Proceedings of World Business, Finance and Management Conference
14 - 15 December 2015, Rendezvous Grand Hotel, Auckland, New Zealand
ISBN: 978-1-922069-91-7
The paper reviews the entry of Australian banks into the wealth management sector and its success within the last ten years. While we look at the Australian banking sector in general our main focus is on the four major banks. Secondary data is used at two levels; qualitative information available in research reports, presentations, annual reports and quantitative data available in annual reports and databases.
Reported internal and external growth strategies are evaluated against the success of wealth management initiatives. Constraints imposed by international and national regulatory environment and their potential drag on short, medium and long term profitability of banks are analysed using published information to address our research question: has the foray into wealth management by banks increased the returns for the shareholders? Finally, we identify strengths and weaknesses of strategies implemented to explore creative destruction-driven alternative strategies for the future.
JEL Codes: G1, G2 and G21
Banks’ interest in wealth management increased significantly in the 1990’s. The increase in High Net Worth (HNW) individuals worldwide and a strong run of economic growth were key drivers of this push into wealth management by the banks. Switzerland, for example, has private banking activities that account for about half of the banking sector’s total contribution to the economy (Geiger and Hurzeler
2003). Economies of scale of large wealth management divisions with significant asset bases have helped banks to deliver good profits (Burgstaller and Cocca 2010).
In Australia, with an ageing population, wealth management increasingly became an important area of profitability for banks. But the results have been mixed. The focus of this paper is the strategies used to enter into wealth management by the
Australian Big 4 Banks and success or failure of such strategies.
The literature focusses on different aspects and trends of banking in general and wealth management in particular. The KPMG Financial Institutions Performance
Summary (2015) provides an analysis of the first half 2015 performance results of the Big 4 Australian Banks. Although all the Banks indicated a slowing profitability due to “biting capital regulation”, it was highlighted that wealth management earnings grew strongly, supported by a rising stock market and net inflows (KPMG 2015).
However, it has frequently been suggested that profitability derived from wealth management is closely correlated with economic cycles. In Boston Consulting
Group’s report by Rolander et al (2002), it was stated that 2001, a year of economic downturn was a “watershed year” for private bankers and wealth management. The focus of this paper was to highlight the keys to profitability through wealth management.
________________________________________________________________
*Dr Shantha P Yahanpath, Sydney Business School, University of Wollongong, shanthay@uow.edu.au
**Shan P Yahanpath, MBA Student, Sydney Business School, University of Wollongong, shanpyahanpath@gmail.com

Proceedings of World Business, Finance and Management Conference
14 - 15 December 2015, Rendezvous Grand Hotel, Auckland, New Zealand
ISBN: 978-1-922069-91-7
A report by Deloitte AG (2009) followed a similar idea, highlighting the ways to “win in Wealth Management” especially after the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) slowdown.
It focusses in particular on the decrease in profitability of Swiss-based Wealth
Management Organisations, and suggests ways in which Wealth Managers can derive profitability in the post-GFC era. Both articles highlight that wealth management is profitable, but has been severely impacted by global economic downturn. Burgstaller and Cocca (2010), look closely at how profitability, efficiency and growth in wealth management are determined through study of the High Net-
Worth hubs of Switzerland and Liechtenstein. In the current economic environment, it has been highlighted in Deloitte’s Wealth Management Centre Ranking by Kobler et al (2015) that wealth management has performed quite well globally with increased International Market Volume (IMV), driven by economic growth and positive capital market performance.
Similarly, improved wealth management growth for the Big 4 Banks in Australia has been reported in Price Waterhouse Cooper’s Major Banks Analysis (2014) due to strong equity market performance. Although there have been overall increasing profitability and growth in the Big 4 Banks, more recently the wealth management divisions have underperformed. Regulatory burden has been a drag on profitability.
The review of advice is covered extensively in Australian Securities and Investments
Commission (ASIC) media releases. These releases state NAB Wealth and
Westpac’s BT refunding wealth management customers in response to ASIC action.
Similarly, earlier in 2015, Macquarie Investment Management refunded clients after
ASIC had reviewed internal system errors (Rose and Moulakis 2015).
We employ a two-stage qualitative and quantitative methodology based on secondary data. Stage 1 is a high level analysis of wealth management within the banking sector focussing on strategic insights into impact on performance of banks.
More specifically we rely on the following categories of qualitative information:

Technical reports published by consultants;

Reports initiated by regulators;
 Banks’ responses to regulatory reviews;

