaims any and all liabilities based on such information or on omissions therefrom. The recipient must not reproduce, disclose or distribute the information contained herein without the express prior written consent of McKinsey & Company, Inc.”
Indian Banking:Towards Global Best Practices
Insights from industry benchmarking surveys
November, 2007
5
The Indian banking sector is rapidly globalising, making it important for Indian banks to ensure their
practices match those of the best banks in the world. This is the focus of this year’s Annual Bankers’
Conference, with the theme “Indian Banking: Towards Global Best Practices.”
To assess how leading banks in India are meeting global best practices, McKinsey & Company has
administered, on our behalf, five industry benchmarking surveys across selected banks. Building on
existing proprietary research across various industries internationally, McKinsey has achieved the
difficult task of defining, measuring and comparing the processes and practices of leading banks in
India with those of leading banks in other parts of the world. This report captures the findings and
conclusions of this research, and highlights what must be done to bring banking in India to world-class
levels.
The Bank of Baroda and the Indian Banks’ Association thank McKinsey & Company for devoting
time and resources to conducting the survey and putting together this report. We also thank all the
banks that have taken part in the benchmarking survey; their participation has made it a tremendous
success.
This is our first association with McKinsey & Company as Knowledge Partners. We hope to continue
this relationship in our future endeavours.
Dr. A. K. Khandelwal
Chairman & Managing Director
Bank of Baroda
H. N. Sinor
Chief Executive
Indian Banks’ Association
7
PrefaceIndia’s banking sector is growing rapidly and is expected to enjoy even greater growth opportunities
in the future. Several Indian banks are pursuing global strategies, as Indian companies globalise and
people of Indian origin increase their investment in India. At the same time, a large number of global
banks have stepped up their focus on India, keen to participate in the sector’s growth.
Today, the question often asked is: how competitive are Indian banks and how do the practices
at work in these banks compare against global best practices. To assess this, we at McKinsey &
Company, with support from the Indian Banks’ Association, profiled 14 leading banks in India, using
five proprietary surveys developed by our Banking and Securities, Organisation, Risk Management
and Business Technology practices and administered at banks across the world. This allowed us
to compare the performance and practices of Indian banks with those of global banks in a way we
believe has not been done before. The banks surveyed include: seven leading public sector banks,
four new private sector banks, and three large foreign banks with a significant presence in India.
The five surveys we administered are: the McKinsey Personal Financial Services Survey; Excellence in
Retail Banking Survey; IT Benchmarking Survey; Organisational Performance Profile Survey; and Asset
Liability Management Survey.
The surveys were detailed and consisted of two parts. The first entailed a qualitative assessment based
on a detailed performance grid to analyse the underlying practices at work (e.g., a self-assessment
grid to evaluate excellence in retail banking). The second involved detailed analyses of quantitative
data and financial performance (e.g., technology spends or retail banking data).The analysis focused
on unearthing underlying capabilities using our proprietary methodology in each of the survey areas.
All data was handled with utmost confidentiality. Findings and conclusions in the chapters that follow
reflect aggregate numbers with no attribution to any particular bank. During analysis, code names
were assigned to individual bank data to ensure confidentiality even within the working team.
Our findings uncover several interesting facts and trends that are likely to influence the evolution of
the sector in India. Five key highlights include:
(i) While on the surface most banks in India currently have similar levels of profitability, there are
dramatic differences in the underlying economics. The profitability of the wholesale banking
operations of attackers, i.e., new private and foreign banks, is much higher compared to incumbents,
i.e., public sector and old private banks that mainly rely on their valuable legacy retail franchises.
8
Our analysis shows that access to retail banking deposits is today the biggest driver of retail
banking profitability; in fact incumbent banks enjoy a staggering ROE (return on equity) of about
33 per cent on their retail banking portfolios. Attackers, on the other hand, are investing heavily in
building large-scale retail franchises.
(ii) Our research globally indicates that customer experience is the biggest driver of value. However, in
India customer experience and tailored offerings will be a big driver of bank profitability as young,
affluent customers are more demanding and discerning and are less credit-averse. Our survey reveals
that while attackers have revolutionalised levels of convenience and provide customers with superior
service levels, they also have more customers with “negative experiences”. Further, the research
shows that such customers fragment their wallet more than others leading to inferior economics.
(iii) The survey results show that Indian banks have historically had access to superior talent relative
to other global banks leading to superior organisation performance on average. However, it is well
known that incumbents suffer from a severe lack of specialist skills and new-age leaders. The
survey shows that the extent of the problem is acute and crippling for these banks. They need to
act urgently to attract, hire, develop and retain the best available talent to ensure sustained growth
in the long term. While attackers are doing better on this front, they will also have to deal with
severe talent shortage issues and will need to devise innovative strategies to continue to attract
talent and develop new leaders.
