Now new CBA chief, Ralph Norris would say that wouldn’t he.

only been at the helm of the CBA for just under a month and there’s the
new CEO, Ralph Norris “endorsing Which new Bank’, the program that’s
seen the complete restructuring of the bank’s retail division. But did
he? Because that ‘endorsement’ looks horribly qualified from where I

going to cost well in excess of a billion dollars, has already seen the
loss of two and a half thousand or so jobs at the bank and the subtext
from yesterday’s announcement is that it’s not really working.

there were a lot of charts and stuff from the bank about how things are
improving but if it’s so good why would the bank quote Norris as making
this point in a statement issued yesterday?

Norris expressed some disappointment at the Bank’s lack of progress in
providing service in line with customer expectations. In his view great
customer service starts with engaged and committed staff.”

at the CBA it doesn’t, where Murray and the board have spent years
fighting with staff in the retail division and the union. The bank is
still suing the union for daring to raise issues about the revamp at
the 2004 annual meeting

That’s a poisonous legacy left by Murray
who may have started as a bank teller back in 1966 but left that all
behind as he rose through the bank to become its first CEO.

changes Murray introduced are based on many of the changes wrought by
Norris when he was running the CBA’s ASB subsidiary in New Zealand
(that’s before he was drafted to run a tottering Air New Zealand after
its disastrous adventure with Ansett).

there is anyone in
the bank who can speak with authority about the Which new Bank program
because of his experience in New Zealand, it is Norris. For him to damn
it with faint praise and express guarded disappointment means that it
is a failure and needs a lot of work.

this end,” the statement continued, “much of his (Norris) initial time as
CEO has been spent meeting as many staff as possible across Australia
to understand what they require to serve customers better.

Norris concluded by emphasising that Which new Bank was right for the
bank and has provided a strong platform from which to develop the post
Which new Bank strategy.”

ain’t that statement interesting.
Notice the past tense in the use of the phrase ‘was right for the bank’
and the other phrase ‘post Which new Bank strategy’? On top of
this was Norris’ comment at the recent AGM that the CBA was an
underachiever in business banking: which was an indirect slap at Murray.

So in the space of a month or less, two on the record, oblique criticisms of David Murray.