I read with interest the recent Datamonitor report on Consumer-Driven Channel Management within banking. The report puts forward the theory that while the benefits of multi-channel distribution are well documented, the current cost conscious climate will put such strategies under pressure and we will return to the days of channel focused products. Loans for example will be the domain of call centre and the internet, while mortgages remain branch based as do current accounts (although moving more online).

Is this not a step backwards though? As a consumer I want a consistent informed service regardless of the channel. True some of the more experimental channels I won’t miss – I find the text messages I receive frankly irritating, while I can’t yet visualise myself involved in any of the virtual channels via the online gaming or social networking sites – but an integrated strategy across core channels such the call centre, internet, branch and ATM network surely is a must.

Having stressed the importance of getting an integrated channel strategy in place I have to accept it does depend on the quality of the channels being integrated. As a long suffering user of Abbey’s business banking, having one effective channel would be a step forward. Online channels are developed to be convenient for the user – accessed anytime from anywhere – but the services they offer must be complete. Branch services are to add the personal touch – but they mustn’t lose basic efficiencies. Call Centres are designed to be efficient – but they must maintain the personal touch to keep customer relationship strong. Without these basic building blocks then banks are right to abandon multichannel strategies and focus on getting the basics right.

In a novel called Ninety-Three by Victor Hugo (best known for Les Misérables and Notre Dame de Paris), he relates a story of great courage borne out of negligent failure.

The story is set in 1793 – the ‘year of the Terror’ in France – during which a monarchist insurrection led by the Marquis de Lantenac was attempting to open the door for an invasion by England. De Lantenac was a formidable character smuggled into the country on a boat from England. Whilst commanding a ship called the Claymore, a loose cannon was being tossed around the deck – damaging the ship and endangering the lives of all on board. At this point, a young ensign risks his life to secure the cannon and save the ship. As a result of his bravery, de Lantenac acknowledges his actions and gives the sailor the highest award… following which he has him executed!!! The point being, that despite the young man’s bravery, it was his responsibility to have ensured the cannon was secure in the first place and so he had caused the situation that prompted his heroism.

We are now in the throes of a more modern ‘year of terror’ and perhaps there are some interesting parallels… We have a financial crisis that has been caused by a negligent ignorance of the need for proper risk assessment and of a failure to apply proper restraint against the actions and inaction that can cause danger and damage.

A range of individuals and organisations (companies and Governments) are – like the ensign – guilty of a failure of duty and so endangered the economy that is our ship. Some of these people are now claiming to be heroes in saving us from sinking! However, unlike the consequences for the ensign, there is – as yet – no sign that the original failure to identify and control the risks will now be punished! Proper Board and Governmental ‘governance’ is essential and whilst I accept the phrase ‘if you immunise yourself against risk, you immunise yourself against reward’ this must be put in the context of identifying what the risk is, what is understood by those it could affect, knowing what is acceptable and ensuring that it is being managed and controlled. ‘Independent’ non Executive Directors (NEDs) should act as a ‘check and balance’ for Boards and management. However, if they feel that they do not have the authority to challenge and/or are fearful of being displaced for voicing concerns, then their value will be relegated to being a ‘bum on a seat’! However, used properly, NEDs can be a ‘fresh pair of eyes’ that can identify new opportunities and options as well as act as a ‘voice of reason’.

On a lighter note, the causes of the Credit Crisis are quite well explained by Messr’s Bird and Fortune in a clip on YouTube!