The Human Challenges of the Digital World: The Paradigm of

Employee Expectations in the Banking Sector

Supriya Bhasin
PhD Research Scholar, Amity School of Business, Amity University, Noida, U.P.
E-mail: [email protected]

Dr. Pratibha Garg

Assistant Professor, Amity School of Business, Amity University, Noida, U.P.
E-mail: [email protected]

Corresponding Author: Supriya Bhasin, Amity School of Business, Amity University,

Noida (U.P.), India. Tel: +91-9779-589-315; E-mail: [email protected]

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

 The Human Challenges of the Digital World: The Paradigm of
Employee Expectations in the Banking Sector

ABSTRACT
Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) is a drastic and transformative means to help
organizations rethink their existing processes from the fundamentals to totally re-engineer or
to transform or to improve them. The aim is to achieve big cost reductions and a strategically
differentiating and better customer service. Banking business processes are differentiated into
three key elements: Customer inquiries or requests which form the Inputs, the Processing of
data through some stages and various necessary internal channels and the delivery result as
expected by bank and customer forming the Outputs. BPR predominantly mediates in the
data processing part to alter it to become time and cost effective. Information technology has
been regarded as the key enabler for the radical changes as seen after BPR exercises. A
digital revolution of the processes is the most important goal for nearly all banks across the
world. Use of Information Technology tools promises to deal with the numerous external and
internal threats and pressures that the banks face. The mounting costs of multiple regulations
and difficult customers who continuously seem to prefer more and more expediency and a
coolness quotient are a few challenges that are overwhelming the banking sector. The hub of
banks’ digital makeover is Information Technology coupled with customized products,
enabled by simplifying the processes to the maximum and ensuring offering as much
convenience to the customers as possible by developing multiple delivery channels.
As the banking picture moves more towards the customers’ orientation from the
bankers’ perspective, banks have started offering a host of services like mobile banking,
loans, internet banking, credit/debit card facilities, stock broking, and investment options
among the vast pool of other services. Majority banks in India, particularly the large private
sector lenders – HDFC Bank, AXIS Bank and ICICI Bank are now at different stages of
digital promptness. HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank and AXIS Bank are the biggest private sector
banks in India by Market Capitalization and proud members of the Big 4 banks of India – the
4th being the State Bank of India (SBI). These banks have adopted technology advancements
swiftly enough to be called the Market Leaders of BPR projects in the Indian banking sector.
They have re-imagined and re-engineered their processes using the latest tech-tools viz. Chat
Bots; Artificial Intelligence (AI) led engines and Robotics Software. Even though these may
be in their embryonic stages, these technologies would fundamentally alter the banking
scenario sooner than anyone expects. Numerous banking experts foresee these technologies
taking maximum five years to digitize all banking and trade eco-systems but Blockchain
technology – the new kid on the block - has the potential to be the real game changer and
may disrupt the complete financial system. Of late, several Indian banks are feeling
vulnerable and face a dangerous competition from the fresh bank licensees which are
indisputably extremely digitally savvy competitors. Digital technology, per se, is not proving
to be difficult to procure - it is usually delivered to the client (banks) which work in
partnership with external tech-based firms. The Software and Apps are being developed
rapidly and being installed efficiently, for example, digital tools like the Mobile App.
Technology, by its very nature, remains permeable and over a period of time reaches one and
all. It is at this point that we realize that IT based tools are ‘enablers’ of BPR projects or
Digitization of banks. The ‘strategic differentiators’ are and will be the people - since any
such project also affects the banks’ culture, behavior, structure and work-processes.
1

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

 Digitization of a traditional bank is considered to be akin to redesigning an airliner
while it is flying. The top level management and senior managers of the organization ought to
have a towering degree of belief in the digital technologies, digital future and fortitude to see
it through major surgical changes while continuing to deliver their quarterly performances.
More importantly, the whole organization needs to be completely involved. Line managers
need to defend the redesign and its completion with tremendous willpower. As digital
technology throws up opportunities for sweeping new ways to run a process, it challenges
prevailing paradigms. The new processes may or not be permissible under regulations and
may pose new risks that may not have been anticipated earlier. Banks are going about
digitization by crafting multidisciplinary teams that are jointly responsible end to end - from
the design stage to full-scale roll-out of the new process. Since a completely new set of
metrics needs to be measured, employee key result areas (KRAs) are being re-calibrated. The
front-end executives dealing with bank customers now have customer-centric KRAs. The
performance management systems are being changed. People who have gone through a
successful digitization have felt the environment during the project to be as stressful as that
during a post-merger integration - in terms of commitment of efforts required and
engagement of the bank employees at all levels. Many banks continue to find it extremely
challenging to drum up this level of vigor and enthusiasm for the on-going digital programs.
Hence, it becomes vital to understand the perception and expectations of employees all
through these changes.
Despite the astonishing growth and achievements witnessed by the banking
sector in India, most banks are now discovering that they have been pushing themselves to
the extremes. There is a kind of saturation sneaking in the banking industry. Difficult
consumers, the anxiety to develop more and more business and to amplify profits, hostile
rivals and the need of a strong mechanism to detect and prevent banking frauds while
delivering growth is making the banks take a rational view of their operations post the
technological changes. Organizations are beginning to realize that organization factors and
people issues are the core issues – they can either be strategic assets or the real stumbling
blocks. It seems, even in the digital world, it is the human angle that makes all the difference.
In this context, it becomes important to explore and evaluate whether the Human Resource
Division of banks has an important role to play in the BPR programs and in what capacity. A
comprehensive review of literature points out that HR’s roles in BPR programs has been
largely perfunctory and restricted to being a facilitator of BPR centric training programs.
Nevertheless, the literature reviewed emphasizes upon the banks to mull over a more strategic
role for the HR to achieve remarkable improvement in the outputs derived from BPR
programs.
The purpose of this paper is to empirically analyze bank employees’ perception
regarding HR’s role in BPR programs and their expectations from the HR division. The
objectives of this research are: to analyze the perception and expectations of other bank
employees from the role of their bank’s HR personnel in BPR programs and to compare the
selected banks vis-à-vis the difference between perception and expectations from the role
played by HR personnel in BPR programs. A questionnaire was designed and mailed to the
Operations and Front-line executives of the selected Indian Private Sector banks. Suitable
hypotheses were developed to assess and evaluate the perceptions and expectations of bank
employees. The data obtained from the responses was used to perform the empirical analysis.
Various parametric, non-parametric tests and descriptive statistics constituted the extensive
empirical analysis. The experimental analysis reveals that even though there is a strong
perception of HR playing an important role in BPR programs, the expectations from HR
remain very high. This study is subject to the characteristic limitations of a survey research.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

The research findings can make a very significant contribution to banks and other
stakeholders.
Keywords: Perception, Expectation, Human Resource Personnel, Business Process
Reengineering, Operations Executives, Digitization, Private Sector Banks, SPSS