Press releases;

Literature review articles;
Stage 2 focuses on quantitative analysis based on published accounts and databases. Here our focus is on:

Annual reports;

Analyst briefings;

Specific quantitative information reported in published reports;

Databases.
In our first stage we start with a broader set of reports on banking and wealth management and then focus on wealth management strategy articles and reports.
Then we use the pointers developed in Stage 1 to focus on aggregate accounting information and attempt to separate accounting information specific to wealth management in banks.
We pose the following research questions related to our main research question: has the foray into wealth management increased the returns for the shareholders and if so is it due to economic cycle driven asset growth or due to strategic benefits derived from wealth management sector?

Proceedings of World Business, Finance and Management Conference
14 - 15 December 2015, Rendezvous Grand Hotel, Auckland, New Zealand
ISBN: 978-1-922069-91-7

How significant is the differentiation of different levels of success among banks?

Did early entry into wealth management by some banks give them a first mover advantage?

Did regulatory burden hinder growth and profitability?
The Big 4 Banks, except for Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA), have separated their core brand from their Wealth Management brand. Westpac have a share in BT Wealth Management in Australia. Although Westpac have explicitly stated that “Wealth Management is in our DNA” (Westpac 2013), it appears that
Westpac are keeping an arm’s length from BT Wealth Management and, more recently, reduced the investment in BT Wealth Management (Taylor 2015). ANZ similarly acquired ING’s Wealth management business and rebranded it as One
Path making it their own but preserving its autonomy (ANZ 2014). Likewise, for NAB, they own MLC, but keep it as a separate brand renowned for its expertise in Wealth
Management (NAB 2014).
But in the case of CBA, they have made Wealth Management truly their own, integrating Commonwealth Bank Wealth Management and Commonwealth Financial
Planning into their core branding. They also have other brands under Wealth management umbrella including Financial Wisdom and Colonial First State, but these are additional to the core branding (CBA 2014b).
The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) established the
Wealth Management Project in October 2014 to lift the standards of the major financial service providers, that is the big 4 Banks and AMP, the financial services giant (Professional Planner 2015). The ASIC Financial Service Review Committee made a number of recommendations related to financial services sector. One of the most important was recommendation for the government to establish an independent inquiry into the misconduct of advisers and planners within CBA Financial Planning
(Recommendation 7). ASIC were specific in stating that they would thoroughly examine the actions of the Commonwealth Bank in relation to this issue (ASIC
2015a).
Furthermore, ASIC stated that they would identify any conduct which may amount to a breach of laws or professional standards. Recommendation 7 also suggested the review of all client files affected or likely to be affected by the inappropriate advice and determine whether the compensation processes and the amounts provided by
CBA to its clients were fair and appropriate (ASIC 2015a).
Although Commonwealth Bank has a greater degree of control over their Wealth
Management arm compared to Westpac, they have to face a greater burden on their reputation when misconduct has occurred in the Financial Planning Division. A
Financial Planning is integral part of the same Commonwealth Bank brand, the whole CBA brand is subject to brand depletion. Consequently, CBA’s results have been adversely affected by this regulatory drag (ASIC 2015a).
Recommendation 11 was an extension of Recommendation 7 which went on further recommending that ASIC keeps a close watch of other financial advice businesses that have “recently been a source of concern”. This is an effort to ensure that ASICs initial concerns with misconduct within financial planning/wealth management are addressed (ASIC 2015a).

