LAKE BLUFF, Ill.-A review of more than 1,600 financial institutions' websites has found has found many lag in updating pricing and other information, are inconsistent with other channels, and may even invite additional regulation.
That is the analysis of Moebs $ervices, which during May and June reviewed website information for all 1,676 financial institutions with assets of $500 million and greater. The review checked to see if websites could answer 15 consumer transaction questions, ranging from checking availability to overdraft and NSF fees.
The study found one-third of the FIs (32%) offered the information on their websites that was sought as part of the study, said Michael Moebs, economist and CEO. But a greater concern is that only 83.7% of the answers on the sites were consistent with answers given via the financial institutions' main call centers. The website review was immediately followed with calls to all of the FIs' call centers.
"The website is a major tool for financial institutions and potentially a functional area," said Moebs. "Yet it is not being used that way. The major thing we found is websites are not being updated quickly and are underutilized as a source of information for customers or members. We often got call centers telling us they received new pricing information in a meeting but that the website had yet to be changed."
'Cinderella in Disguise'
Moebs contends that not updating the website immediately runs counter to the need for financial institutions to provide consumers with clear and timely information. It also shows many organizations have yet to reach the point where they are sharing consistent information across all delivery channels, something Moebs and a growing number of analysts say is needed, especially with the move to mobile.
"The financial institution's website is a channel going wanting," offered Moebs, saying procedures to ensure consistent information, regardless of channel, need to be in place. "It is Cinderella in disguise. The website is an electronic bulletin board and should be the first thing you change."
According to Moebs, a big downside to not having as much or consistent data on the website, compared with what consumers receive in-branch or from call centers, is the practice makes FIs greater targets for consumer advocacy groups and it encourages regulatory interference in pricing. "If credit unions, banks and thrifts don't want more government interference in their business, then they have to be more transparent and keep their websites updated."
Moebs reminded the study included every bank, thrift and CU with assets of $500 million and greater, saying that below that asset level website information is not as extensive. "There definitely is a line of demarcation."
CUs Get 7 in 15 Right
The report shows that credit unions fared better than banks and thrifts at having websites that answered more of the questions. CUs averaged seven of the 15 answers Moebs $ervices sought, while banks and thrifts came in at three. But Moebs said this shows little advantage. "Credit unions are providing more information. However, the problem is they are virtually identical to the banks and thrifts in providing consistent information."
Moebs emphasized that the study made no determination on the quality or scope of a website. It did show that FIs shared a great deal of information on free and interest-bearing checking, but lacked data on overdrafts sand NSFs.
"We get into problems with price when we don't provide enough information," concluded Moebs. "We need to pay more attention to our websites, provide more data and do so in a timely manner. That will reduce compliance risk, promote greater efficiency of call center and branch personnel and foster more sales.