(iv) The Asset Liability Management Survey shows that treasury is a significant contributor to bank
earnings in India. The treasury divisions at Indian banks are integrated profit centres that manage
capital market businesses and credit and market risk. It is encouraging to see that several attackers
have leapfrogged on this front and are using sophisticated risk management techniques on par
with those implemented by global banks. However, risk management practices in public sector
banks are at a nascent stage and simply conform to regulatory and compliance measures.
(v) Indian banks, in particular attackers, have leveraged the nation’s IT skills to establish a competitive
advantage. IT has now become a distinctive capability that these banks can successfully export
to international markets as they globalise. Attackers with best-in-class IT capabilities are truly the
best in the world on account of three factors: the ability to avoid using legacy systems, superior
governance practices that often entail direct CEO involvement, and the India advantage. However,
most incumbents have made large investments in technologies such as core banking solutions,
but have not fully developed strategies to derive value from these investments, e.g., leverage
these investments to upgrade their levels of customer service.
We hope that these findings derived from a robust fact base will stimulate debate and facilitate
informed decision making in India’s banking sector as it aspires to become globally competitive and
continues to grow rapidly in both the domestic and international markets.
Joydeep Sengupta
Director
McKinsey & Company
Renny Thomas
Partner
McKinsey & Company
Banking in India: Towards global best practices
15
Banking in India: Towards global best practicesOver the last four years, India’s economy has been on a high growth trajectory, creating unprecedented
opportunities for its banking sector. Most banks have enjoyed high growth and their valuations have
appreciated significantly during this period. Looking ahead, the most pertinent issue is how well the
banking sector is positioned to cater to continued growth.
A holistic assessment of the banking sector is possible only by looking at the roles and actions of
banks, their core capabilities and their ability to meet systemic objectives, which include increasing
shareholder value, fostering financial inclusion, contributing to GDP growth, efficiently managing
intermediation cost, and effectively allocating capital and maintaining system stability (Exhibit 1).
Exhibit 1
Assessing the performance of the Indian banking sector
Source: McKinsey analysis
1. Return share-holder value
2. Foster financial inclusion
3. Contribute to GDP growth
4. Efficiently manage intermediation costs
5. Effectively allocate capital and maintain stability
Five key objectives
Policymakers
Stakeholders Enablers
Core capabilities• Organisation • Sales and
distribution• Credit and risk• IT and operations
Enabling regulatory environment
Banks
ILLUSTRATIVE
Exhibit 1
16
GLOBAL COMPARISONS INDICATE THAT INDIA’S BANKING SECTOR MEETS ITS OBJECTIVES BUT IS POLARISED
Our survey of 14 leading banks in India shows that banks have done remarkably well in increasing
shareholder value, allocating capital effectively, and contributing to GDP growth (Exhibit 2). However,
in comparison to international peers Indian banks could do more to foster financial inclusion and
manage intermediation costs. Our findings also highlight the clear divide between the performance
of incumbents, i.e., public sector and old private banks, and attackers, i.e., new private and foreign
banks, a reflection of the underlying shifts in the banking sector.
Increasing shareholder value: Indian banks have enjoyed high growth in underlying businesses over
the last three years. Loans have grown at over 30 per cent and deposits at about 18 per cent during
this time. Profitability remains robust at around 18 per cent (pre-tax return on equity), which compares
favourably to that of Asian peers. This up-tick in performance has been handsomely rewarded: banking
stocks have appreciated by over 35 per cent year-on-year from January 2000 to October 2007, outdoing
overall stock-market growth in India as well as that of banks in the region (Exhibit 3).
Fostering financial inclusion: Indian households are among the highest savers in the world, saving as
much as 32.4 per cent of their income. Household savings account for 69 per cent of India’s gross
national savings, significantly more than in most countries. But the financial system has only been
able to access 47 per cent of these savings (Exhibit 4), partly because of geographical fragmentation
that often results in limited reach.
Further, Indian urban centres account for almost 60 per cent of total savings deposits (as of March
2006), despite only 27 per cent of the population residing in 4,000 urban locations. This reaffirms two
widely held beliefs—the potential of customers in urban areas is high and more importantly, there is
need to foster financial inclusion to tap the remaining 73 per cent of customers fragmented across
650,000 villages in India.
Exhibit 2
Banks are doing well on 2 of the 5 objectives
Source: McKinsey analysis
Made significant progress
Need to make significant progress
Made progress
1. Return shareholder value
2. Foster financial inclusion
3. Contribute to GDP growth
4. Effectively manage intermediation costs
5. Effectively allocate capital and maintain stability
Performance on achieving these objectivesFive key objectives of the banking sector
Five key objectives
Policy makers
Stakeholders Enablers
Corecapabilities
Enabling regulatory environment
Banks
ILLUSTRATIVE
Exhibit 2
17
Exhibit 3
Indian banks have provided high returns to shareholders over the last few years
India achieved the highest growth in the region and has maintained high profitability . . .