Proceedings of World Business, Finance and Management Conference
14 - 15 December 2015, Rendezvous Grand Hotel, Auckland, New Zealand
ISBN: 978-1-922069-91-7
ASIC has worked closely with these financial service providers to identify and remediate non-compliant advice, as well as enforce regulatory outcomes against
Licensees and Advisers. This has led to large scale review programs being developed in collaborati on with ASIC such as CBA’s Open Advice Review Program and recently the Financial Advice Customer Response Initiative of National Australia
Bank, to review and remediate customers who may have received non-compliant
Advice (Danckert 2015). Although these programs may restore integrity of the wealth management brand, they come at a considerable cost to the banks. For example
CBA’s profitability fell by 18% from financial year 2014 to financial year 2015, largely due to the costs of the Open Advice Review program. The reasons for this fall are further highlighted by CBA “The major driver of expense growth was growing regulatory, compliance and remediation costs, including those associated with a number of legislative reforms (Future of Financial Advice, Stronger Super), provisioning for the costs of the Advice Review program and ongoing regulatory engagement” (CBA 2015). It shows the impact of tighter regulations on the shortterm profitability of the largest bank in Australia. ANZ, on a slightly smaller scale, organised remediation for those customers that did not receive the Prime Access service as part of their financial advice. This cost the bank an estimated $30 million
(Riskinfo 2015).
ASIC has also worked with Macquarie Investment Management to remediate clients affected by systems errors (ASIC 2015b). ASIC is determined to lift the standards of
Wealth Management, in a country where the banks have been particularly robust despite the shaky market conditions in the post-GFC era. Although regulatory compliance and remediation has taken its tolls on the short-term profitability of the
Big 4 Banks, wealth management presents long term opportunities for profitable growth.
Switzerland is seen as the world leader in Wealth Management. A majority of banks in Switzerland offer wealth management services to wealthy private and institutional investors (Geiger and Hurzeler 2003). As mentioned earlier, private banking activities make up around half of the banking sectors total contribution in
Switzerland, emphasising just how important banking on Wealth Management is in
Switzerland. In a study by Burgstaller and Cocca (2010) on Wealth Management in
Switzerland and Liechtenstein, the key observations were:
1. Private banks which were successful in attracting new funds had greater potential to increase profit margins.
2. Those banks specialised in private banking charge relatively higher fees, which is consistent with the observation that the more diversified banks charge lower fees in order to gain market share.
The global trend, even before change in regulation in Australia, was the shift from commission based pricing to asset-based pricing. This was partially due to the economic downturn post September 11 2001; asset-based pricing was implemented to offset the falling commission revenues (Roland et al 2002). The importance of wealth managers to ensure that the advice they provide is priced appropriately is paramount in tough economic times.
However, if we take away the influence of economic conditions, we can see the rationale of the move to asset-based pricing. In Australia, The Future of Financial
Advice (FOFA) reforms introduced by the Commonwealth Government were strongly

Proceedings of World Business, Finance and Management Conference
14 - 15 December 2015, Rendezvous Grand Hotel, Auckland, New Zealand
ISBN: 978-1-922069-91-7 supported by the Financial Planning Association of Australia (FPA). One of the key recommendations under FOFA was for clients, rather than product providers to pay for the financial advice they receive (Kaplan 2014). This was a move away from commission-based pricing. FPA believed that the commission-based pricing stimulated a conflict of interest in that the commission based prices tend to maximise the income of the financial planners.
The commission-based pricing, although lucrative for planners and wealth managers, at times of economic prosperity, had its inherent problems for Wealth
Management organisations. In the case of Commonwealth Bank Financial Planning and indeed other bank-based Wealth Managers globally, some planners had taken advantage of their customers in order to get maximum possible commissions. This tempted planners to engage in unethical conduct, and in the long run, this has caused significant problems for Wealth Management organisations, both in terms of management time and remediation costs (Promontory 2014).
Wealth Management organisations have had to take responsibility for the misconduct of their planners. This was explicitly stated by CBA after the misconduct of advisers (CBA 2014b). They (CBA) stated that internal deficiencies contributed to those advisers failing the customers. Among these reasons were; organisational structures that did not clearly separate product and advice functions or business line and compliance functions, remuneration arrangements, which were commissionbased, allowed unethical advisers to attain personal reward by neglecting serving the interests of their customers; and finally the quality assurance systems in some cases did not identify patterns of bad advice and allow ed the poor advice to go “under the radar” for too long (May 2015). This highlights the perils of the once ludicrous commission-driven Wealth Management industry. In an industry which is supposed to be highly customer-centric, the customer focus was largely ignored in pursuit of high commissions. Although largely profitable in the short run, this was desirable only for banks which are interested in quick profits.
Interesting to note, the McKinsey Global Wealth Management Survey had no focus on the Australian Wealth Management market. This is due to the fact that Australia was not in the top 20 countries for High Net Worth (HNW) Individuals. The report highlights that wealth management is one of the most attractive businesses in the financial services sector and produced above GDP-growth revenue growth, typically high profitability with low capital requirements and sufficient liquidity (McKinsey
2014).
Global profitability was found to be converging in 2013 to 80 basis points worldwide, except for the Middle East, which had 110bp, showing how lucrative the United Arab
Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Qatar are as markets for Wealth Managers, driven by growth in the number of high net worth individuals. In 2018, all three of these nations are predicted to be in the top 20 HNW countries. For Wealth managers to prosper in this market, it is essential for local private banks to invest in their capabilities and products, as the Middle East Market enjoys high margins and solid economic growth.
The local banks will have the advantage over foreign private banks with an in depth knowledge of their customer base (McKinsey 2014).
Western Europe has been a slowing down market, but the market is increasingly competitive, experiencing a regulatory tightening and the small scale. This is similar to the Australian experience. The keys to Wealth Management success in this region are the need to digitise to survive, a move to offshoring of some functions and shifting advisory and pricing models (McKinsey 2014). Creative destruction in wealth management is taking shape to deliver better service at lower costs.
North America, on the other hand had a market heavily driven by strong equity market growth. In Australia, the similar trend has occurred; strong equity market