1. INTRODUCTION

The role and aspects of Human Resource Management are relatively under-explored in the
Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) literature and available documents. BPR’s main
focus is on elements such as: the effects of BPR on the organization, the influence and
criticality of Information Technology (IT) in BPR, tools and techniques of more effective
implementation of BPR etc. At the outset, there is scant of studies on the contribution of
people or the HR personnel towards the success of BPR projects. BPR projects typically
require organizational restructuring and typically have a high failure rate. Many executives
who have dealt with the BPR initiatives in their organizations have also reported that those
programs had unintended side effects and ended up creating new problems even though they
managed to achieve the intended benefits of BPR exercises – reduction in cost, time and
resources of the particular processes which were successfully re-engineered.
In majority of the cases, such problems are caused by almost nil involvement of the
Human Resource Management Department and or poor people-management practices which
failed to properly address the human beings’ inherent resistance to change or a widespread
fear of change. In an era where technological advancements are widespread and quickly
permeate organizations, Information Technology (IT) is not and will not be the critical
differentiator between a success and a failure story of BPR projects. The major reason for
failure of BPR projects has been and will continue to be the failure of managers to anticipate
and address the human aspects and concerns of the employees or the constructive and
strategic role played HR function in BPR programs. These human aspects will always be
more central and critical than any technology aspects and if the organizations are indeed
serious about deriving long term strategic benefits from their BPR initiatives (which usually
involve a lot of cost), the human side cannot be left to tend to itself.
As this study was an endeavor to analyze the role of HR function in BPR programs of
selected Indian Private Sector banks, there was a need of studying the role played by the HR
personnel from other employees’ point of view since the other employees constitute the
internal customers of the HR Department Key Responsibility Areas (KRAs). Any analysis of
the role played by HR function which did not cover the feedback of other employees would
have been incomplete.

The objectives of the research:

1. To analyze the perception and expectations of other bank employees regarding the role of
HR personnel in BPR programs.
2. To compare the selected banks on the gap between perception and expectations from the
role of HR personnel in BPR programs.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

To study the objectives, a questionnaire was designed and mailed to the Operations and
Front-line executives of the selected Indian Private Sector banks. Suitable hypothesis were
developed to assess and evaluate the perceptions and expectations of bank employees. The
data obtained from the responses was used to perform the empirical analysis. Various
parametric, non-parametric tests and descriptive statistics formed the parts of the extensive
analysis. The analysis revealed that even though there is a strong perception of HR playing an
important role in BPR programs, the expectations from HR remain very high.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature available on human resource issues related to BPR can be discussed
under the following headings:

2.1. The Role of Managers in BPR Programs

Champy (1995) [2] focused on questions regarding what characteristics a manager

should have in a reengineered organization, what sort of training he/she ought to go through
in order to be effective. He described the skills necessary to overcome the resistance
encountered in the attempt to change workforce culture/mental thought process. He also
underlined the importance of a practical and an appropriate training program which ideally
should pursue these main objectives: an ability to get the job done, communication and
reinforcement of organizational values, ensuring that the vision and mission of the
organization is properly imbibed; increasing self-confidence in individual abilities and
fostering a climate of aspiration within the organization.
Corrigan (1997) [4] suggested that managers in organizations that have been through
a BPR project see their role as being gradually changed, especially middle managers.
According to him, one of the difficulties for managers remained how to define exactly what
they have to do in a wider and a more generalist role, “where they have their own
performance measured with respect to how well they run a process rather than how well they
run a department'' (Stein, 1995) [12].
Zucchi and Edwards (1999) [15] pointed out that the managers’ attitudes at the
beginning of any BPR Project had been usually positive and that the way the senior
management level managed to communicate the purpose of the re-organization was
fundamental in ensuring that the project was accepted by the rest of the organization. The
reasons behind apprehensions of few managers regarding BPR projects were connected to the
modification of their own role. Concepts like use of cross-functional teams, workforce
empowerment and increased delegation were regarded as vague by several managers
specifically those who had occupied a particular position for a long time – insecurities
regarding the changed role and purpose inside the new organization and other uncertainties
were reported to be the maximum in their case. Those organizations which had been through
Total Quality Management (TQM) programs reported experiencing fewer problems in having
BPR projects accepted. Most of the managers agreed that their roles changed post
implementation of BPR programs. There was more concentration on process-related
performance measures and meeting assigned targets with more emphasis on coaching and co-
ordination and less direct control. Managers opined that they were more accountable and
more visible and had an increased authority and autonomy in carrying out their job. There
was also unanimity that the main task for managers post BPR implementation was to assure

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

the meeting of organizational targets and increase process performance. The managers also
had more scope for action than before as they had the newer responsibility and authority of
embracing an entire process crossing different functions. Wan-Jing et al. (2010) [14]
examined the impact of human resource (HR) capabilities on internal customer satisfaction
and organizational effectiveness. By drawing on data from HR managers and line managers,
their study showed that some HR capabilities appear to be strongly linked to internal
customer satisfaction and effectiveness of the organization. The implications for practitioners
were to modify and put emphasis on certain HR practices, and to highlight the role of internal
customers for enhancing the efficacy of organizations.

2.2. Employee Perception

Robbins (2004) [10] defined perception as ‘a process by which individuals organize

and interpret their sensory impressions in order to give meaning to their environment’. It is
known that perception is not necessarily based on reality, but is a perspective from a
particular individual’s view of a situation. In dealing with any concept of organization culture
or organizational behavior, perception becomes extremely important because people’s
behavior is based on their perception of what reality is and not on the reality itself (Selvaraj,
2009) [11]. The factors which influence an employee’s perception can be categorized into:
the situation, the perceiver and the target. For example, the actual factors in an organizational
environment may include: time of work, the tools and techniques required to do the work and
the social setting. Whereas the factors in the perceiver may be: attitudes, motives, interests,
experiences and expectations (Robbins, 2004) [10]. DeVaro et al. (2007) [7] contended that
organizations use perception management in daily internal and external interactions as well as
prior to major product/strategy introductions and following events of crisis and that
perception affects the working relationships in numerous ways related to the factors of
organizational behavior, such as: individual, group or structure.
International expert and consultant David Maister offered an extremely
practical and accessible guide to every management issue at play in professional firms in his
brilliant book titled “Managing Professional Services Firm”. According to him, professional
firms (including banks) differ from other business enterprises in two ways: first, they provide
highly customized services and thus cannot apply many of the management principles
developed for product-based industries. Second, professional services are highly
personalized, involving the skills of individuals (Maister, 1997) [8] Drawing on more than
ten years of research and consulting to these unique and creative companies, Maister brought
up a fundamental point that while “products are consumed, services are experienced.” The
author has emphasized that one may do solid technical work for the client (internal/external),
but if the client doesn’t perceive it to be a quality work, it is bad quality. Or Satisfaction =
Perception – Expectation. The author reiterated that “neither perception nor expectation
necessarily reflect reality.” (Consultant’s Mind, 2018) [3]