* Growth data for China is from 2001-06Source: EIU; Central banks of various countries; DataStream; McKinsey analysis
Indian banking sector outperformed most banking indices with highest total returns to shareholders . . .
Assets growth
CAGR;FY04-06
Deposits growth
CAGR;FY04-06
Pre tax ROE
Per cent; FY06
18.8
16.1
18.2
9.1
Countries
India
Malaysia
China*
Thailand
18.1
14.5
7.2
17.2 17.9
16.3
15.1
9.1
Per cent, TRS CAGR; Jan 00-Oct 07
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
Dec-99 Jul-01 Feb-03 Sep-04 Apr-06 Oct-07
Indian market: 24.03
Indian banks: 36.76
Chinese banks: 17.57
UK banks: 9.34
Dow Jones Index: 4.54
FTSE all shares: 7.16
Indian banksIndian marketChinese banks
UK banksFTSE all shares Dow Jones Index
Exhibit 3
Exhibit 4
India's households are among the highest savers; however the financial sector attracts only 47% of total savings
162024
3744
55
69
India France China* Mexico Japan South Korea
United States
* MGI estimate based on 2005 GDP and estimates of flow-of-funds information** Number of ATMs in 2006
Source: Country National Accounts; IMF; McKinsey Global Institute; McKinsey analysis
32.4 18.0 50.4 21.2 26.4 32.8 12.9
Gross national savings ratesPer cent of nominal GDP; 2005
• Only 47% of the total saving is accessed by the financial services sector (2005)
• High geographic fragmentation has meant that banks have not been able to reach a large part of the population– About 34% of total bank branches are
in urban India– There are 19 ATMs per thousand
people in India as compared to 51 in China, 193 in Brazil, and 246 in Mexico**
Household savings as a share of gross national savings
Per cent; 2005
Exhibit 4
18
Contributing to GDP growth: The financial services sector contributes about 5 per cent to the nation’s
GDP. This is line with the ratios in most the developed and developing countries and reflects the ability
of the sector to create employment. Our work suggests that the financial services sector will create
3.6 million direct jobs by 2010. By 2020, this figure could double to over 7.4 million (Exhibit 5) with
the banking sector accounting for one-third of the total, and the insurance and asset management
industries for the remaining.
Managing intermediation costs: Intermediation costs continue to remain high in India as compared
to those in other markets. At 5.1 per cent (the difference between the average cost of lending and
the average cost of raising liabilities), it is also among the highest in the region. Part of the difference
is driven by the cost associated in meeting regulatory requirements. Banks are required to keep a
minimum statutory liquidity requirement (SLR) of 25 per cent and maintain lending to the priority
sector at 40 per cent of total lending. A large portion of funds are thus invested in these low-yielding
assets that contribute to higher intermediation costs on the core lending portfolio. Overall efficiency
is further constrained by low ticket sizes in general (Exhibit 6).
Allocating capital and managing system stability: Indian banks seem to have made significant
improvements in capital allocation. In 2003, 56 per cent of capital was allocated to sectors yielding
low returns, often less than cost of debt. In 2007, however, only 22 per cent of capital was allocated
to underperforming sectors. A much stronger economy accounts for some of the difference, but banks
deserve some credit for a dramatic reduction in non-performing loans between 2003–07 (Exhibit 7).
Exhibit 5
Healthy contribution to GDP and good employment prospects characterise the banking landscape
Source: EIU; RBI; WIM; Hewitt; McKinsey analysis
Indian banking sector’s contribution to GDP is healthy, almost at par with developed countries and better than most peers in the region …
2.5
2.6
4.8
5.1
5.3
6.5China
USA
India
UK
Malaysia
Thailand
Banking sector’s value-added to nominal GDP; per cent; 2006
• Financial services can employ as many as 3.6 million people by 2010 and 7.4 million people by 2020
. . . and has the potential to employ people in large numbers
Exhibit 5
19
Exhibit 6
Cost of intermediation in India remains high
Source: EIU; RBI; WIM; McKinsey analysis
High intermediation costs despite spurt in lending interest rates and deposit rates
Difference between lending rate and deposits, represented by spreadsPer cent; 2007
2.42.9
3.44.0
5.1
India Thailand China USA Singapore
Average lending rate ~13% and deposit rate at 8% in FY07
Driven by • Low overall
efficiency– Small ticket size
• Low operating efficiency
• Regulatory cost associated with– Statutory
requirements for CRR, SLR
– Priority sector lending
Exhibit 6
Exhibit 7
NPAs have reduced dramatically due to improved capital allocation aided by a booming economy
* ROIC = (PAT + (interest payment x (1-tax rate))/total capital employed** Cost of debt = Prime lending rate x (1–tax rate)
Source: RBI; CMIE-Prowess; McKinsey analysis
Sector ROIC* (2003)
Economic growth underpins the return on capital employed across industries…
. . . while non performing loans have declined in the banking sector over the last few years
4.7
14.4
Sector ROIC* (2007)
Total capital employed (2003)
56%
Total capital employed (2007)
22%
44%
NetNPA
GrossNPA78%
Cost of debt** = 7.46
Costof debt** =
9.55
8.1
16.5
Example industries• Paper and paper
products• Steel• Textiles• Hotels and tourism
Example industries• Drugs• Auto• Food and beverage• Petroleum
Example industries• Textiles• Plastic• Rubber• Health services• Inorganic chemicals
Example industries• Paint• Cement• Auto• Drug• Food and beverage
ROIC < cost of debt
ROIC > cost of debt
ESTIMATES
NPAs as a percentage to advances
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
2003 04 05 06 2007
Exhibit 7
20
Underlying shifts in the banking sector reveal a clear divide
India’s banking sector is marked by a clear divide between incumbents and attackers covered in
the survey. Another characteristic feature is that, though attackers have been appropriating share,
incumbents have enjoyed better returns in segments such as retail banking.
