Anyone who drives from St Ives Chase to Terrey Hills on a sunny weekend morning is likely to encounter lycra-clad middle-aged men riding on their expensive bicycles. Some of these cyclists are quite serious. They’re the ones who take the ride down to Bobbin Head and do the 11km uphill climb to return. I find it difficult doing that hairpin laden stretch of road in a car much less a bike. I tried walking it once but hailed a taxi half way up.
The serious one’s have a couple of other distinguishing identifiers. Firstly, there’s not an ounce of fat on them. Their sinewy frames look as if they’re about to pounce on prey perched up on their bikes (whereas some of the less fit riders have half a buttock dangling on either side of the saddle as they gulp the forced air into their gaping mouths). Secondly, they’re almost universally clean shaven. I’m describing their legs not their faces. Apparently, this helps if they have a fall on bitumen. I’ve been told that the hairs don’t catch onto the road and the lack of body hair is more likely to leave their skin intact. Oh rejoice.
Finally, they’re sometimes more likely to break into the lane in which I’m driving.
Now, I can almost hear the howls of protests from cyclists while I type but I’ve been driving that route every Saturday and Sunday for the last 12 years and it’s something that happens from time to time. As a precaution, I no longer take the left lane (the lane closest to the bike lane) but – on one occasion – my journey has been interrupted even in the right lane by a few cyclists trying to better their competitors in the peloton.
I should mention about now that the speed limit for that stretch of road is 90km/h. So, slowing down is relative. On the rare occasions that cyclists have strayed into my lane I, as most people would, took evasive action to avoid the certain death of the cyclist. You’re welcome.
Consequently, I am extremely vigilant as there have been several deaths in my time living where I live. But I still see cars and trucks, in some cases deliberately, getting very close to cyclists.
Obviously, when cyclists experience a near death scenario with a car or truck, their benevolence and generosity towards the offending driver is quickly extinguished. Verbs and nouns interspersed with adverbs and adjectives are yelled out (sometimes even an adjectival noun). Usually the offending drivers aren’t even aware of their transgressions but some of them stupidly stop and, in a fit of rage, want to take on the peloton.
I say stupidly because usually the driver’s only advantage is their car – it’s what gives them power. Once they’re out of their car they’re taking on the aforementioned gods of the cycling world and their power evaporates.
What is it about getting behind the wheel of a car that turns otherwise decent human beings into seething, angry flesh coloured pus bags?
Apparently, the only action the police can take is to put a radar trap on that stretch of road from time to time. But it’s not the speed of the cars which is dangerous it’s the attitude of the drivers and sometimes the cyclists which has proven to be a deadly mix. Particularly if the driver is trying to intimidate the cyclists by driving a little too close.
It’s the same with people’s interactions with banks…
Every time I read an article about banks, brokers, real estate or the economy a quick check of the comments section reminds me a little of road rage with the added protection of anonymity. Bank rage is not a new phenomenon. In some cases it’s absolutely justified. But the latest round of bank bashing is particularly vicious and I can’t help but remind myself there’s a federal election due in the next 10 months.
We’ve had everything from retired couples encouraged to open an SMSF and borrow to acquire a bed and breakfast to banks foreclosing on the disabled. The only underlying theme that provides a degree of commonality with the aforesaid is that they all failed to repay a loan.
For a moment, let’s just imagine that the banks involved in these high crimes and misdemeanours behave exactly as the press would have them behave and allows people to miss payments without any repercussion – which appears to be what the press is saying in many of these cases – what do you think would happen?
Word would get around and I guarantee the first bank that is soft on defaults will be the first bank to default on its loans. Queue government calling a Royal Commisson to see how the country’s financial system failed.
Now, I’m not saying they should’ve behaved exactly as they behaved but as I’ve said many, many times in previous articles, banks are no longer interested in a relationship with you. They are white collar factories with a series of processes which staff must follow to the letter or face a poor periodic (quarterly, half yearly or annual) review. Two poor reviews and they will no longer have a job (keep reading to see why they do this job in the first place).
