Converging Traditional Phone and Digital Experiences for Customers

Written by

Delivering a seamless customer experience has become increasingly important as banks seek more efficient ways to streamline service.

While nearly two-thirds of the U.S. population use digital banking services, many still reach for the phone when a complex issue arises. This challenges banks with how to manage this channel shift in a way that facilitates a smooth experience for customers. Exacerbating the issue is the ongoing expectation for banks to accomplish more with fewer resources; call centers continue to receive a surge in support calls while facing widespread staffing shortages. Banks may also expect to record increasingly thinner margins in the current economic climate.

So, how can banks ensure they are providing an effortless customer experience — on par with tech giants and major retailers — while increasing efficiencies? The answer can be found in uniting traditional phone service with digital engagements and strategically embracing conversational artificially intelligence, or AI.

Uniting Phone, Digital Engagements
Most institutions currently manage at least two disparate systems for customer service, which creates a notable disconnect between digital and phone interactions. This separation perpetuates inefficiencies and can create a fragmented customer experience. Customers expect every interaction with their bank to be personalized and seamless; it isn’t well received when they encounter the stark contrast between the bank’s phone and digital spheres.

To solve this pain point, banks can unite phone and digital engagements within a single customer engagement platform. Incorporating the traditional call center phone service into digital-first customer support can significantly decrease the complexity of managing various point solutions, while also reducing costs and staffing requirements. Plus, this type of consolidation can drives considerable efficiencies across routing, management and reporting for the bank.

Equally as important, this unification facilitates a more consistent, low-effort customer experience. After all, customers care about resolving their issue resolution, not what channel they’re using — they are simply seeking a favorable experience. This can also create a better employee experience: staff sees the same information no matter how a customer is engaging, enabling easier, more accurate personalization.

Incorporating Conversational AI
Incorporating automation into your bank’s customer service channels can increase efficiencies while improving the customer experience across both digital and phone communications. For example, companies and consumers continue to adopt conversational AI technology and virtual assistants that provide intelligent self-service options in both text and voice channels. These assistants offload work from contact center employees, so they can focus on solving more complex problems and participate in higher-value conversations. Virtual assistants can additionally shorten the resolution time for customers, simultaneously improving efficiency and customer satisfaction (CSAT) scores.

However, not all virtual assistants are created equal. Third-party tool kits and do-it-yourself solutions can deliver less-than-ideal results, which negates their value and even creates additional pain points in the customer experience. Compared to their more-generic counterparts, platforms that have been developed specifically for financial services can provide a quicker, more relevant way to deliver a convenient digital experience for customers across both virtual and human assistants.

Virtual assistants become especially beneficial when a bank uses them across a single customer engagement platform. Leveraging a combination of human and virtual assistants in one platform — including chatbots for digital engagements and intelligent virtual assistants optimized for phone and digital voice engagements — eliminates the need for banks to manage multiple solutions across different technologies.

While there tends to be an imagined dilemma between efficiencies and a better customer experience, banks can — and should — have both. Converging traditional phone support and digital interactions onto a single platform, while strategically incorporating conversational AI, allows banks to reduce costs and optimize resources while increasing consistency across customer interactions.

Six Priorities for Successful Post-Merger Integration

Written by

Is your bank properly resourced for an efficient and effective post-merger integration?

Most banks head into post-merger integration with long to-do lists but find they are not equipped with the people, processes and technology integral to achieving valuable post-close results. Managing data, applications, and infrastructure to integrate the target company to drive the return your institution is expecting is critical to the merger’s success.

Depending on the scope and scale of each transaction, the first 120 days can vary greatly. Boards and executives should keep these six priorities in mind when planning the days following the merger for a smoother transition to full integration. A well-executed and communicated plan avoids delays, unnecessary costs and long-term unfavorable consequences.

Document everything, assume nothing. Memorialize the value creation strategy. What is the integration approach? Where is the value? And what’s the time frame to realize this value? When a bank defines these goals, it allows the integration team to set the right priorities. Communicate it and then communicate it again, and again.