Between 2000 and 2007, attackers have increased assets from 12 to 26 per cent, profits from 21 to
32 per cent, and market capitalisation from 37 to 49 per cent. They have been rewarded with a higher
than average P/E (price-to-earnings) ratio of 27, compared to 7 for incumbents, and a price-to-book
ratio of 3 compared to 1.0 for incumbents (Exhibit 8). There are good reasons for this trend. Attacker
banks exhibit far higher capabilities—often matching world standards. Our proprietary Excellence in
Retail Banking Survey (covered in chapter 3) reveals the vast differences in capabilities (Exhibit 9).
The picture is more mixed when it comes to returns. While the overall profitability of attackers and
incumbents is similar, at 15 per cent and 14 per cent respectively, there is a striking underlying
difference. Incumbents earn a whopping 33 per cent return on equity in their retail businesses
compared to an average of 16 per cent for attackers. Nevertheless, incumbents earn just a 9 per cent
return on equity on the rest of their business compared to 15 per cent for attackers (Exhibit 10).
While profitability varies widely within the two groups of banks, retail profitability largely depends on
the stage at which banks are investing in building a franchise. The fact that, incumbents enjoy a return
on equity of around 33 per cent (capital allocated using Basel I norm) reinforces that retail banking
adds more value once the franchise is built. Incumbents continue to profit from large deposit bases,
thanks to their legacy distribution networks and franchises. Meanwhile attackers continue to invest
heavily in building a retail franchise and realise a relatively lower return on equity. However, attackers
that have already invested ahead of the competition have begun to reap the benefits of a large
franchise compared to players with smaller franchises.
Exhibit 8
Beneath the surface, significant shifts are taking place in the banking landscape
Share of assets Share of profitsShare of market cap** P/BV P/E
21
79
7,306
2000
32
68
31,230
2007
12
88
1,133
2000
26
74
3,384
2007
37
63
36,356
51
2000*
49
298,849
2007*
Rs crore; per centRs 000 crore; per cent
* As of 29 March 2007; market cap for banks not listed in FY00 imputed using a price to book value of peers** Foreign banks not included in market cap analysis as they are not listed
Source: CMIE-Prowess; DataStream; Bloomberg; annual reports; McKinsey analysis
3
1 7
27
Times; 2007 Times; 2007
Incumbents –old private and public sector banks
Attacker –new private and foreign banks
Rs crore; per cent
Exhibit 8
21
Exhibit 9
Distribution efficiency
Marketing and sales
Processing and IT
Credit policy and skills
* Ranked on a scale of 0-4, 0 being the lowest and 4 being the highestSource: McKinsey & Company Proprietary Excellence in Retail Banking survey of leading banks in India
Corporate leadership
Capabilities contrast dramatically – attackers demonstrate global capabilities while incumbents lag behindRankings*; 2007
2 3 4
Incumbents
Top 10 global banks
Attackers
Indiaaverage
Asian max
ERB EXAMPLE
Exhibit 9
Exhibit 10
Per cent; 2007***
Share of capital employed Share of profits
Post tax – return on equity**
Legacy of branch networks and retail deposits of incumbents are levelling the playing field
* Rest of bank includes all activities other than retail, like SME, wholesale, treasury, after adjusting for excess capital** Return on equity using regulatory capital requirement of 9%; Asset income includes capital benefit and deposit income includes third
party distribution income*** Data for banks from our excellence in retail banking survey database
Source:Annual reports; RBI; McKinsey analysis for top Indian banks in our Excellence in Retail Banking survey
3763
50
50
3367
40
60
32
68
47
53
Attackers
Incumbents
15
14Overall
Retail
Rest of bank* 8
16
33
15
65
38
Split of retail revenue from deposits
ESTIMATES
Exhibit 10
22
Incumbents earn as much as 65 per cent of their retail revenue pool from deposits, as opposed to
attackers, who earn 38 per cent from it. Retail deposits are a huge driver of profit and could be seen
as a separate profit centre, not only a source of funds for the lending. But the incumbents can’t rest
easy. A large part of the rest of the business—wholesale banking and treasury—is rapidly globalising
and is an area where attackers have begun to dominate.