2.3. Resistance to Change

According to Al-Mashari and Zairi (2001) [1], BPR fosters change and human being resists
change. The authors emphasized that this resistance is the most common barrier of BPR and
renders success difficult. Crowe et al. (2009) [6] argued that employees resist changes
because of uncertain future initiated by BPR changes including job loss, authority loss,
skepticism about outcomes and a feeling of discomfort regarding working in a new
environment after BPR programs have been implemented. Inadequate communication among
employees and their managers which result in lack of motivation and clarity culminates into

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

resistance to change. Sturdy (2010) [13] argued that fear of changed role of job loss
combined with a sense of loss of control and position, particularly within the middle
management can result in resistance to change. Moreover the line managers may not be
receptive to change due to a lack of determination for radical change, and also because of a
lack of cross-functional cooperation.
Regarding the banking sector in general, it was noticed that there is a dearth of
research on:
 The impact of the HR personnel’s role in BPR programs on other employees of the
banks – specifically those working in the Operations or the IT Department or the
Front Office Executives.
 The perception of the bank employees regarding the role played by the HR function in
BPR programs.
 The expectations of the bank employees from the HR team assigned to deal with
multiple aspects of BPR programs.
Most of the research on BPR in banks is devoted to the Public Sector Banks of our country
and there is a dearth of literature on BPR in Private Banking Sector. These areas of interest
were discussed with the senior management and senior executives of the Operations and
other departments (leaving HR) of the selected Private Sector Banks. Post discussions, there
was a consensus on the importance of analyzing the present satisfaction level or analyzing
what employees may believe HR is doing (perception) and what they would like the HR to do
(expectations). There was an agreement that it is vital to reduce disconnect between the
employees and the HR managers to enhance the output and efficiency derived from the BPR
programs across their various phases. Aligning HR realities with employee expectations and
vice versa was recognized as the need of the hour.

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1. Sample
The main objective of the research was to study the impact of the role of HR
Managers in BPR programs on other employees of the Indian private sector banks. Since the
total number of Indian private sector banks is huge, 3 banks were selected for the study:
AXIS Bank Ltd., HDFC Bank Ltd. and ICICI Bank. The reason behind selecting these banks
was that they are the largest private sector banks in India by market capitalization and proud
members of the Big 4 banks of India – The 4th being the State Bank of India (SBI). Apart
from being equivalent to each other in expressions of Net Interest Income, Net Profit and
Total Assets, these three banks are at almost similar stages of digital readiness in a bid to
meet customer needs in a time when banking is becoming more about clicks and mobile
banking than the conventional modes of banking.
The objectives specified were analyzed with the help of a well drafted pre-tested
Questionnaire. Interviews were also considered as an excellent tool to gather information
from the Executive Managers/Officers. The bank employees – which formed the basis of this
objective of study, were selected from amongst employees working in different departments
– Operations, Business Development, Front Office and from different levels like the
Executive Managers, Assistant Managers, Relationship Managers, Branch Managers,
Customer Care Executives/Officers, and Front Desk Executives etc. While interviews were

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

mainly informal in nature, it was requested that the questionnaire be completed by those who
had undergone specific training and up-gradation exercises regarding BPR programs, who
had been responsible for the planning and execution of the BPR programs, whose role and
responsibilities had changed post the implementation of the BPR programs, by top hierarchal
managers of the Operations and Business Development/Analytics divisions or by all of them.
3.2. Hypothesis Formulation

The first objective of the study was to analyze the perception and expectations of other bank
employees regarding the role of HR personnel in BPR programs. The authors were unable to
come across literature which could explain other bank employees’ perception of the role of
HR in BPR programs or any study which elaborated on what the other bank employees might
be expecting from the HR Departments of their banks vis-à-vis BPR programs. The endeavor
of this paper was to study the gap between the perception and expectations of the bank
employees – whether the difference between perception and expectations is significant or
whether the HR function performing its expected role with aplomb. Hence the null and
alternative hypotheses developed for the first objective were:
H0a: There is no difference between the perception and expectations of bank employees from
the role of HR in BPR programs in banks.
H1a: The difference between the perception and expectations of bank employees from the role
of HR in BPR programs in banks is significant.
The second objective of the study was to compare the selected banks on the difference
between perception and expectations from the role of HR in BPR programs. To compare the
selected banks with each other on the parameter of other employees’ perception of the role
played by their bank’s HR in BPR programs, there was a need to compare the 3 different
banks’ respondents in terms of their perception and expectations through minute data analysis
using descriptive statistics.
These research objectives and hypotheses were kept in consideration before
construction of the questionnaire.

3.3. Construction of the Questionnaire

To construct the most appropriate questionnaire, broad literature review was done. The
studies of Zucchi and Edwards (1999) [15] and Al-Mashari et al. (2001) [1] were used to
form the primary draft of the questionnaire which was then customized to the banking sector
by discussing with experts from academia and the top managers and executives of the
selected banks as described in the literature review section of this paper. The questionnaire
consisted of 20 statements grouped under: Perception (10 statements) and Expectations (10
statements). These are presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Statements of the Questionnaire grouped under different factors

S.No. Statements
Factor – Perception (Response to each on five-point Likert Scale ranging
from Strongly Agree (5 for computation purpose) to Strongly Disagree (1 for
computation purpose)
1. HR Department’s role has been limited to minimizing resistance to change &
statutory compliance by the employees.
2. HR Department is well-integrated with Information Technology Department.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

 3. Organization culture has been conducive to BPR related changes.
4. The BPR programs have resulted in easy communication among the employees
and departments.
5. Employees’ feedback and suggestions during BPR training exercises have been
taken in the right spirit & solutions offered.
6. Employees have been made to feel empowered hence employee commitment has
improved.
7. Performance levels have increased and there is clarity regarding the new roles and
processes.
8. Performance targets are realistic thus achievable.
9. The BPR programs have increased the level of usage of information technology
and it has helped in improving performance.
10. Employees display a sense of ownership and are keener on team-work.
Factor – Expectations (Response to each on five-point Likert Scale ranging
from Strongly Agree (5 for computation purpose) to Strongly Disagree (1 for
computation purpose)
11. HR Department should play a strategic role and consult employees for opinion
before/at BPR programs’ initiation stage.
12. HR Department should be more tuned to and work more with Information
Technology division.
13. The management should act more actively, promote a healthy culture and give
total support to the BPR processes.
14. The supervisors should discuss with their juniors about the problem areas of the
BPR processes and how to improve them.
15. Employees’ concerns about change in their job profiles/nature of work post BPR
should be addressed & genuine efforts should be made to make them feel positive.
16. The suggestions from employees should be taken very seriously so that they feel
empowered and committed to their job outcomes.
17. Work should be streamlined to improve productivity and adequate clarity must be
given regarding new roles and processes.
18. There should be clarity regarding new targets and the revised employee
performance management plan.
19. The employees of the bank should be periodically re-trained on use of IT and
skills related to BPR programs to enable them to contribute more towards BPR
success.
20. Employees should be encouraged to give creative solutions and make cross
functional teams across different departments to work on projects for the benefit
of the whole bank.