Prioritize consistent communication between key players. The right hand needs to know what the left hand is doing. That does not mean constant meetings between every member of the integration team, but the moving pieces — for example, the merger and acquisition leaders, operations and the finance team — must regularly sync. Boards need to set an expectation for communication cadence early.

Agree on the integration approach. Is this acquisition an absorption, holding, value creation or integration? Agreeing on what the end game looks like creates a solid, common vision and strategy, quiets the noise around non-priorities for the near term and universally defines what success looks like in zero to 90 days, 90 to 120 days and beyond.

Realistically assess team skills and what’s missing. In most banks, everyone on the integration team has a day job and few have the experience or bandwidth to handle onetime tasks and niche elements of M&A, including core system conversions. For most banks, this may be the first time they’ve been through the process, or the last deal was years ago. If your institution doesn’t have time for training, consider contracting outside talent that regularly performs these types of transactions to handle your institution’s integration efficiently.

Core system conversion planning. Core system conversion readiness and availability of vendors is a key part of the post-integration plan. This component alone could demand a separate team of bank personnel from both organizations. Use this time to review your technology vendor contracts.

Understand (and respect) the culture. Every transaction will affect people: employees, customers, shareholders, and vendors. Recognize the impact, plan for it and communicate what you know when you know it. Focus on the value creation for each audience.

As early as possible, rightsize the project team with a trusted advisor that understands the nuances of the banking industry, has nimble processes, a broad range of knowledge and expertise, and most importantly — the ability to execute.

The information contained herein is general in nature and is not intended, and should not be construed, as legal, accounting, investment, or tax advice or opinion provided by CliftonLarsonAllen LLP (CliftonLarsonAllen) to the reader. CLA (CliftonLarsonAllen LLP) is an independent network member of CLA Global. See CLAglobal.com/disclaimer. Investment advisory services are offered through CliftonLarsonAllen Wealth Advisors, LLC, an SEC-registered investment advisor. 

CECL Model Validation Benefits Beyond Compliance

Written by

The current expected credit loss (CECL) adoption deadline of Jan. 1, 2023 has many financial institutions evaluating various models and assumptions. Many financial institutions haven’t had sufficient time to evaluate their CECL model performance under various stress scenarios that could provide a more forward-looking view, taking the model beyond just a compliance or accounting exercise.

One critical element of CECL adoption is model validation. The process of validating a model is not only an expectation of bank regulators as part of the CECL process — it can also yield advantages for institutions by providing crucial insights into how their credit risk profile would be impacted by uncertain conditions.

In the current economic environment, financial institutions need to thoroughly understand what an economic downturn, no matter how mild or severe, could do to their organization. While these outcomes really depend on what assumptions they are using, modeling out different scenarios using more severe assumptions will help these institutions see how prepared they may or may not be.

Often vendors have hundreds of clients and use general economic assumptions on them. Validation gives management a deeper dive into assumptions specific to their institution, creating an opportunity to assess their relevance to their facts and circumstances. When doing a validation, there are three main pillars: data and assumptions, modeling and stress testing.

Data and assumptions: Using your own clean and correct data is a fundamental part of CECL. Bank-specific data is key, as opposed to using industry data that might not be applicable to your bank. Validation allows for back-testing of what assumptions the bank is using for its specific data in order to confirm that those assumptions are accurate or identify other data fields or sources that may be better applied.

Modeling (black box): When you put data into a model, it does some evaluating and gives you an answer. That evaluation period is often referred to as the “black box.” Data and assumptions go into the model and returns a CECL estimate as the output. These models are becoming more sophisticated and complex, requiring many years of historical data and future economic projections to determine the CECL estimate. As a result of these complexities, we believe that financial institutions should perform a full replication of their CECL model. Leveraging this best practice when conducting a validation will assure the management team and the board that the model the bank has chosen is estimating its CECL estimate accurately and also providing further insight into its credit risk profile. By stripping the model and its assumptions down and rebuilding them, we can uncover potential risks and model limitations that may otherwise be unknown to the user.