CORE CAPABILITIES OF BANKS IN INDIA: ACTIONS NEEDED ON MULTIPLE DIMENSIONS
In view of the sharp divide in Indian banking, it is imperative to assess attackers’ and incumbents’
core capabilities. Our survey reveals several areas in which banks belonging to both categories display
scope for improvement (Exhibit 11).
Organisation: Imperative need to strengthen leadership and talent
An assessment of the organisational capabilities of banks in India using McKinsey’s proprietary
Organisational Performance Profile Survey indicates that Indian banks on average have benefited
from superior organisation performance relative to banks in other markets given their historic access
to superior talent. However, today, incumbents need to strengthen their organisations on several
dimensions. At present, the low motivation and skills are of particular concern, and if not addressed
could prove “crippling” for these organisations (Exhibit 12).
A challenge both types of banks face is people development, although it is a particularly acute one
for incumbents. Close to 80 per cent of responses from incumbents indicate that recruitment, people
development, and retention require urgent attention (Exhibit 13).
Exhibit 11
Real capability levels of incumbents and attackers differ significantly
Source: McKinsey analysis
ILLUSTRATIVE
Sales and distribution2
Organisation1
Credit and risk3
Information technology and operation4
Incumbents Attackers
Low levelof capability
High levelof capability
Five key objectives1. Return shareholder
value 2. Foster financial
inclusion3. Contribute to GDP
growth4. Effectively manage
intermediation costs5. Effectively allocate
capital and maintain stability
Four key capabilities
Policy makers
Stakeholders Enablers
Corecapabilities
Enabling regulatory environment
Banks
Exhibit 11
23
Exhibit 12
Incumbents (7)n = 586 Direction
61%
ExternalOrientation75%
Accounta-bility68%
Capability82%
Leadership74%
Direction81%
ExternalOrientation81%
Innovation72%
Accounta-bility83%
Capability83%
Motivation82%
Leadership81%
Attackers (7)n = 438
Environ-ment and values60%
Environ-ment and values74%
Distinctive (85%+)Superior (70-85%)Common (50-69%)Not effective (0-49%)
Attackers display superior organisation and performance attributes, incumbents fall short on a few
Source: McKinsey & Company Proprietary Organisation Performance Profile survey of leading banks in India (n = 1,024)
Per cent responding strongly agree or agree; 2007
Coordina-tion and control73%
Motivation57%
Innovation53%
Coordina-tion and control76%
-20%
-7%
-14%
-15% -3%
-1% -25%
-19%-6%
(Incumbents – Attackers)
Exhibit 12
Exhibit 13
Talent and people development will be the biggest challenge for Indian banks, particularly for the incumbents
The company continually refreshes its talent pool by recruiting top performers from outside the company to fill key roles
1
The company proactively identifies and mines the best external sources of top candidates
2
The company attracts highly talented people3
The company extends financial incentives to motivate employees at all levels
4
15
22
26
13
62
69
51
54
Organisation performance parameter Performance level
Source:McKinsey & Company Proprietary Organisation Performance Profile survey of leading banks in India (n = 1,024)
Per cent responding strongly agree or agree; 2007 Incumbents
Attackers
Exhibit 13
24
Sales and distribution: Driven by innovation
Attackers have innovated considerably in the area of sales and distribution. They rank higher than the
best global banks in effective multi-channel management and the development of future channels, and
also score high on the aggressive use of remote channels, to the extent that their branch interactions
are lower by a third compared to incumbents. Attacker banks could use innovative and efficient alternate
channel management capabilities to gain a competitive advantage as they globalise (Exhibit 14).
On average, attackers score higher than incumbents on customer service. But customers also report
more negative experiences with these banks than with incumbents. This shows that as customers
become more discerning, their expectations rise. Attackers in India must enhance customer service
to dissuade these customers from fragmenting their wallet by increasing the numbers of banking
relationships. Our survey shows that customers reporting positive experiences with banks have
relationships with 2.4 financial institutions; while those reporting negative experiences on average
have relationships with 2.7 financial institutions (Exhibit 15). Further, the emergence of newer customer
segments, such as affluent and young professionals, will drive demand for superior banking services.