The Panel of Experts Method (POE) involving relevant experts from the banking sector was
used for the validation of the questionnaire. For reliability check, Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient was used as a measure, which is 0.883 (for statements on perception) and 0.910
(for statements regarding expectations). The data collected was analyzed in details using the
SPSS software.

3.3.1. Reliability

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

 To test out the internal consistency of the questionnaire, an alpha coefficient needs to
be calculated which measures the interrelationship between the items in the questionnaire
(Cortina, 1993) [5]. Nunally (1978) [9] suggested that a reliability coefficient of 0.70 or
higher be deemed acceptable.
The ‘Perception’ part of the questionnaire designed had ten statements to measure the
perception of other bank employees regarding HR’s role in BPR programs. Each statement
was a 5-point Likert item to be answered as a single response from "strongly disagree" to
"strongly agree". The statements were worded in a way so that all through the scale, a high
score on each statement indicates a high belief of other bank employees vis-à-vis HR’s
quantum of role in BPR programs or a highly favorable perception. The ‘Expectations’
part of the questionnaire designed had ten statements to measure the expectations of other
bank employees from the HR’s role in BPR programs. Each statement was a 5-point Likert
item to be answered as a single response from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree". The
statements were worded in a way so that all through the scale, a high score on each statement
indicates a high expectation of other bank employees vis-à-vis HR’s quantum of role in
BPR programs.
To establish whether all these statements in the questionnaire reliably measure the
same construct (other employees’ favorable perception of HR’s role in BPR programs), we
asked 25 participants (executives) from the Operations Division of the two banks – HDFC
(10) and AXIS (15) - to provide responses to these 20 statements (10 for perception and 10
for expectations) of the questionnaire, so that Cronbach's alpha could be calculated based on
their scores. This formed an integral part of our Pilot Study. After calculations in SPSS, the
output obtained is depicted in Table 2 and Table 3.
Table 2: Measurement of Cronbach’s alpha value (Perception) – reliability parameter

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach’s Cronbach’s Alpha N of items

Alpha Based on Standardized Items

0.883 0.923 10

Table 3: Measurement of Cronbach’s alpha value (Expectations) – reliability parameter

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach’s Cronbach’s Alpha N of items

Alpha Based on Standardized Items

0.910 0.946 10

Cronbach’s alpha values established that the questionnaire had an acceptable reliability, α =
0.883 and α = 0.910.

3.3.2. Validity
The questionnaire was developed after a wide-ranging literature review and
discussions with the senior Operations and IT management of the selected banks. This in

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

itself principally established the content validity of the questionnaire. Additionally, for most
advantageous results, the Panel of Experts (POE) Method was used as suggested by the
senior managers of the banks themselves. It consisted of two parts.
Part 1: Establishing the reliability of the experts: From the senior Operations and IT
management of each of the selected banks, 10 experts were chosen. Each graded the other 9
on a scale of 0-5. The limiting parameter was fixed at <40% or 18 pts. Those who obtained
less than 18 points in total were excluded from the final panel. This is illustrated in Table 4.
In Table 4, expert A gave scores – 3, 2, 5, 4, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 1 to experts B to J
respectively. He did not grade himself. Similarly, expert B gave a score of 5 to A and 4, 4, 5,
3, 3, 2, 2 and 1 to experts C to J. The experts whose total scores were more than the limiting
parameter set (18 points) were included in the panel. As an example from the table above, G
having a total score of 16 was not included. After few rounds of this exercise, a Panel of 9
experts across the selected 3 banks was finalized which included a Senior Operations Officer,
a Deputy Bank Manager, a Senior Manager – Operations/Logistics, a Director of Operations,
Senior Operations Manager – Business Analyst, GM – Information Technology, Senior
Technology Product Manager, Senior IT Specialist and Advanced Business Analyst.
Part 2: Validation of the questions of questionnaire: The core objectives of the study were
discussed with the panel of experts. Finally, options were given to the experts to: OK the
question (s)/Redefine/Restate/Reword the question (s)/Reject the question (s) or Add any
question (s). After this comprehensive exercise, the questionnaire was finalized and
administered to the other employees.

Table 4: Panel of Experts method – Establishing the reliability of experts.

A B C D E F G H I J
A X 3 2 5 4 2 3 4 5 1
B 5 X 4 4 5 3 3 2 2 1
C … … X … … … … 1 … …
D … … … X … … … 2 … …
E … … … … X … … 1 … …
F … … … … … X … 2 … …
G … … … … … … X 1 … …
H … … … … … … … X … …
I … … … … … … … 1 X …
J … … … … … … … 2 … X
Total Score 16

4. DATA COLLECTION
For the purpose of research, 17 branches of each bank – HDFC, ICICI and AXIS - across
NCR New Delhi and Chandigarh Tri-city were shortlisted for administering the

10

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

questionnaire. Thus, a total of 51 bank branches were tapped and the questionnaire was
directed to a total of 300 Operations and Front-line personnel. Mid level and senior level
managers were requested to present their inputs. Team Leaders/Sr. Managers/Heads and Sr.
Executives with a minimum of 3 years work experience in the bank had been short-listed as
the qualifying criteria. The sample of the employees was drawn using Convenience sampling
followed by Random sampling. Depending upon inputs from some employees of the bank
branches, 40 questionnaires were mailed to their referrals in corresponding positions in other
banks branches as well. A total of 175 responses (out of a total of 340) were obtained for the
questionnaire within the specified time. 16 responses (invalid response – 9, missing data – 7)
were discarded. Thus the sample (175 out of 340) represented 51.4% response rate which was
considered satisfactory.

4.1. Demographic profile of the respondents

Total number of respondents from the Operations and Front-office divisions of the 3 selected
banks were 175: From HDFC Bank: 49, ICICI Bank: 51 and AXIS Bank: 59. The gender
wise break up is illustrated in Figure 1.

Fig 1: Classification of respondents based upon Gender (Graph with data labels)

40
Gender
Male
Female

30

Count

20
33

26 26 25 26
23
10

0
HDFC ICICI AXIS
Bank ID

The respondents could choose their level of education in the questionnaire from 3 categories
– Graduation, Post Graduation and Post Graduation & above. Figure 2 illustrates the
responses obtained with respect to each of the three banks.