Validations should give financial institutions confidence in how their model works and what is happening. Being familiar with the annual validation process for CECL compliance will better prepare an institution to answer all types of questions from regulators, auditors and other parties. Furthermore, it’s a valuable tool for management to be able to predict future information that will help them plan for how their institution will react to stressful situations, while also aiding them in future capital and budgeting discussions.

Stress testing: In the current climate of huge capital market swings, dislocations and interest rate increases, stress testing is vital. No one knows exactly where the economy is going. Once the model has been validated, the next step is for banks to understand how the model will behave in a worst-case scenario. It is important to run a severe stress test to uncover where the institution will be affected by those assumptions most. Management can use the information from this exercise to see the connections between changes and the expected impact to the bank, and how the bank could react. From here, management can gain a clearer picture of how changes in the major assumptions impact its CECL estimate, so there are no surprises in the future.

What to Look for in New Cash and Check Automation Technology

Written by

Today’s financial institutions are tasked with providing quality customer experiences across a myriad of banking channels. With the increased focus on digital and mobile banking, bankers are looking for ways to automate branch processes for greater cost and time savings.

This need should lead financial institution leaders exploring and implementing cash and check automation solutions. These solutions can improve accuracy, reduce handling time and labor, lower cost, deliver better forecasting and offer better visibility, establish enhanced control with custom reporting and provide greater security and compliance across all locations, making transactions seamless and streamlining the branch experience. However, as bank leaders begin to implement a cash and check automation solution, they must remember how a well-done integration should operate and support the bank in its reporting and measurement functions.

Ask Yourself: Is This the Right Solution?
When a bank installs a new cash or check automation solution, the question that should immediately come to mind for a savvy operations manager is: “How well is this integrated with my current teller software?” Regardless of what the solution is designed to do, the one thing that will make or break its effectiveness is whether it was programmed to leverage all the available functionality and to work seamlessly with the banks’ existing systems.

For some financial institutions, the question might be as simple as: “Is this device and its functionality supported by my software provider?” If not, the bank might be left to choose from a predetermined selection of similar products, which may or may not have the same capabilities and feature sets that they had in mind.

The Difference Between True Automation and Not
A well-supported and properly integrated cash automation solution communicates directly with the teller system. For example, consider a typical $100 request from a teller transaction to a cash recycler, a device responsible for accepting and dispensing cash. Perhaps the default is for the recycler to fulfill that request by dispensing five $20 notes. However, this particular transaction needs $50 bills instead. If your cash automation solution does not directly integrate with the teller system, the teller might have to re-enter the whole transaction manually, including all the different denominations. With a direct integration, the teller system and the recycler can communicate with each other and adjust the rest of the transaction dynamically. If the automation software is performing correctly, there is no separate keying process alongside the teller system into a module; the process is part of the normal routine workflow within the teller environment. This is a subtle improvement emblematic of the countless other things that can be done better when communication is a two-way street.

Automation Fueling Better Reporting and Monitoring
A proper and robust solution must be comprehensive: not just controlling equipment but having the ability to deliver on-demand auditing, from any level of the organization. Whether it is a branch manager checking on a particular teller workstation, or an operations manager looking for macro insights at the regional or enterprise level, that functionality needs to be easily accessible in real time.

The auditing and general visibility requirements denote why a true automation solution adds value. Without seamless native support for different types of recyclers, it’s not uncommon to have to close and relaunch the program any time you need to access a different set of machines. A less polished interface tends to lead to more manual interactions to bridge the gaps, which in turn causes delays or even mistakes.

