No Tengo Archivo

CRD Program Assessment Rubric
Resource
Item | Topic | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Level 4 |
1a (Model 1) | Customer Sponsorship | Sponsors are not assigned to all customers | Sponsorship assigned mainly to product managers based on the customer's revenue largest product | Sponsorship distributed evenly and effectively to product managers and other resources | Account Management at everylevel. LAM's are utilized to sponsor all custodian branch customer relationships |
1b (Model 2) | Customer Sponsorship | Sponsors are not assigned to all customers | Sponsorship assigned mainly to product managers based on the customer's revenue largest product | Sponsorship distributed evenly and effectively to product managers and other resources | CRDM acts as a part time LAM sponsoring themajority of custodian branch customer relationships |
2 | CRDM | Position is open | Position is filled | The resource is seen as a long term fit for the position, but the appropriate model has not been implemented | The appropriate model for the CRDM position has been applied |
3a (Model 1) | Team Structure and Expectations | LAM's and/or CAM's do not report to the CRDM. No expectations aredocumented for the AM Team | LAM and/or CAM’s report to the CRDM, however, no expectations have been documented for the AM team | CRDMs conduct quarterly reviews with all AM's,
expectations are documented and team members are held accountable to these, however; individuals tend to focus solely on their accounts | CRDM and AM team are functioning as a cohesive customer retention and developmentdepartment, all members are working toward the success of the local CRD program and their focus is not limited to the accounts they sponsor |
3b (Model 2) | Team Structure and Expectations | CRDM/LAM does not have any influence to hold Local Customer Sponsors accountable for the retention and growth of their customers. Little or no DM support is given in this area | CRDM/LAM has little influence,however the DM does hold sponsors accountable for meeting tactical requirements of the program (calls/reviews completed on-time) | CRDM/LAM has influence and the DM places some accountability on the sponsors for the strategic elements of the retention and development of their customers | Both the CRDM and the DM hold the local customer sponsors accountable for the retention and development of theircustomers as seen through frequent sponsor reviews and re-alignment of customer sponsorship when expectations are not met |
4 | CRDM Role | CRDM is viewed as an administrative role and spends little if any time face to face with customers | CRDM is viewed as a peer position to an account manager and they own the calls associated with their accounts | CRDM position is viewed as both an accountmanager and a resource for the sponsors to prepare content (Business Reviews, Scorecards, Reporting) for face to face customer calls | CRDM is viewed as a product manager. They spend significant time face to face with customers while coaching and mentoring other local customer sponsors |
Performance
Item | Topic | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Level 4 |
5 | Sponsor 1:1 | No sponsor reviews aretaking place | Reviews are tactical and infrequent. Sponsor preparation and engagement is limited | Monthly tactical reviews occur and evidence of minimal improvement exists; Sponsors are engaged and prepared | Reviews are strategic and concentrate on assessment area improvement of their customers (relationship, execution, products/services), sponsors begin to drive reviews - CRDM checking foraccountability |
6 | CRD Performance Scorecard | Barely using CRS | Red | Yellow | Green |

Marketing and Communication
Item | Topic | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Level 4 |
7 | New Solutions Distribution Process | CRDM/Sponsors do not see the value in the new solution, no process exists and implementations are minimally executed and/or not on time | CRDM/Sponsors do not see the value...