Proceedings of World Business, Finance and Management Conference
14 - 15 December 2015, Rendezvous Grand Hotel, Auckland, New Zealand
ISBN: 978-1-922069-91-7 growth has buoyed the growth of Wealth Management. In North America, profitability jumped 26% in 2013. Also, asset growth has been strong, with increasing client affluence. The key implication for this market is growth, as the priority for most private banks, which is capturing new wealthy customers (McKinsey 2014).
Asia, as an extremely large market is enjoying solid growth, as the number of millionaires is growing significantly and they are demanding more complex products, with a strong risk appetite for alternative assets. The key factors to focus on for success in the region are digitisation, having a local affiliate in China who knows the customer base well and having a special focus on entrepreneur, who have specialised financial planning needs (McKinsey 2014).
Latin America is a very attractive market, with a growing number of millionaires in
Brazil and Mexico. Also, a lower cost margin compared with other regions has meant their profit margins are stronger than the rest of the world, except for the Middle
East. Particularly favourable for the Wealth Management sector in the region is high interest rates. Brazil and Mexico dominate the private banking market (66%), but typically have customers who favour fixed income instruments. The key focus areas for success are preparing for increased competition and strengthening international product and offshore offering to make the Latin American market more attractive for investment (McKinsey 2014).
How does Australia compare with the world? Although Australia and Oceania were not included in this study, Australia certainly has experienced some similar trends.
Australia has a rather competitive Wealth Management sector with increased demand for superannuation-related products. Also, with Australia being a significant funds management hub, the banks have been increasingly competitive in their
Financial Planning product offerings. Also, the cost margins in Australia are on the higher side by world standards, so it is a challenge to maintain profit margins. The increased regulatory burden has clearly increased costs especially for bank-based
Wealth Managers.
In embracing the profitability of Wealth Management, the banks have hoped to generate a higher proportion of non-interest income. However, only National
Australia Bank has a higher proportion of non-interest income when compared to their interest-based income in 2014. The success of MLC as a reputable name in
Wealth Management is a likely contributor to this figure.
Bank
Table 1
– Proportion of Interest vs. Non-Interest Income
Proportion of InterestProportion of non-Interest
NAB (National Australia
Bank) based income (FY14)
46.94% income (FY14)
53.06%
CBA (Commonwealth
Bank)
57.07% 42.93%
WBC (Westpac)
ANZ (Australia and New
66.84%
67.25%
Zealand Bank)
Source: NAB, CBA, WBC and ANZ 2014 Annual Reports
33.16%
32.75%
Westpac and ANZ in particular have a much higher profitability from their traditional core banking activities. This however, is only the most recent snapshot and these figures also include other non-interest income.