Cash and check automation are key to streamlining operations in the branch environment. As more resources are expanding to digital and mobile channels, keeping the branch operating more efficiently so that resources can focus on the customer experience, upselling premium services, or so that resources can be moved elsewhere is vital. Thankfully, with the proper cash and check automation solutions, bank leaders can execute on this ideal and continue to improve both the customer experience and employee satisfaction.

Powering the Web of Partnerships to Make Innovation Easy

Written by

The right platform can help banks accelerate innovation, navigate the changing tech landscape and offer next generation solutions to customers. Public clouds are the platform to achieve these outcomes.

The cloud has moved from an ambiguous and amorphous buzzword to the platform that powers much of the innovation happening in the financial industry. Clouds, like Microsoft’s Azure, serve as the modern foundation banks, digital cores and other fintech firms use to build, develop, house and host their solutions. Participating in the cloud eco-system allows these players to seamlessly integrate with each other to expand their customer reach, take advantage of pre-built accelerators, and access third party fintech solutions. This ecosystem, with its multiple connection points, when housed on the same cloud means innovation can happen faster — at every level.

That accelerated innovation is crucial to small and mid-sized banks like Hawthorn Bank, a subsidiary of the Jefferson City, Missouri-based Hawthorn Bancshares. Banks must balance providing high-quality customer service and relevant products to customers while keeping up with nonbank and big bank competitors, but have limited staff and capacity for adding new tech projects and offerings. Hawthorn wanted to add more services and solutions for its business customers, like expedited online and in-person payments, which didn’t always fit into its traditional suite of offerings.

Hawthorn didn’t realize it at the time, but belonging to the right cloud network helped it address a number of their business customer’s pain points. The $1.7 billion bank relies on Jack Henry’s Banno digital banking platform, which now offers embedded invoicing and digital payment acceptance functionality through a partnership with Autobooks, as well as the full Autobooks small business solution as a seamless add-on to Banno platform users.

Both Autobooks and Jack Henry reside in Microsoft Azure, which made it easy for Banno to incorporate Autobooks as an additional service, as well as for Hawthorn to flip a switch to enable the service. And Autobooks proved to be a complementary, revenue-generating solution that Hawthorn Bank could bring to its business customers.

Examples like this show how coexisting in a cloud ecosystem can remove friction at all levels of development, deployment and integration. This has several benefits for banks and the end user. Being in the same cloud means that fintechs like Autobooks and service providers like Jack Henry can roll out new features and updates to their banks faster. It also helps banks control their third-, fourth- and fifth-party risks, which regulators have highlighted as a way to manage operational and cyber risk.

Selecting that cloud provider, however, starts with trusting the tech company as a secure partner who can meet regulatory expectations. Azure’s developers engage with more than 200 global financial regulators to meet compliance and security requirements, including hosting an annual summit to discuss new regulations and threats. Microsoft also accompanies regulators during audits at financial institutions. And Microsoft works with banks at the platform level to help them navigate projects with other partners, including audit, analytics and other digital banking overhauls and core integrations.

A relationship that close requires shared values — and increasingly, banks are noticing that some of their vendors may not be true partners. A number of large tech firms providing cloud, analytics and platform services to banks are also developing financial products on the side that could compete directly for the bank’s customers. Banks may find that their big-tech cloud provider doesn’t share their values or definition of partnership or compliance; they may treat private customer data differently. The ultimate risk for banks is that they partner with a firm that could one day become a competitor. Banks should look for cloud providers with a proven track record of staying focused on delivering value to the institution.

Community banks like Hawthorn are constantly looking for ways to serve customers better through innovative products and services, while keeping a close eye on costs and managing employee workloads. The right digital platform, powering their service providers and fintech partners alike, is key to unlocking and accelerating their digital transformation.

MOE Compensation Considerations, Challenges

Written by


Mergers of equals present unusual — and often, more challenging — compensation considerations for executive teams. The deal structure means both institutions will need to consider a variety of factors ahead of and after deal announcement, navigating them carefully to retain talent and incentivize integration. In this video, Todd Leone, partner at McLagan, a division of Aon’s Total Rewards, lays out how bank leaders involved in MOEs can use compensation to support bank culture and communicate with stakeholders.