Fig 2: Classification of respondents based upon Educational Qualification (Graph with

data labels)

11

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

 Education Level
Graduation
Post Graduation
30
Post Graduation
and above
Count

20

31
28
24
10 21
19 18

6 7
5

0
HDFC ICICI AXIS
Bank ID

The respondents were required to specify their age by ticking the appropriate of any of the
following groups: Less than/Equal to 25 years, 26-30 years, 31-35 years, 36-40 years, 41-45
years, 46-50 years, 51-55 years and Greater than/Equal to 56 years. Figure 3 shows the total
number of responses obtained (from all the 3 banks).
Fig 3: Classification of respondents on the basis of Age Group (Pie-chart with data
labels)

Age Group
</= 25 years
26-30 years
2
12 31-35 years
36-40 years
34
41-45 years
20
46-50 years
51-55 years
>/= 56 years

18
26

20

27

5. HYPOTHESIS TESTING AND DATA ANALYSIS

To analyze the perception and expectations of bank employees regarding role played by HR
in BPR processes in banks, Likert scale statements were used. The respondents were asked to
indicate their response by choosing any one degree out of ‘Strongly Disagree’, ‘Disagree’,
‘Neutral’, ‘Agree’ and ‘Strongly Agree’ for each of the statements as illustrated in Table 1.

12

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

For necessary calculations, the term ‘Perception Score (P)’ was used to denote the sum of
actual response scores to Likert Scale statements (S.No. 1 to 10) in the questionnaire. The
response scores ranged from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree). The total
perception score of each respondent was obtained by adding the response scores to each of
the 10 statements as indicated by the respondent. Likewise, the term “Expectation Score (E)’
was used to denote the sum of actual response scores to Likert Scale statements (S.No. 11 to
20) in the questionnaire. The response scores ranged from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5
(Strongly Agree). The total expectation score of each respondent was obtained by adding the
response scores to each of the 10 statements as indicated by the respondent.

5.1. Hypotheses Testing for the First Objective of the Study

The first objective was to analyze the perception and expectations of other bank employees
regarding the role of HR personnel in BPR programs. The null and alternative hypotheses
developed for the first objective were:
H0a: There is no difference between the perception and expectations of bank employees from
the role of HR in BPR programs in banks.
H1a: The difference between the perception and expectations of bank employees from the role
of HR in BPR programs in banks is significant.

The Hypotheses were tested in Two parts:

 For the combined data obtained from selected banks

 For the data of individual bank(s)
Total number of respondents from the Operations and Front-office divisions of the 3 selected
banks (175) formed the combined sample size. 49 respondents from HDFC Bank, 51 from
ICICI Bank and 59 from AXIS Bank constituted the samples of the individual bank(s).

5.1.1. Statistical Tests used:

1. Paired Samples t-test: The Paired Samples t-test is used to examine the difference in
means of the dependent samples. It is used to compare each respondent with self, at another
point in time. Hence, the Paired Samples t-test or the Dependent Samples t-test (as it is also
known) was used in our study to compare the Perception and Expectation scores of the bank
employees. The assumptions of Paired Samples t-test were thoroughly checked for
compliance before administering the test:

 The Dependent variable is measured on ratio or interval scale (the responses to the
Likert scale statements satisfied this criteria)
 Respondents are selected randomly (the samples met this criteria as well)
 The Sample mean is normally distributed – to check this; tests of normality available
in the SPSS package were run on the samples. Where the distribution of the
Perception scores (P values) was found to be normal, the Paired Samples t-test was
used. Where it was not found to be normal, Wilcoxon Signed Rank test was used.
2. Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test: It is the non-parametric version of the Paired Samples t-test.
It was used when the sampling distribution (Perception scores or P values) was not found to
be normally distributed.

5.1.2. Hypotheses testing for combined data obtained from selected banks

13

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

The Explore command available in SPSS was used to examine the normality of data in order
to determine the appropriate statistical technique for the purpose of drawing inferences from
the sample. The output obtained is given in Table 5.
Table 5: Tests of Normality on Combined Sample obtained from Selected Banks

Kolmogorov-Smirnov(a) Shapiro-Wilk

Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Total of P
.077 159 .023 .992 159 .547
values
a Lilliefors Significance Correction

Since the combined sample size was greater than 100, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic was
used to examine the normality of data. The null and alternative hypotheses for the purpose
were:
H0: The sampling distribution is normal
H1: The sampling distribution is not normal.
As the significance level of Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was 0.23 (from the output table) which
was less than the set significance level of 0.05, the null hypothesis was rejected and we
interpreted that the distribution of the Total of Perception scores (P values) was not normal.
Hence, the Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test was used and after running the test on SPSS,
the following outputs were obtained. Table 6 gives the Descriptive Statistics. The maximum
value of P/E scores could be 50 (10 statements X 5 points each for strongly agreeing with all
statements). As visible in Table 6, the Mean value of P was 32.94 and for E it was a very high
number: 43.16. The Minimum P value obtained from the combined sample was 18 while the
maximum was 49. Minimum Expectation score obtained was 33 while the maximum was 50.

Table 6: Descriptive Statistics of Combined Sample obtained from Selected Banks

Descriptive Statistics

Std. Percentiles
N Mean Deviation Minimum Maximum 25th 50th (Median) 75th
Total of P values 159 32.94 5.748 18 49 29.00 33.00 36.00
Total of E values 159 43.16 3.478 33 50 41.00 44.00 46.00

The Negative Ranks in Table 7 were assigned to those cases in which the total expectation
score was less than the total perception score. Those cases where the total expectation score
was greater than the total perception score were given Positive Ranks while where the total of
both P and E scores was the same were Ties.

14

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

 Table 7: Wilcoxon Signed Ranks of Combined Sample obtained from Selected Banks
Ranks

N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks

Total of E v alues - Negativ e Ranks 10a 14.80 148.00
Total of P v alues Positiv e Ranks 146b 82.86 12098.00
Ties 3c
Total 159
a. Total of E v alues < Tot al of P v alues
b. Total of E v alues > Tot al of P v alues
c. Total of E v alues = Tot al of P v alues

In Table 8, the Z-statistic obtained was -10.577 and the associated level of significance was
0.000 (which is less than 0.05). The null hypothesis was thus rejected and we concluded that
difference between the perception and expectations of other bank employees from the role of
HR in BPR programs in banks is statistically significant. In other words, bank employees
who were the respondents of the three banks in question: HDFC, ICICI and AXIS Bank
believe that HR should play a more significant role in BPR programs in banks.
Table 8: Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test Statistics of Combined Sample obtained from
Selected Banks

Test Statistics b

Total of E
v alues - Total
of P v alues
Z -10.577a
Asy mp. Sig. (2-tailed) .000
a. Based on negativ e ranks.
b. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test

5.2.3. Hypotheses Testing for Data of Individual Banks

The Explore command available in SPSS was used to examine the normality of data in order
to determine the appropriate statistical technique for the purpose of drawing inferences from
the sample of each bank. The output obtained is given in Table 9.