Credit and risk management: Long way to match global standards
Overall, banks in India seem to be managing risk well. But, once again, attackers perform better than
incumbents on this front. This suggests that incumbents risk market disfavour, reflected by the higher
chance of adverse portfolio selection (Exhibit 16). Incumbents will need to strengthen credit risk
management, particularly their funding and liquidity practices. Our survey showed that, on the whole,
they lack advanced early warning systems and use only basic funds transfer pricing methodologies to
conform to regulatory and compliance measures (Exhibit 17).
Exhibit 14
Attackers compare favourably against global peers on distribution efficiency*
Attackers in India have pioneered global standards of innovation in distribution
3.2
3.6
Branch capacitymanagement
3.43.3
Effective use of direct channel
3.1
2.6
Multi-channelmanagement
3.3
3.1
Development of future channel
* Scale of 0-4, 0 being the lowest and 4 being the highestSource: McKinsey & Company Proprietary Excellence in Retail Banking survey and Personal Financial Services survey
3.8
4.2
1.9
0.9
0.4
0.9
34.057.0
Branch
55.039.0
ATM
Telephone
Mobile
Top 10 global banks
Attackers have a higher usage of alternate channels, whereas incumbents continue to leverage their branch network
Per cent using a particular channel
Internet
Incumbents
Attackers
Exhibit 14
25
Exhibit 15
8471
6170
6875
IncumbentsAttackers
While existing service levels are perceived as high, increasing customer demands will put pressure on banks
The waiting time at the branch office is reasonable
Problems areresolved by the first person I speak with
The company delivers on its promises
“Have you had any negative experience with your bank in the past 2 years?”
Negative experience leads to use of more financial institutions
1
2
3
New emerging segments likely to drive need for superior services• Affluent customers• Young professionals
2.4
2.7
People with positive momentsof truth
People with negative moments of truth
Average numbers of financial institutions used
8
12
IncumbentsAttackers
Source:McKinsey & Company Proprietary Personal Financial Services survey
Per cent responding strongly agree or agree; 2007
Exhibit 15
Exhibit 16
Attackers
Incumbent
Indian banks compare favourably against global credit and risk best practices
. . . However, incumbents lag behind significantly*
3.2
2.3
3.4
2.6
3.1
2.1
3.3
2
Credit underwriting, rating and scoring
* On a scale of 0-4, 0 being the lowest and 4 being the highest Source: McKinsey & Company Proprietary Excellence in Retail Banking survey of leading banks in India
Risk-based pricing
Credit portfolio management
Credit monitoring workout
3.13.2
Top 10 global banks
Asian max
2.8
Incum-bents
3.3
Attackers
Attackers exercise best-in-class credit skills and policy* . . .
Exhibit 16
26
Exhibit 18
On technology the best banks in India are among the most efficient in the world
US$ 000s; 2007
* Accounts include only deposit accounts** Sample set of best banks in India includes 5 leading private and foreign banks
Source: McKinsey & Company Proprietary IT Benchmarking survey of leading banks in India; McKinsey analysis
ESTIMATES
IT spend/ banking FTE
2.4
6.2
21.2
9.1
Network spend/ access point
7.0
11.9
11.7
n/a
Desktop + helpdesk spend/ desktop
1.5
0.4
0.5
1.0
IT spend/1,000 accounts*
10.2
15.9
n/a
76
Best Indian banks**
Sampleaverage
India
European bank average
Exhibit 18
Exhibit 17
33
67
0
63
12
25
88
8
4
Overall funding and liquidity practices will need strengthening
Incumbents lack advanced early warning systems and contingency plans . . .
17
33
38
50
33
42
Formal contingency plan
Formal contingency plan including escalation process with increased severity of stress
. . . and significantly lag behind attackers in the use of advanced FTP methodology
Single rate (one rate applies to all)
Matched-term funding rates
Multiple rates (different rates apply to different B/S items)
Source: McKinsey & Company Proprietary Asset Liability Management survey of leading banks in India
Percentage of respondents; 2007
Top 10 global banks
Incumbents
Attackers
Exhibit 17
27
IT and operations: Opportunity to leverage competitive capabilities globally
In technology, select private and foreign banks in India are among the best in the world, spending
less than US$11 per account on IT systems and services, compared to an average spend of
US$76 per account in European banks. This has been achieved by avoiding legacy systems, using
distributed computing, and benefiting from India’s lower cost talent pool. While there are still areas
for improvement, Indian banks can export these capabilities (low-cost technology platform) as they
globalise (Exhibit 18).
Our methodology
109
Our methodologyMcKinsey & Company, with support from the Indian Banks’ Association, profiled 14 leading banks in
India, using five proprietary surveys to assess how well their capabilities meet global best practices.
The five surveys we administered are: the McKinsey Personal Financial Services Survey; Excellence in
Retail Banking Survey; Organisational Performance Profile Survey; Asset Liability Management Survey;
and IT Benchmarking Survey. Our survey findings were compared with the results of the corresponding
five surveys administered across global banks. The comparisons allowed us to determine how Indian
banks perform vis-à-vis global counterparts. Below, we describe each of the surveys and the methodology
that we followed.
PERSONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES
The proprietary McKinsey Personal Financial Services Survey is one of the largest customer surveys in
Asia. It is administered across 12 Asian markets and captures customer data from multiple customer
segments, e.g., affluent and mass affluent.
To assess consumer needs, attitudes and behaviours in personal financial services (PFS), McKinsey’s
Asia-Pacific PFS 2007 survey profiled over 13,000 customers across 12 Asian countries in 2007. The
survey collected quantitative data through 60-minute, face-to-face interviews with customers, who were
asked over 150 questions. It spanned all key customer segments and product markets. In India, the
survey covered over 5,300 customers from urban and rural segments. The India survey also offered a
basis for comparison with the results from 36,000 profiles available through four such surveys carried
out in India by McKinsey since 1998.
EXCELLENCE IN RETAIL BANKING
Excellence in Retail Banking (ERB) is a McKinsey approach for assessing the linkages between strategy,
capability and performance in retail banking. The overall performance of banks is assessed along
five dimensions: corporate leadership and performance, marketing and sales, distribution efficiency,
processing efficiency, and credit policy and skills (Exhibit 1).
The survey consisted of two stages. In the first stage participants ranked themselves on a scale of
zero to four across 32 competencies reflecting the five dimensions of excellence (zero being the lowest
and four the highest score). During the second stage, participating banks provided information on their
110
retail deposits, loans, fee income, operating costs (across branches, other channels, back offices and
other areas) and credit losses. To assess true profitability and return on equity, we transfer priced
revenues both on the deposit and loans side based on market clearing rates, and attributed costs
and provisions based on data collected from the banks. In addition, we attributed capital using Basel
I norms.
Using this proprietary ERB methodology, we assessed retail banking practices, operating efficiency,
growth and profitability. We then compared the findings with those of over 100 leading banks across
the world surveyed earlier.
For the purposes of analysis, we grouped the 14 banks according to the inherent growth of the franchise
(measured by annual growth in total retail deposits plus retail loans over three years) and overall
profitability (measured by the cost-income ratio).
ORGANISATIONAL PERFORMANCE PROFILE
This proprietary survey evaluates the effectiveness of an organisation in achieving its vision and
aspirations. The Organisation Performance Profile (OPP) Survey has covered over 100,000 participants
from over 400 global organisations so far. The resulting database of over 100,000 respondents was
cleaned, normalised (to address language and cultural barriers) and tested using rigorous methodologies
to validate the soundness of the outcomes. All standard tests on the integrity and robustness of our
data (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha) were run. An exhaustive set of OPP frameworks was tested and refined
using data from these surveys and data available on the financial performance of these organisations.
The results of these tests have confirmed the reliability and validity of the survey tool.
The Organisation Performance Profile Survey was administered with over 1,000 senior managers at the
participating banks. Their responses were then compared with responses in our global database.
Exhibit 1
Excellence in Retail Banking
Superiorcredit policyand skills
Corporateleadership for performance
Highly
developed
marketing
and sales
competence
Differentiatedand efficient distribution
Highly efficient processesand IT
Source: McKinsey & Company Proprietary Excellence in Retail Banking framework
Defining the excellence in retail banking methodology
Exhibit 1
111
The survey examines three drivers of organisational performance: alignment, execution and renewal.
Alignment indicates a shared understanding of where an organisation is headed, what its purpose and
strategy is, and how supportive its internal environment is, including culture and interactions, to help
employees achieve its overall vision and aspirations. Strong alignment is one of the key attributes of
an effective organisation.
Alignment is assessed by measuring responses to statements related to the following attributes of an
organisation:
Direction: People understand and are aligned with the company’s vision or strategy and how it is to be
achieved.
Leadership: Leaders at all levels inspire employees and shape their actions to achieve better
performance.
Environment and values: The quality of employee interaction (e.g., culture, workspace design) fosters
a shared understanding of core values. This is usually achieved by sufficient collaboration and
transparency, and process-driven efficiency and consistency.
Execution was assessed through responses to statements about outcomes and supporting
practices:
Accountability: Reporting relationships and the performance assessment process ensure that people
are accountable for results.
Capability: Internal skills and talent are sufficient to support the company’s strategy and to create a
competitive edge.
Coordination and control: Business performance and risk are measured and reported.
Motivation: Employees are inspired to perform and encouraged to stay with the company.
Renewal is a key attribute of an organisation’s performance and is revealed by how the organisation
understands, interacts, responds and adapts to its situation and external environment. The survey
gathers responses on how organisations are performing on each of these attributes:
External orientation: Constant two-way interaction takes place between the organisation and customers,
suppliers, partners, or other external groups that help create value.