  • How MOE Compensation Differs
  • Preparing Prior to Announcement
  • Telling Your Story

Data Considerations for Successful Deal Integration

Written by

Bank M&A activity is heating up in 2021; already, a number of banks have announced deals this year. Is your bank considering a combination with another institution?

Banks initiate mergers because of synergies between institutions, and to achieve economies of scale along with anticipated cost savings. Acquiring institutions typically intend to leverage the newly acquired customer base, but this can be difficult to execute upon without a data strategy.

Whether your bank is considering are buying or selling, it has never been more important to evaluate whether your data house is in order. Unresolved acquisition data challenges can result in poor customer experiences, inaccurate reporting and significant inefficiency after the merger closes. What causes these types of data challenges?

  • Both institutions possess massive volumes of data and multiple systems, while disparate systems prevent a holistic view of the combined entity. In a merger, the acquirer does not have access to the target’s data until legal close, and data is not consolidated until the core conversion is completed.
  • Systems are often antiquated, and it is difficult to access high-value customer data. Data integrity is often an issue that impedes anticipated synergies that could promote revenue generation.
  • Absence of enterprise knowledge or insight into target’s customer portfolio. This makes it difficult to identify growth opportunities and plan the strategy for the combined institution. It also creates a barrier to pivoting in the event a key relationship manager leaves the institution.

Baltimore-based Howard Bancorp has conducted five successful acquisitions in the last eight years. Steven Poynot, Howard’s CIO, recommends looking internally first and getting your house in order prior to any merger. “If you don’t understand all of the pieces of your bank’s data and portfolio well, how are you going to overlay your information in combination with the other bank’s data for reporting?”

Five solutions to merger data challenges include:

  • Create a data governance strategy before a deal is in the works. Identify the source and location of all pertinent data. Evaluate whether customer data is clean and up to date. Stale customer information such as old land line phone numbers and inaccurate email addresses yield roadblocks for relationship managers attempting to use data effectively. If your bank does identify data issues, implement a clean-up project based on a data governance policy framework. This initiative will benefit all banks, not just those looking to merge.
  • Develop an M&A integration plan that sets expectations and goals. Involve the CIO quickly and identify tools needed for the integration. Make a strategic determination of what data fields need to be integrated for reporting purposes. Acquire tools to allow for enterprise reporting and to highlight sales opportunities. Partner with vendors who understand the specific challenges of the banking industry.
  • Unify Disparate Systems. Prioritize data integration with a seamless transition for customers as the top priority. Plan for mapping and consolidating data along with reporting for the combined institution. Take product and data mapping beyond what is needed for the system mapping required for core integration. Use the information gleaned from the data to support product analytics, risk assessment, business development and cross selling strategies. The goal is to combine and integrate systems quickly to leverage the data as an asset.
  • Discourage Data Silos. Make data available and easily accessible to all who need it to do their jobs. Banking is a relationship business, and relationship managers need current customer relationship information readily available to them.
  • Analyze. Once the data has been consolidated, analyze and leverage it to identify opportunities that will drive revenue.

In a merger, the sooner that data is combined, the earlier decisions can be made from the information. As data silos are removed and data becomes easily accessible across the organization, data becomes an enterprise-wide asset that can be used effectively in the bank’s strategy.

Navigating Four Common Post-Signing Requests for Additional Information

Written by

Consolidation in the banking industry is heating up. Regulatory compliance costs, declining economies of scale, tiny net interest margins, shareholder liquidity demands, concerns about possible changes in tax laws and succession planning continue driving acquisitions for strategic growth.

