Cuttyhunk Bank: Case: 5.1
- Submitted by: HartWA
- Views: 1888
- Category: Other
- Date Submitted: 12/06/2011 06:14 PM
- Pages: 2
- Report this Essay
The CuttyHunk Bank Case: Case 5.1
The CuttyHunk Bank Case is a classic example of poor communication. In this case the CEO Mr. Wilson was eager to strengthen his bank by converting it from a federal savings bank to a state-chartered savings bank and also merging with a smaller bank called Harbor state bank. Mr. Wilson was aware that all members of the bank had a say whether to agree with the new plans or disagree. A non-mandatory meeting was to be held to educate the members and take a vote. Proxy votes had already been sent in by many members, but if a member didn’t vote then they would have no vote. Mr. Wilson was legally bound to inform members of the meeting, and did so in a letter. This letter would be the route of the confusion, and the trouble for the bank.
Mr. Wilson sent this letter to all members, stating the facts of the plan and that attendance of the meeting is not mandatory and most all members have already voted. However, many of the members did not understand the letter or realize they had actually already voted. The members then seeked guidance from their branch managers and the in turn asked Nancy Brooks what to tell the members. Mrs. Brooks acted quick and sent an email to all branch managers basically telling them to tell members that they don’t need to go.
However, this email was leaked and it looked as if the bank was trying to get something past the members with this vote. In actuality, it was on the level and a good move for the company. Mr. Wilson should have recognized whom he was sending this mass letter to, and he should’ve simplified it. The letter confused the members and thus made a management level employee make a decision that was probably to tough to make, causing the spiral. A clear concise message in the first place would have prevented all of this.
The CuttyHunk Bank Case is a classic example of poor communication. In this case the CEO Mr. Wilson was eager to strengthen his bank by converting it from a federal savings bank to a state-chartered savings bank and also merging with a smaller bank called Harbor state bank. Mr. Wilson was aware that all members of the bank had a say whether to agree with the new plans or disagree. A non-mandatory meeting was to be held to educate the members and take a vote. Proxy votes had already been sent in by many members, but if a member didn’t vote then they would have no vote. Mr. Wilson was legally bound to inform members of the meeting, and did so in a letter. This letter would be the route of the confusion, and the trouble for the bank.
Mr. Wilson sent this letter to all members, stating the facts of the plan and that attendance of the meeting is not mandatory and most all members have already voted. However, many of the members did not understand the letter or realize they had actually already voted. The members then seeked guidance from their branch managers and the in turn asked Nancy Brooks what to tell the members. Mrs. Brooks acted quick and sent an email to all branch managers basically telling them to tell members that they don’t need to go.
However, this email was leaked and it looked as if the bank was trying to get something past the members with this vote. In actuality, it was on the level and a good move for the company. Mr. Wilson should have recognized whom he was sending this mass letter to, and he should’ve simplified it. The letter confused the members and thus made a management level employee make a decision that was probably to tough to make, causing the spiral. A clear concise message in the first place would have prevented all of this.