Is Technology New and Improved for your customer or for YOU?

I recently read a Google alert specific for "remote deposit checks' titled, "Better Through Whose Eyes?" By Scott Anthony, Bloomberg - USA.

The article is a brief synopses of the writer's experience making a deposit at a "new and improved" ATM.  The bank proudly announces with a sign "optical scanning and reading of the checks for depositing at the ATM."

Unfortunately the writer could only deposit 5 out of 6 checks, leaving him with only one option- return to the bank during business hours.  What a bummer, he just wants to deposit his money!

Just like Scott, you'd be frustrated and might likely come to the same conclusion below.

"Rightly or wrongly, my check-deposit struggles left me with an image: Bank of America is innovating to help itself, not me." - Scott Anthony

This is definitely where Scott gets to the heart of a problem for implementing new technology at the consumer and customer level making the experience "easier, more convenient, or simpler" but then it's not.  There is no user friendly back up process to this exception.

It is unfortunate that some banks have been innovating themselves without considering the effect on their customer, where a customer experience occurs.

Scott continues, "The general point here is to make sure you evaluate innovations through the proper lens. The trap companies often run into is they think their view of quality is the same as the markets'.  That's not always true.  If the innovation isn't perceived to be better by the consumer, customer, partner, or supplier to whom it is targeted, then adoption could slow and frustration could grow."

I couldn't agree more.  That's why iStream leveraged a comprehensive usability study to create a Merchant/Corporate RDC product made for the user.  Most banks that selected an RDC product for their business didn't put it to the real test- does it really work/help the business?

Just as with Scott's ATM experience, some businesses on other RDC solutions have this issue with items they are unable to scan, like money orders, traveler's checks or even when a business gets an IRD of an NSF (Returned) Check; they have to take it to the bank.  Again, if a business isn't able to remotely deposit 10 out of 10 or 100 out of 100 checks, what is the benefit of the RDC system?  RDC products that force businesses to mail or physically drive to the bank for exceptions defeat the purpose of remote deposit.

iStream identified many exceptions early on (i.e. Image quality) and is proud of a 99.99% acceptance rate of checks scanned by users with our system. 

Scott then continues, "Obsessive customer focus is best practice in any economic climate, and particularly important in tough times when customers evaluate spending decisions more critically.  If it's better for you, but not for your customer, you might find that your innovation efforts disappoint."

Again, Scott hits a key point that is coming to surface in light of this economy.  Banks are now becoming most sensitive to this and are hearing about it from their customers.  Don't get me wrong, some customers are completely happy, but some aren't.  Banks should be listening to these concerns in any economic climate.

It is important that the bank be as sensitive to the needs (time and resources) of the customer as it is to the needs of the bank.   If that gets lost in translation, the bank is in jeopardy of losing the customer's business to a competitive bank or third party provider.

"Has anyone else experienced something that claimed to be "new and improved" but felt anything but?"

So consider Scott's last line above the next time you are investing in technology that "touches" the business or customer of your bank.  How would you feel?  If you can't answer the question, check with a few of your customers.