Unlike many industries, where the signing and closing of an acquisition agreement may be nearly simultaneous, the execution of a definitive acquisition agreement in the bank space is really just the beginning of the acquisition process. Once the definitive agreement is executed, the parties begin compiling the information necessary to complete the regulatory applications that must be submitted to the appropriate state and federal bank regulatory agencies. Upon receipt and a quick review of a filed application, the agencies send an acknowledgement letter and likely a request for additional information. The comprehensive review begins under the relevant statutory factors and criteria found in the Bank Merger Act, Bank Holding Company Act or other relevant statutes or regulations. Formal review generally takes 30 to 60 days after an application is “complete.”

The process specifically considers, among other things: (1) competitive factors; (2) the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the company or companies and the banks concerned; (3) the supervisory records of the financial institutions involved; (4) the convenience and needs of the communities to be served and the banks’ Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) records; (5) the effectiveness of the banks in combating money laundering activities; and (6) the extent to which a proposal would result in greater or more concentrated risks to the stability of the United States banking or financial system.

During this process, the applicant and regulator will exchange questions, answers, and clarifications back and forth in order to satisfy the applicable statutory factors or decision criteria towards final approval of the transaction. Each of the requests for additional information and clarifications are focused on making sure that the application record is complete. Just because information or documents are shared during the course of the supervisory process does not mean that the same information or documents will not be requested during the application process. The discussions and review of materials during the supervisory process is separate from the “application record,” so it helps bank management teams to be prepared to reproduce information already shared with the supervisory teams. A best practice for banks is to document what happens during the supervisory process so they have it handy in case something specific is re-requested as part of an application.

Recently, we consistently received a number of requests for additional information that include questions not otherwise included in the standard application forms. Below, we review four of the more common requests.

1. Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic. Regulators are requesting additional information focused on the impact of the coronavirus pandemic. Both state and federal regulators are requesting a statement on the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic that discusses the impact on capital, asset quality, earnings, liquidity and the local economy. State and federal agencies are including a request to discuss trends in delinquency loan modifications and problem loans when reviewing the impact on asset quality, and an estimate for the volume of temporary surge deposits when reviewing the impact on liquidity.

2. Additional, Specific Financial Information. Beyond the traditional pro forma balance sheets and income statements that banks are accustomed to providing as part of the application process, we are receiving rather extensive requests for additional financial information and clarifications. Two specific requests are particular noteworthy. First, a request for financial information around potential stress scenarios, which we are receiving for acquirors and transactions of all sizes.

Second, and almost as a bolt-on to the stress scenario discussion, are the requests related to capital planning. These questions focus on the acquiror’s plan where financial targets are not met or the need to raise capital arises due to a stressed environment. While not actually asking for a capital plan, the agencies have not been disappointed to receive one in response to this line of inquiry.

3. List of Shareholders. Regardless of whether the banks indicate potential changes in the ownership structure of an acquiror or whether the consideration is entirely cash from the acquiror, agencies (most commonly the Federal Reserve), are requesting a pro forma shareholder listing for the acquiror. Specifically, this shareholder listing should break out those shareholders acting in concert that will own, control, or hold with power to vote 5% or more of an acquiring BHC. Consider this an opportunity for both the acquiror and the Federal Reserve to make sure control filings related to the acquiror are up to date.

4. Integration. Finally, requests for additional information from acquirors have consistently included a request for a discussion on integration of the target, beyond the traditional due diligence line of inquiry included in the application form. The questions focus on how the acquiror will effectively oversee the integration of the target, given the increase in assets size. Acquirors are expected to include a discussion of plan’s to bolster key risk management functions, internal controls, and policies and procedures. Again, we are receiving this request regardless of the size of the acquiror, target or transaction, even in cases where the target is less than 10% of the size of the acquiror.

These are four of the more common requests for additional information that we have encountered as deal activity heats up. As consolidation advances and more banks file applications, staff at the state and federal agencies may take longer to review and respond to applications matters. We see these common requests above as an opportunity to provide more material in the initial phase of the application process, in order to shorten the review timeframe and back and forth as much as possible. In any event, acquirors should be prepared to respond to these requests as part of navigating the regulatory process post-signing.