Innovation: A flow of ideas and change ensures that the organisation can sustain itself, survive and
grow over time.
The survey measures how organisations are doing on several aspects of organisational performance by
capturing two distinct but related elements of performance: outcomes and practices (Exhibit 2). It is
made up of two parts. In the first, respondents are asked to rank their company’s effectiveness on nine
predefined outcomes of organisational performance. In the second, respondents’ views are probed on
actions or practices that can be used to achieve each outcome.
112
ASSET LIABILITY MANAGEMENT
The Asset Liability Management (ALM) Survey is based on McKinsey’s proprietary methodology to
assess banks across six key parameters—strategy and philosophy, organisation policy and governance,
structural market risk and capital, fund transfer pricing, funding and liquidity management, and systems
(Exhibit 3).
Exhibit 2
Defining the methodology used to assess the organisation’s performance profile
Direction
Coordinationand control
Account-ability
Externalorientation
Innovation
Capability Motivation
Environmentand values
Leadership
Organisation performance profile Performance culture comprises of9 outcomes, grouped into 3 clusters
Alignment
Where is the organisation headed, what is its purpose and strategy, and how supportive is its internal environment?
Execution
How does the organisationexecute against its strategy and deliver its services?
Renewal
How does the organisationunderstand, interact, respond, and adapt to its internal and external environment?
Source: McKinsey & Company Proprietary Organisation Performance Profile framework
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 4
Asset liability management best practices fall into 6 key areas
ALM best practices
Source:McKinsey & Company Proprietary Asset Liability Management Survey framework
1. Strategy and philosophy
6. Systems
2. Organisation, policy and
governance
5. Funding and
liquidity management
3. Structural market risk and capital management
4. Funds Transfer
Pricing(FTP)
Exhibit 3
113
Strategy and philosophy: A bank’s risk management practices are guided by its risk strategy and
philosophy. We considered a bank’s ALM philosophy (e.g., profit versus cost centre), risk appetite,
integration with enterprise risk management and business strategy, and hedging strategy and policy.
Organisation, policy and governance: To achieve best-in-class ALM practices, banks must have a basic
organisational structure and responsibilities (risk group, treasury, ALCO) in place. Such arrangements
are necessary to establish risk policies and limit structures, to assess performance management and
incentives, and to review and audit procedures.
Market risk and capital management: Managing market risk is one of the most important functions
of ALM. Risk management techniques to manage different of types risks and processes—interest
rate risk and foreign exchange risk, hedging approaches and choice of instruments, and reporting and
monitoring—are assessed in this part.
Funds Transfer Pricing: As part of this parameter, we looked at the FTP methodology, FTP processes
and reporting, and monitoring of the FTP system.
Funding and liquidity management: This is the second most important function of ALM and it
encompasses funding and liquidity management processes, and balance sheet optimisation and yield
management.
Systems: Well-managed risk processes require suitably designed IT infrastructure. The system
architecture needs to facilitate risk measurement and control. Front- and back-end support is required
for the effective execution of risk processes.
Similar benchmarking initiatives were undertaken over the last few years across many financial
institutions worldwide—this allows for further comparisons across the stated parameters. The results
from the survey were benchmarked against those of our Global Treasury and ALM Survey conducted
across 30 leading institutions worldwide in late 2006.
IT BENCHMARKING
The IT benchmarking survey is based on McKinsey’s proprietary methodology to assess a bank’s overall
IT capability. It measures IT performance in banks along the following four dimensions (Exhibit 4):
Spend allocation: Total spends on technology are analysed by category, activity, and frequency (whether
recurring or one-time) to ascertain how much is invested and spent, in which areas, and for what
return.
Value creation: The survey assesses alignment of IT systems with corporate objectives to determine if
the right sets of activities are chosen to create business value from investments.
Solutions: The survey assesses whether the chosen solutions provide utility with minimal complexity.
Delivery: The survey probes for strong governance and management processes, development of in-
house talent and the right sourcing to determine how well the change and steady-state solutions are
being managed, measured, and delivered.
114
Exhibit 5
The IT benchmark measures how technology enables business performance along 4 dimensions
• Current value creation• IT alignment with corporate
objectives
• IT spend effectiveness and intensity
• IT spend allocation
IT valuecreation
IT delivery
ITsp
end
Businessperformance
ITso
lutions
• IT governance• IT management processes• IT talent management• Sourcing• Productivity
• Application complexity management • Infrastructure complexity management• Cross-border consolidation for regional
banks
How does IT add value to the business and to what extent?
How effective are the chosen solutions?
How well are the change and steady-state solutions managed, measured, and delivered?
How much should be invested and spent, for what return and in which areas?
Source: McKinsey & Company Proprietary IT Benchmarking framework
Exhibit 4
115
Financial Services PracticeCopyright © 2007 McKinsey & CompanyMcKinsey & Company Inc
Designed by New Media Australia