Proceedings of World Business, Finance and Management Conference
14 - 15 December 2015, Rendezvous Grand Hotel, Auckland, New Zealand
ISBN: 978-1-922069-91-7
It is interesting to note that the Big 4 Banks had strong performance in the first half of financial year “Despite weaker insurance earnings wealth management earnings grew strongly”. This was heavily influenced by strong Australian stock market performance and net inflows (KPMG 2015).
Consistent with the statement that most of their profitability comes from traditional core banking, both ANZ and Westpac recorded declines in non-interest income in first half of FY 15. Commonwealth and National Australia Bank had strong gains in non-interest income, somewhat reflecting their strong focus on Wealth Management activity (KPMG 2015).
Overall Insurance and Wealth Management income had increased, and KPMG noted that Wealth management brands of the Big 4 banks gave a resilient annuity-based income stream. In 1H15, ANZ and NAB were the star performers. ANZ in particular reported an increase in both insurance and wealth management incomes (KPMG
2015).
An analysis of the Annual Reports provides a more in-depth picture of Wealth
Management performance for the big 4 banks. Some key observations are made.
One of the most prominent is CBA’s fall in Wealth Management profit from FY 2014 to FY 2015. The fall from $789 million to $650 million can be largely attributed to the regulatory requirements for financial advice in Australia, dictated by ASIC and the expense of the Open Advice Review program which is arguably the most comprehensive financial advice review program in Australia (CBA 2015). This however is an important step for CBA to maintain their reputation in Wealth
Management; unethical advice provided by some advisers left customers in disadvantaged positions. Also of concern is operating expenses to total operating income, which stands at 73.4% and up from 66.9% in the previous year. This is in stark contrast to banking sector cost to income ratio of around 40%. This can be attributed to the costs of the large scale Open Advice Review Program, as well as the responsibility Commonwealth Bank has taken on by having their very own wealth management division. The impact of the GFC can clearly be seen in 2009, whereby profitability fell by 30.25%. This is expected, with the value of investments falling
(CBA 2011).
In the case of Westpac, BT Financial Group (Wealth Management), experienced strong profitability post GFC, and like CBA, exceptional profitability in FY2014.
However, Westpac also has had to run remediation with the assistance of ASIC. This has been at a smaller scale compared to CBA, but it still has affected profitability
(ASIC, 2013). Operating expenses to total income has been considerably lower than
Commonwealth Wealth Management for a 10-year period and has stayed close to
50% (Westpac 2014). BT Financial Group has kept these operating costs under control, sugg esting that there could be a clear benefit of Westpac’s strategy to keep a degree of separation between their core business and Wealth management. The ability of BT Financial Group to focus on wealth management has proven effective in keeping expenses low in the Wealth Management field. This is one advantage of a bank making an acquisition of a wealth management organisation that already has a strong reputation in the Wealth Management sector. A very interesting observation is that despite the GFC, BT’s profitability has followed a growth trend. This could also be att ributed to BT’s decades of experience in wealth management; although it is part of Westpac, BT is still its own entity (Westpac 2014).
In our research, only CBA and Westpac had a clear demarcation of profitability attributable to the Wealth Management division of the company. This made

Proceedings of World Business, Finance and Management Conference
14 - 15 December 2015, Rendezvous Grand Hotel, Auckland, New Zealand
ISBN: 978-1-922069-91-7 comparison that much more difficult, but we can observe how both NAB and ANZ have approached Wealth Management. ANZ groups financial planning and private banking under the umbrella Personal (ANZ 2014), whereas NAB provides their financial planning advice both under the NAB Wealth Management and MLC (NAB
2014).
Despite the increasing regulatory burden for banks (which will eat into short-term profitability significantly), banking on Wealth Management is not necessarily a failed strategy for banks. Although the actions of some financial advisers have been unethical and the remediation programs are costly, it is essential that they continue their Wealth Management activities, as it will continue to be a growing business in
Australia. This is the case, as the ageing population of Australia is becoming more financially savvy and demand more tailored advice in planning their superannuation.
Also, the relative robustness of Australian banks by world standards has given them a strong financial position to invest in their non-core, but important activities.
Furthermore, given the Superannuation Guarantee (SG) in Australia over 9% of salaries will regularly go into the financial planning and wealth management sector.
In answering our key research question we can conclude that while the foray into wealth management by banks has the potential to increase shareholder returns, thus far the results have been mixed. The increase in revenue has been mainly due to economic cycle driven asset growth. Effective strategies to lighten the regulatory burden will help in increasing shareholder returns from wealth management.
In answering the question of differentiation between the levels of success we can conclude that it varies among banks depending on the chosen strategy. It appears that integration of wealth management into banks have not been as successful as keeping the wealth management division as a separate entity. For example, CBA with their integration strategy appears to have not performed well in the wealth management sector. In contrast, Westpac and NAB in particular have benefitted from keeping the wealth management divisions separate. Embracing this strategy of
“arm’s length”, new Westpac CEO has abolished the bank’s Australian Financial
Services division and made BT Financial Group report directly to him (Taylor 2015).
With regards to the question of early entry of NAB into wealth management by acquiring MLC appears to have given them a first mover advantage but late entry by
Westpac by acquiring BT Financial Group has not deterred them from making headway in wealth management. ANZ as a late entrant has also performed reasonably well. Therefore it is not the timing of or the time in the wealth management sector but the strategies crafted and implemented appear to be the key to the success.
With regards to the effects of regulatory burden we can conclude that it has cost the banks in terms of management time, compliance and remediation. While CBA has suffered significantly, most other banks have also been adversely affected from the regulatory burden. Although there are no easy solutions to overcome regulatory burden careful selection of staff, good training, supervision and incentives for quality business writing will be important to improve the long term profitability.
ANZ, (2014), 2014 Annual Report , Full Financial Year Report, Australia and New
Zealand Banking Corporation.