Overcoming Cultural Challenges In M&A

Written by

Culture is fundamental to the success of the deal, so it’s top of mind for bank leadership teams working with Richard Hall, managing director for banking and financial services at BKM Marketing. In this video, he explains why transparent, candid communication is key to retaining customers and employees, and shares his advice for post-pandemic strategic planning.

  • Ensuring a Successful Integration
  • Retaining Customers and Employees
  • Formulating a Strategy for 2021

Pandemic Challenges, Strengthens Bank’s Deal Integration

Written by

One bank found that the Covid-19 pandemic actually accelerated its deal integration, creating a stronger pro-forma institution to serve clients after overcoming a number of unexpected hurdles.

The coronavirus crisis has thrown a wrench in bank mergers and acquisitions, challenging everything from due diligence to pricing to regulatory and shareholder approvals. Only two bank deals were announced in May, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence; potential buyers and sellers seem to be focusing on assisting customers while they wait for a normalized environment. But Sandy Spring Bancorp found itself with no choice but to adapt its deal integration with Rockville, Maryland-based Revere Bank, even as both banks shifted to a remote work environment.

“For us, it’s very important to understand that not just the successful integration, but a successful acquisition is centered around finding the right partner to begin with,” says Sandy Spring President and CEO Daniel Schrider. “And it’s really important … to find an organization that either complements what we do or provides access to a different market that maybe we’re not in, but has a shared vision around client relationships.”

The Revere team was well-known to Sandy Spring, with executives serving on their state bank association as well as competing against each other for local deals. After talking for about 18 months, they announced their merger agreement in September 2019; the deal pushed the Olney, Maryland-based bank above $10 billion in assets.

For months, deal integration proceeded as expected. The banks kicked off internal communication campaigns to keep both groups informed of the timeline, process and upcoming changes, and increase comradery before merger close. They formed 20 cross-functional teams of employees from both companies that tackled specific integration-related tasks or objectives, which met through mid-February.

“Both companies had tremendous first quarters. We were very excited about bringing the two organizations in a new structure and pulling the trigger on a number of things, based upon our ability to be together,” he says. “Then obviously, things came to a screeching halt.”

Once the pandemic closed physical offices, Sandy Spring used video and electronic communication to continue integration work. The pro-forma executive team created welcome videos featuring Schrider, along with digital and virtual orientations, instead of the usual face-to-face interactions.

But the integration encountered yet another unexpected challenge: the Paycheck Protection Program. The Small Business Administration loan program began accepting applications on April 3, two days after the Revere acquisition closed.

“All of a sudden, two companies were faced with trying to solve the problems that many of their clients are having,” Schrider says. “That actually accelerated our integration.”

The newly combined teams, which pride themselves on being relationship focused, worked together to fulfill the unsolicited loan demand. They hosted daily PPP calls and involved more than 200 employees to process applications from customers at both banks. The undertaking combatted any inertia they may have felt about actually combining and functioning as one company.

“In a strange way, we’re probably in a better place today than we would have been, absent a pandemic, from the standpoint of being together,” he says. “Even though we’re not physically together.”

Sandy Spring believes picking a bank partner with similar values and staying focused on its strategy helped the pro-forma institution navigate deal-specific challenges. For instance, the all-stock deal for Revere originally carried a price tag of $460.7 million when it was announced in September; at close, it was valued at $287 million based on Sandy Spring’s quarter-end stock price, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence. Schrider says potential buyers and sellers should avoid fixating on absolute deal price, and instead consider the relative value and potential upside of the combined entity’s shares.

So far, the only integration activities that the pandemic has paused are reorganization efforts the bank believes are best done in person, including the planned appointment of Revere co-CEO Ken Cook as executive vice president. The systems conversion and branch consolidation are still on track for the third quarter. Until then, the pro-forma institution will continue to integrate while serving clients during the pandemic.

“It’s been a wild ride but a good one,” Schrider says.