Table 9: Tests of Normality (individual bank)

Tests of Normality

Kolmogorov -Smirnov a Shapiro-Wilk

Bank I D St at ist ic df Sig. St at ist ic df Sig.
Total of P v alues 1 HDFC .101 49 .200* .963 49 .128
2 ICICI .147 51 .008 .969 51 .209
3 AXIS .116 59 .048 .955 59 .028
*. This is a lower bound of the true signif icance.
a. Lillief ors Signif icance Correction

15

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

Since the individual bank sample size was less than 100, we used the Shapiro-Wilk’s test to
examine normality. The null and alternative hypotheses for this purpose were:
H0: The sampling distribution is normal
H1: The sampling distribution is not normal.
From Table 9, the significance level of Shapiro-Wilk’s test was 0.128 for HDFC Bank
sample which was greater than the set significance level of 0.05, hence the null hypothesis
was accepted and we interpreted that the distribution of Perception scores (P values) was
normal. The significance level of Shapiro-Wilk’s test was 0.209 for ICICI Bank sample
which was greater than the set significance level of 0.05. Hence the null hypothesis was
accepted and we interpreted that the distribution of Perception scores (P values) was normal.
For AXIS Bank sample, the significance level of Shapiro-Wilk’s test was 0.028 which was
less than the set significance level of 0.05. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected and we
interpreted that the distribution of Perception scores (P values) was not normal.
Keeping in mind the results of the Tests of Normality, the Paired Samples t-test was
deemed to be appropriate for HDFC Bank and ICICI Bank samples. For AXIS Bank sample,
the appropriate tool was Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test. The results obtained are as follows:

(i) HDFC Bank:

After following the procedure for Paired Samples t-test on the SPSS for the sample of HDFC
Bank where the sample size N was equal to 49, the output was displayed in three tables as
follows. Paired Samples Statistics Table 10 displayed the Mean of the perception score as
32.78 and the Mean of the expectation score was 43.55.

Table 10: Paired Sample Statistics of HDFC Bank sample

Paired Samples Statisti cs

St d. St d. Error
Mean N Dev iation Mean
Pair Perception Scores 32.78 49 7.016 1.002
1 Expected Scores 43.55 49 3.254 .465

Table 11 was the Paired Samples Correlations table. It provided the Correlation between the
Perception and Expectation scores (a positive correlation with a value of 0.121).

Table 11: Paired Samples Correlations of HDFC Bank sample

Pair ed Samples Co rr elation s

N Correlation Sig.
Pair Perception Scores
49 .121 .406
1 & Expected Scores

The Paired Samples Test Table 12 generated the value of t-statistic of -10.240 with associated
significance value 0.000, which was less than 0.05 (chosen α value). Therefore, we rejected
the null hypothesis and concluded that the difference between the perception and expectations
of the respondents of HDFC Bank from the role of HR in BPR programs is statistically
significant.

16

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

 Table 12: Paired Samples t-test of HDFC Bank sample

Paired Samples Test

Paired Diff erences

95% Confidence
Interv al of the
Std. Std. Error Diff erence
Mean Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df Sig. (2-tailed)
Pair Perception Scores
-10.776 7.366 1.052 -12.891 -8.660 -10.240 48 .000
1 - Expected Scores

(ii) ICICI Bank:

After following the procedure for Paired Samples t-test on the SPSS for the sample of ICICI
Bank where the sample size N was equal to 51, the output was displayed in three tables as
follows. Paired Samples Statistics Table 13 displayed the Mean of the perception score as
33.00 and the Mean of the expectation score as 43.25.

Table 13: Paired Sample Statistics of ICICI Bank sample

Paired Sampl es Statistics

St d. St d. Error
Mean N Dev iation Mean
Pair Percept ion Scores 33.00 51 5.831 .816
1 Expectation Scores 43.25 51 3.411 .478

Table 14 which was the Paired Samples Correlations table provided the Correlation between
the Perception and Expectation scores (a negative correlation with a value of -0.148).

Table 14: Paired Samples Correlations of ICICI Bank sample

Pair ed Samples Cor r elation s

N Correlation Sig.
Pair Perception Scores &
51 -.148 .301
1 Expectation Scores

The Paired Samples Test Table 15 generated the value of t-statistic of -10.204 with associated
significance value 0.000, which was less than 0.05 (chosen α value). Therefore, we rejected
the null hypothesis and concluded that the difference between the perception and expectations
of the respondents of ICICI Bank from the role of HR in BPR programs is statistically
significant.

Table 15: Paired Samples t-test of ICICI Bank sample

Paired Samples Test

Paired Diff erences

95% Confidence
Interv al of the
Std. Std. Error Dif f erence
Mean Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df Sig. (2-tailed)
Pair Perception Scores -
-10.255 7.177 1.005 -12.274 -8.236 -10.204 50 .000
1 Expectation Scores

17

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

(iii) AXIS Bank:
After running the Wilcoxon Signed Rank test for AXIS Bank sample (Sample Size: 59), the
following outputs were obtained. Table 16 gives the Descriptive Statistics. The Mean value
of P obtained was 33.02 and for E it was 42.76. The minimum score of P was 24 while the
maximum was 46. Minimum E score was 34 while the maximum was 50.

Table 16: Descriptive Statistics of Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test for AXIS Bank sample

Descriptive Statistics

Std. Percentiles
N Mean Deviation Minimum Maximum 25th 50th (Median) 75th
Perception Scores 59 33.02 4.462 24 46 29.00 32.00 35.00
Expectation Scores 59 42.76 3.725 34 50 40.00 44.00 46.00

The Negative Ranks in Table 17 were assigned to those cases in which the total expectation
score was less than the total perception score. Those cases where the total expectation score
was greater than the total perception score were given Positive Ranks while where the total of
both P and E scores was the same were Ties.

Table 17: Wilcoxon Signed Ranks of AXIS Bank sample

Ranks

N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks

Expectation Scores Negativ e Ranks 3a 4.67 14.00
- Perception Scores Positiv e Ranks 55b 30.85 1697.00
Ties 1c
Total 59
a. Expectation Scores < Perception Scores
b. Expectation Scores > Perception Scores
c. Expectation Scores = Perception Scores

In Table 18, the Z-statistic obtained was -6.519 and the associated level of significance was
0.000 (which is less than 0.05). The null hypothesis was thus rejected and we concluded that
difference between the perception and expectations of the respondents of AXIS Bank from
the role of HR in BPR programs is statistically significant. In other words, respondents of
AXIS Bank believe that HR should play a more significant role in BPR programs in banks.

Table 18: Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test Statistics of AXIS Bank sample

Test Statistics b

Expectation
Scores -
Perception
Scores
Z -6.519a
Asy mp. Sig. ( 2-tailed) .000
a. Based on negativ e ranks.
b. W ilcoxon Signed R anks Test

18

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

5.2. Descriptive Analysis of the Second Objective of the Study
The second objective of the study was to compare the selected banks on the difference
between perception and expectations from the role of HR in BPR programs. To compare the
selected banks with each other on the parameter of other employees’ perception of the role
played by their bank’s HR in BPR programs, there was a need to compare the 3 different
banks’ respondents in terms of their perception and expectations through minute data analysis
using descriptive statistics.

