Says a few things doesn't it?
Has to be one of the biggest (in sheer numbers) people moves ever. Kudos to Hanspeter and Raj.. Congratulations to RBS management, you no longer have a headcount problem.
How aggressive BSI was. For a new player in Asia, it essentially bought itself a turn-key operation. There might not be too many stars out of the 75 (or whatever number is actually going to BSI) but the key to Asian (particularly Singaporean) private banking may be more about having willing warm bodies people than superstars. BSI probably overpaid and egos played a bigger role than common sense but BSI hits the ground running. It might take a year or 2 for BSI to recoup this initial outlay but at least it tells everyone that they are committed. If you're looking for job security (for 3 years it seems) and the chance to join a hungry player, time to contact ol' Hans. The place is ripe for some people to make their mark.
How low was morale at RBS Coutts before and now? What this comes down to is people saying: "abandon ship". To have that many people leave is an indictment on the poor staff relations at RBS. Yes the economic meltdown and government bailout took its toll on morale, confidence and the company's coffers so pay rises and bonuses were all taken off the table. But that's an industry wide problem so why haven't people from Citi or HSBC jumped ship en masse for BSI? Aside from money, clearly there are other work place issues. Love to be a fly on the wall at a real exit interview (the kind headhunters and HR consultants conduct, not the check the box form your HR does when you leave). Senior management at RBS simply forgot or ignored that managing your human capital is just as important as managing the bottom line. Is BSI a better place to work? Is BSI really paying that much more? Does BSI offer more room for personal/career development? I would say marginal at best. Going to BSI has its own risks as it is a new player and a small one on the global level. This is not like getting a cache offer from Goldmans. Heck it doesn't even have the job security of going to DBS. So 75 chose to face the unknown rather stick around. RBS spin doctors will play it down as some money grab and a frivolous spender and management may delude itself but symptoms of a cancerous growth within the Singapore office are evident. In these times, almost all operations are running extremely lean, even understaffed, so losing 5% your staff is a major inconvenience. Losing a third is almost crippling. Guess how bad blood will flow to the regional offices that have to help cover and/or send in reinforcements?? More heads, and very senior heads, should start rolling at Coutts if there's any chance of change.
If you had a choice, would you join a company where 75 of your peers had just dissed as being a hell hole of a place to work? How many of those 75, without fear of repercussions, are bad-mouthing you now? How many of the those remaining are looking for a life preserver? Some will reach for theirs, sooner or later. How much "extra" do you need to spend to keep the rest of the staff from defecting? How much in recruiting, training and disruption costs to replace those 75? Traditional slash and burn HR cost cutting tactics often forget the humans, the most volatile part of the equation. Unlike beasts of burden, you can't run them into the ground, they have pride and they have legs and 75 just proved it. Treat them badly and and they will bite the hands that feed them.
To all those bean counters and their devoted disciples at RBS (and elsewhere), who scoff and marginalize the hard and soft costs of staffing, ask yourself if BSI could do it, why couldn't you? How much will this little episode really cost you? In the grand scheme of things, saving a few million in bonuses, incentives, salary and other HR expenses (like training, staff events, etc) isn't much in a multi-billion dollar enterprise but means another leaky hole in your ship. And we all know rats have no loyalties when it comes leaky sinking ship.
No comments:
Post a Comment