The issue is one of a lack of leadership to affect culture so that the people you hire are not the type of people who would behave in the abominable ways some of these people have behaved. When you do, there should be more effective mechanisms in place to weed them out and dispose of them.
I’m afraid, from what I’ve seen in banking and since the GFC, the opposite is true. People who are clueless about banking but follow orders and processes are promoted ad-nauseum. But you don’t need a Royal Commission to tell you that, Linkedin is full of idiotic comments from bankers in quite senior positions demonstrating that they haven’t been on-the-tools for many years and haven’t interacted in the real world for just as long.
All of this leads to dissatisfaction by bank staff. I haven’t met a banker in years who is happy in their job. Like unicorns, I’m sure they still exist but I’m yet to meet one. Bankers do their jobs these days for the pay and conditions. They’ve mentally already resigned from their jobs they just haven’t left yet.
When I was a banker, I would draft a resignation letter on the day that I started a new job and update the addressee as required. So fickle was the industry – and that was pre-GFC.
So, the next time the red mist descends on you when you’re on the phone to a banker or in a bank branch, know this. They’re no longer engaged (yes, I’m generalising). They don’t give a tinker’s cuss about your problems. They’re just not there anymore. Sure, there’s the manifestation of a human being in front of you but it’s been stripped bare of its soul long ago by meaningless processes, KPI’s, and NPS surveys.
They will politely nod, give you something that resembles what you think you want, remind you that you will get a survey and any score under 9 (out of 10) will risk their jobs and pass you onto the next process in a long line of processes.
However, the fault is not theirs it’s yours. Why would you interact with a bank at all? They’ve outsourced everything including their loan distribution. Leave that to the likes of us. Even most brokers have outsourced their interactions with banks as the 30-minute waits on phones to speak with a call centre six times a day takes its toll on them.
The banks have merely progressed to the next phase of financial interaction with their customers for about 9 years now. It’s just their customers have been ignorant of this shift and now that it’s out in the open they don’t know what it is they don’t like because they can’t quite put their finger on it – they just know they don’t like it. That makes them really, really angry.
APRA, the banking regulator, can only do what the police do on Mona Vale Road. They can curb the speed at which the banks write loans – by restricting growth and other mechanisms – but they cannot alter bankers’ attitudes.
The banks are like the car driver on Mona Vale Road. However, if they’re within their lane and travelling within the speed limit they will get to their destinations. Even if they clipped one or two cyclists who strayed from the peloton to try and get ahead. In the banks’ process driven world they are following the rules of process and are no longer trained to distinguish out-of-the-ordinary behaviour and – in their world at least – the blame is entirely the fault of the cyclists who have clearly strayed beyond their lane.
You and I may choose to apply the brakes or turn the wheel to avoid a catastrophe, but we haven’t been institutionalised (via a carrot and stick) into thinking that’s not the right thing to do.
If you think this is a bit rich have a look at the response by one particular senior banker at the Royal Commission. When asked if evicting a blind pensioner from her home who couldn’t read or write the document she signed as guarantor; the executive responded with: “My review of the file shows we followed the process I would want the bank to follow.” To continue the metaphor and in other words…I know we can turn the wheel to avoid the cyclist but that’s not part of our process. Our process is not to deviate from our course even if it means a few people get hurt.
At the risk of contradicting everything I’ve said, I believe a well-designed process is extremely important for a bank. But what is more important than process is knowing when to step outside the boundaries of said process. This won’t change if banks continue to hire and utilise external consultants (or process engineers) who then become CEOs or other very senior executives within their ranks.
My very strong preference is for the ranks of banking senior management be staffed with people who have decades of banking experience, particularly customer facing and credit/risk experience in the retail, commercial, corporate and institutional divisions of the bank coupled with a technical background (like accounting, engineering, economics etc).
It will take some very brave decisions and some considerable expense to change this culture. It’ll have to start at board level.
Now, if only I could extend the metaphor to whom the peloton may be…