5.2.1. Perception
The ‘Perception’ part of the questionnaire had ten statements to measure the perception of
bank employees regarding HR’s role in BPR programs. The statements were coded as
follows:

P1 HR Department’s role has been limited to minimizing resistance to change &

statutory compliance by the employees.
P2 HR Department is well-integrated with Information Technology Department.
P3 Organization culture has been conducive to BPR related changes.
P4 BPR programs have resulted in easy communication among the employees and
departments.
P5 Employees’ feedback and suggestions during BPR training exercises have been
taken in the right spirit & solutions offered.
P6 Employees have been made to feel empowered hence employee commitment has
improved.
P7 Performance levels have increased and there is clarity regarding the new roles and
processes.
P8 Performance targets are realistic thus achievable.
P9 BPR programs have increased the level of usage of information technology and it
has helped in improving performance.
P10 Employees display a sense of ownership and are keener on team-work.

The total score was obtained by adding the scores given by all the respondents of one bank
for each statement. Since the number of respondents of each bank was different, the average
score was computed by dividing the total score by the number of respondents of the
respective bank. Table 19 depicts the results. MP1 refers to the Mean Score of the 1st
statement and so on till MP10 which refers to the Mean Score of the 10th statement.

Table 19: Mean Scores of Perception Statements

Bank MP1 MP2 MP3 MP4 MP5 MP6 MP7 MP8 MP9 MP10

HDFC 3.22 3.32 2.91 3.38 3.38 3.28 3.5 3.14 3.53 3.26

ICICI 3.49 3.23 2.82 3.52 3.25 3.29 3.23 3.17 3.31 3.64

AXIS 3.57 3.2 3.22 3.42 3.28 3.28 3.03 3.23 3.47 3.27

Total 10.28 9.75 8.95 10.32 9.91 9.85 9.76 9.54 10.31 10.17

19

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

The total of mean scores of Statement 4 (BPR programs have resulted in easy communication
among the employees and departments) was found to be the highest (10.32) for the combined
data of all banks. Respondents of HDFC Bank on an average most strongly agreed with
Statement 9 (BPR programs have increased the level of usage of information technology and
it has helped in improving performance). ICICI Bank respondents had the strongest
perception about Statement 10 (Employees display a sense of ownership and are keener on
team-work). AXIS Bank respondents most strongly identified with Statement 1 (HR
Department’s role has been limited to minimizing resistance to change & statutory
compliance by the employees). Figure 4 illustrates the comparison of the agreeability of each
of the 10 statements.
It is noteworthy that the total of mean scores obtained by all the statements was close
except for Statement 3 (Organization culture has been conducive to BPR related changes). As
visible in Table 19, respondents of all banks have the least favorable perception of this
statement. Its total mean is also the lowest (8.95). The Bank wise mean score obtained by
each of the 10 statements is depicted in Figure 5. The sums of mean scores of all statements
(bank wise) were computed as: AXIS Bank: 32.97; ICICI Bank: 32.95 and HDFC Bank:
32.92. The difference was overall marginal though individual differences across statements
were significant as illustrated by Figure 5.
Fig 4: Mean score given to each statement with data labels

12

10
3.57 3.42 3.28 3.03 3.47 3.27
3.2 3.28 3.23
8 3.22

6
3.49 3.23 3.52 3.25 3.29 3.23 3.31 3.64
3.17
2.82
4

2 3.22 3.32 2.91 3.38 3.38 3.28 3.5 3.14 3.53 3.26

0
MP1 MP2 MP3 MP4 MP5 MP6 MP7 MP8 MP9 MP10

HDFC ICICI AXIS

20

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

 Fig 5: Bank wise mean Perception score of each statement with data labels

3.27
3.47
3.23
3.03
AXIS 3.28
3.28
3.42
3.22
3.2 MP10
3.57
MP9
3.64
3.31 MP8
3.17 MP7
3.23
ICICI 3.29 MP6
3.25
3.52 MP5
2.82
3.23 MP4
3.49
MP3
3.26 MP2
3.53
3.14 MP1
3.5
HDFC 3.28
3.38
3.38
2.91
3.32
3.22

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4

5.2.2. Expectation
The ‘Expectation’ part of the questionnaire had ten statements to measure the expectation of
bank employees regarding HR’s role in BPR programs. The statements were coded as
follows:

E1 HR Department should play a strategic role and consult employees for opinion
before/at BPR programs’ initiation stage.
E2 HR Department should be more tuned to and work more with Information
Technology division.
E3 The management should act more actively, promote a healthy culture and give total
support to the BPR processes.
E4 The supervisors should discuss with their juniors about the problem areas of the BPR
processes and how to improve them.
E5 Employees’ concerns about change in their job profiles/nature of work post BPR
should be addressed & genuine efforts should be made to make them feel positive.
E6 The suggestions from employees should be taken very seriously so that they feel
empowered and committed to their job outcomes.

21

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

E7 Work should be streamlined to improve productivity and adequate clarity must be
given regarding new roles and processes.
E8 There should be clarity regarding new targets and the revised employee performance
management plan.
E9 The employees of the bank should be periodically re-trained on use of IT and skills
related to BPR programs to enable them to contribute more towards BPR success.
E10 Employees should be encouraged to give creative solutions and make cross
functional teams across different departments to work on projects for the benefit of
the whole bank.

The total score was obtained by adding the scores given by all the respondents of one bank
for each statement. Since the number of respondents of each bank was different, the average
score was computed by dividing the total score by the number of respondents of the
respective bank. Table 20 depicts the results. ME1 refers to the Mean Score of the 1st
statement and so on till ME10 which refers to the Mean Score of the 10th statement.

Table 20: Mean Scores of Expectation Statements

Bank ME1 ME2 ME3 ME4 ME5 ME6 ME7 ME8 ME9 ME10

HDFC 4.38 4 4.36 4.51 4.4 4.42 4.32 4.3 4.24 4.57

ICICI 4.19 4.07 4.27 4.35 4.31 4.45 4.41 4.41 4.37 4.39

AXIS 4.23 4.15 4.25 4.38 4.42 4.27 4.18 4.22 4.18 4.44

Total 12.8 12.22 12.88 13.24 13.13 13.14 12.91 12.93 12.79 13.4

The Total Mean of Statement 10 (Employees should be encouraged to give creative solutions
and make cross functional teams across different departments to work on projects for the
benefit of the whole bank) was found to be the highest (13.4) for the combined data of all
banks. Respondents of HDFC Bank and AXIS Bank, on an average, had strongest
expectations vis-à-vis Statement 10 (Employees should be encouraged to give creative
solutions and make cross functional teams across different departments to work on projects
for the benefit of the whole bank). ICICI Bank respondents had the strongest expectation
regarding Statement 6 (The suggestions from employees should be taken very seriously so
that they feel empowered and committed to their job outcomes).
Figure 6 illustrates the comparison of the score of each of the 10 statements. It is
noteworthy that the total of mean scores obtained by all the statements was close except for
Statement 2 (HR Department should be more tuned to and work more with Information
Technology division). As visible in Table 20, respondents of all banks have the least
expectation from this statement. Its total mean is also the lowest (12.22).
The Bank wise mean scores obtained by the 10 statements are depicted in Figure 7.
The sum of mean scores of all statements bank wise were computed as: AXIS Bank: 42.72;
ICICI Bank: 43.22 and HDFC Bank: 43.5. The overall difference was marginal though
individual differences across statements are significant as illustrated by Figure 7.

