Is Engagement Banking enough?

// February 4th, 2011 // Banking, Banking business strategy, Decommoditization, Engagement banking, Enthrallment banking, Jeff Stephens

First, let me be clear: I’m a big fan of the concept of “Engagement Banking.” I really like the Engagement Banking site from Sapient Nitro, and love what the guys at Geezeo are doing. The only thing I don’t like about the Twitter hashtag #engagementbanking is that I didn’t think of it. And if you’ve paid even a shred of attention to what CBC is all about, it’s got brand engagement written all over it.

But lately, I’ve got to wondering something: Is “engagement banking” enough? To have an engaged customer/member base is certainly an improvement from where most banks and credit unions are today…but does engagement banking go as far as we really need to take it in this industry? Will engagement alone help us break free from being commodity financial providers?

Or do we need a heavier dose than just mere engagement?

I’d like to suggest that what banks and credit union brands really need is “enthrallment banking.” As in, “I’m captivated with this brand because it resonates so strongly with me.” For instance, Apple loyalists aren’t engaged with Apple, they’re captivated by it.

You may be thinking, “one step at a time, Jeff–we have to walk before we can run.” And maybe that’s true. But it doesn’t hurt to ask ourselves today, “what is our real end goal: engagement or enthrallment?”

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post

4 Responses to “Is Engagement Banking enough?”

  1. Brady Walen says:
    February 4, 2011 at 3:04 pm

    I don’t think concepts like “engagement” or “enthrallment” are (or would be) given consideration by most bankers. Unfortunately, many in the industry simply dismiss those efforts and conversations as some kind of “hippie touchy-feely soft marketing mumbo-jumbo.”

    As consumers, can we really expect financial institutions to enthrall us? Do we even want that level of relationship?

    I agree that there needs to be more importance given to engagement. And that relies heavily on attention to marketing and brand. But for those that aren’t willing to address the issue directly, perhaps the focus needs to shift towards becoming as utilitraian as possible. No fluff. No frills. Just plain old transaction-centered banking.

  2. Jeff Stephens says:
    February 4, 2011 at 3:16 pm

    I like the idea you’re referring to, where banks take one of two divergent paths: a) become true brands, or b) become white label generic processors of financial transactions. For most banks out there, if we’re being honest, their skills fit fit path B much better. But I doubt many will want to take that route, because in their minds they are creating a strong brand based on “personal customer service,” etc.

    I don’t know if we can expect financial institutions to enthrall us…but I do believe we can expect strong brands in that category to enthrall us. To go back to the Apple example, one could ask “can we really expect a technology company to enthrall us?” But I think the real question is, “can someone build a strong brand in the tech category that could enthrall us?” And the answer to that is clearly ‘yes,’ so I don’t see why it’s impossible in financial services.

  3. Tweets that mention Is Engagement Banking enough? | Jeff Stephens -- Topsy.com says:
    February 4, 2011 at 5:30 pm

    [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Steve Sleeper, rshevlin. rshevlin said: RT @Jeff_Stephens: New Post: Is #engagementbanking enough? http://bit.ly/eNi6KA <-good post, Jeff [...]

  4. Brett King says:
    February 5, 2011 at 7:53 pm

    Jeff,

    Good post. Why don’t we just call it “knock your socks off banking”? :)

    Hash Tag would be a problem, admittedly…

    BK

Leave a Reply