Proceedings of World Business, Finance and Management Conference
14 - 15 December 2015, Rendezvous Grand Hotel, Auckland, New Zealand
ISBN: 978-1-922069-91-7
ASIC, (2013), BT to refund customers after review of fees disclosed and charged ,
ASIC Media Release 13-159 MR 1 July, 2013.
ASIC, (2015a), List of Recommendations, Australian Securities and Investments
Commission, www.asic.gov.au
.
ASIC, (2015b), Macquarie Investment Management to refund clients after review of system errors , ASIC Media Release 15-150 MR 17 June, 2015.
Burgstaller, J and Cocca, T.D, 2010, Profitability, efficiency and growth in the private banking industry: evidence from Switzerland and Liechtenstein, Banks and Bank
Systems, Volume 5, Issue 4.
CBA, (2011), Annual Report, 2011, Full Financial Year Report, Commonwealth Bank of Australia.
CBA, (2014a), Annual Report, 2014, Full Financial Year Report, Commonwealth
Bank of Australia.
CBA, (2014b), Submission: Senate Economics References Committee: Inquiry into the scrutiny of financial advice, CBA Submission to Senate.
CBA, (2015), Annual Report, 2015, Full Financial Year Report, Commonwealth Bank of Australia.
Danckert, S, (2015), National Australia Bank sets up compensation program over dodgy advice , The Sydney Morning Herald, October 21, 2015.
Deloitte AG, (2009), Winning in Wealth Management Strategies for building profitable business operating models, Deloitte Switzerland report.
Geiger, H and Hürzeler, (2003), The Transformation of Swiss Private Banking,
Working Paper, Swiss Banking Institute of the University of Zurich.
Kaplan, (2014), Foundations of Financial Planning Part B:Financial Planning, Kaplan
Education Pty Ltd.
Kobler, D, Hauber, F and Bucherer, S, (2015), The Deloitte Wealth Management
Centre Ranking 2015: Capturing Value in a shifting environment , A Deloitte
Switzerland Report, 2 nd
Edition.
KPMG (2015), Major Australian Banks: Half Year Results 2015, KPMG Financial
Institutions Performance Summary, May 2015 .
May, J (2015), Regulation, remediation drive CBA expenses , Financial Observer, 13
August 2015.
McKinsey (2014), McKinsey Global Wealth Management Survey 2014: An attractive sector in transition, McKinsey Banking Practice Report.
NAB, (2014), Annual Financial Report 2014, Full Financial Year Report, National
Australia Bank...
Price Waterhouse Coopers, (2014 ), Innovating for Growth: Major Banks Analysis,
Price Waterhouse Coopers White Paper, November 2014.
Professional Planner, (2015), ASIC Update on Wealth Management Project-
Investigation into charging of advice fees without providing advice, Professional
Planner, April 16, 2015.
Promontory, (2014), Commonwealth Bank Open Advice Review program Initial
Report, Promontory Report on CBA Open Advice Review Program, 19 December
2014.
RiskInfo, (2015), ANZ Latest Bank to Report Advice Issues, RiskInfo, April 21 2015.
Rolander, J, de Juniac, C, and Dyer, A, (2002), Hidden Treasure: Finding the Keys to Profitability in Wealth Management, The Boston Consulting Group.
Sally, R and Moullakis J (2015), ASIC Makes Macquarie Refund Another $5.5 m to
Clients, Sydney Morning Herald, 17 June 2015, www.smh.com.au
Taylor, M, (2015), New Westpac CEO changes reporting lines, Money Management,
2 February 2015 www.moneymanagement.com.au
.

Proceedings of World Business, Finance and Management Conference
14 - 15 December 2015, Rendezvous Grand Hotel, Auckland, New Zealand
ISBN: 978-1-922069-91-7
Westpac, (2013), Full Year 2013 Financial Result, Westpac Financial Performance
Presentation, 3 March 2013.
Westpac, (2014), 2014 Westpac Group Annual Report , Full Financial Year Report,
Westpac Banking Corporation.