22

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

 Fig 6: Mean score given to each statement with data labels

14

12
4.25 4.38 4.42 4.27 4.18 4.22 4.44
4.23 4.18
4.15
10

8
4.19 4.27 4.35 4.31 4.45 4.41 4.41 4.37 4.39
6 4.07

4
4.38 4 4.36 4.51 4.4 4.42 4.32 4.3 4.24 4.57
2

0
ME1 ME2 ME3 ME4 ME5 ME6 ME7 ME8 ME9 ME10

HDFC ICICI AXIS

23

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

 Fig 7: Bank wise mean Expectation score of each statement with data labels

4.44
4.18
4.22
4.18
4.27
AXIS
4.42
4.38
4.25
4.15
4.23
ME10
4.39 ME9
4.37
ME8
4.41
4.41 ME7
4.45 ME6
ICICI
4.31
4.35 ME5
4.27 ME4
4.07
ME3
4.19
ME2
4.57 ME1
4.24
4.3
4.32
4.42
HDFC
4.4
4.51
4.36
4
4.38

3.7 3.8 3.9 4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7

6. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTED AREAS FOR FURTHER

RESEARCH

The banking sector is moving more and more towards the customers’ orientation and
almost all banks have started offering a host of services like mobile banking, loans, internet
banking, credit/debit card facilities, stock broking, and investment options among the vast
pool of other services. The majority banks in India, particularly the large private sector
lenders – HDFC Bank, AXIS Bank and ICICI Bank are now at different stages of digital
promptness. These banks have adopted technology advancements swiftly enough to be called
the Market Leaders of BPR projects in the Indian banking sector. They have re-imagined and

24

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

re-engineered their processes using the latest tech-tools viz. Chat Bots; Artificial Intelligence
(AI) led engines and Robotics Software. Even though these may be in their embryonic stages,
these technologies would fundamentally alter the banking scenario sooner than anyone
expects. Of late, several Indian banks are feeling vulnerable and face a dangerous
competition from the fresh bank licensees which are indisputably extremely digitally savvy
competitors. Digital technology, per se, is not proving to be difficult to either procure - it is
usually delivered to the client (banks) which work in partnership with external tech-based
firms. Technology, by its very nature, remains permeable and over a period of time reaches
one and all. It is at this point that we realize that IT based tools are ‘enablers’ of BPR projects
or Digitization of banks. The ‘strategic differentiators’ are and will be the people - since any
such project also affects the banks’ culture, behavior, structure and work-processes.
This paper aimed to empirically analyze the perception of the selected bank
employees (mainly from the functional areas of Operations and the Front Office) regarding
the role played by HR in BPR programs in banks. The experiential analysis revealed that
though the employees have a largely positive and favorable perception of the role being
played by HR function in BPR programs, they also strongly expect the HR’s role and scope
to be enhanced. The paper has statistically concluded that across the selected banks, the
difference between the perception and expectations of bank employees from the role of HR in
BPR programs in banks is statistically significant. In other words, the respondents believe
that HR should play a more significant role in BPR programs in banks. This has been
corroborated by the results of appropriate statistical tests conducted on the combined data of
all the banks as well as on the individual sample of each selected bank.
AXIS Bank respondents, on an average, had the strongest perception of HR
Department’s role as being limited to minimizing resistance to change & statutory
compliance by the employees in context of BPR programs. The statement: “Employees
should be encouraged to give creative solutions and make cross functional teams across
different departments to work on projects for the benefit of the whole bank” resonated the
most in terms of expectations of the combined data of all banks, specifically with the
respondents of HDFC Bank and AXIS Bank. ICICI Bank respondents had the strongest
expectations regarding the statement: “Suggestions from employees should be taken very
seriously so that they feel empowered and committed to their job outcomes”.
The overall difference of the score of statements used to analyze perception and
expectations (bank-wise) was marginal though individual differences across statements were
found to be significant. These differences require a comprehensive analysis and are scope of
future studies. The findings of the study can make a major contribution to the banks
particularly to their HR department and the top management. Last but not the least, any such
analysis done with reference to Public Sector banks can also greatly augment the scale and of
the literature available.

25

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389

REFERENCES

1. Al-Mashari, M., Irani, Z. & Zairi, M. (2001). Business process reengineering: a survey of
international experience. Business Process Management Journal, 7(5), 437-55.

2. Champy, J. (1995). Reengineering Management, the Mandate for New Leadership.

HarperCollins, London.

3. Consultant’s Mind. (2018). Satisfaction = Perception – Expectation. Retrieved from

https://www.consultantsmind.com/2018/04/29/satisfaction/
4. Corrigan S. (1997). Human and organizational aspects of business process reengineering.
Retrieved from http://bprc.warwick.ac.uk/shef-focus.html

5. Cortina, J.M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 98-
104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.1.98
6. Crowe, T.J., Fong, P.M., & Zayas-Castro, J.L. (2009). Quantitative risk level estimation of
business process reengineering efforts. Business Process Management Journal, 8(5), 490-
511.
7. DeVaro, J., Li, R., & Brookshire, D. (2007). Analyzing the job characteristics model: New
support from a cross-section of establishments. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 18(6), 986–1003.
8. Maister, D.H. (1997). Managing the Professional Service Firm. Free Press Paperbacks,
Simon & Schuster, New York.
9. Nunally, J.C. (1978). Psychometric Theory (2nd Ed.) New York: McGraw Hill.
10. Robbins, L. (2004). Gender and the relationship between perceived fairness of pay or
promotion and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(6), 910–917.
11. Selvaraj, M. (2009). Total quality management in Indian commercial banks: A
comparative study. Journal of Marketing and Communication, 4(3), 59–70.
12. Stein, A. (1995). Re-engineering the executive: the 4th generation of EIS - a case study.
Information and Management, 29, 55-62.

13. Sturdy, G.R. (2010). Business Process Reengineering: Strategies for Occupational
Health and Safety. Newcastle, Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
14. Wan-Jing, Chang, A., & Huang, T.C. (2010). The impact of human resource capabilities
on internal customer satisfaction and organizational effectiveness. Total Quality Management
& Business Excellence, 21(6), 633-648. DOI: 10.1080/14783363.2010.483075
15. Zucchi, F., & Edwards, J.S. (1999). Human resource management aspects of business
process reengineering: a survey. Business Process Management Journal, 5(4), 325 – 344.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14637159910297376

26

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3743389