I have always been slightly distrustful of polls either at the political ballot box or in financial magazines. Perhaps it may be due to spending some years of my early childhood in Africa where voters were openly encouraged to change their minds with the help of three main inducements which were palm wine, beer and fistfuls of nearly worthless Nigerian or Ghanaian notes. During elections my father's driver, a towering but gentle Ibo, was permanently so wide-eyed and legless that a relief had to be hired. When my father finally asked him for whom he had voted, he could never remember.

But that was in the late 1950s when much of the world map was still coloured in pink. Political elections have become less corrupt in most countries and financial publications now have regular polls which have been mastered to a fine art and extensively researched. Some of the investment banks and financial institutions listed in the polls may bitch and groan but that is generally because they don't like their rankings. However, as I continually remind the losers, there is absolutely no point in throwing all your toys out of the pram and threatening not to join in the next game because customers read the polls from top to bottom and, without customers, where would their business be? I was particularly interested in the annual "Poll of Polls' compiled by Euromoney and published in the January edition. The results seemed especially relevant as they included a combination of bond and equities rather than splitting the two business sectors. The polls specifically asked participants to name the best houses in three separate functions – underwriting, trading and advisory. Were there many surprises? Yes, there were several but rather than concentrating on the winners, I also looked at those houses for whom the poll results must have been a great disappointment. Because the customers who sent in their votes have such a collective influence, the message which they are sending cannot be ignored. Of all of the shock results in the three polls, I was surprised principally by the dismal rankings of Commerzbank. In previous Financial News columns I have discussed Commerzbank at some length and perhaps not always in the most favourable terms. Time was, and not so long ago, when Commerzbank could hold its head up high in the Euromarkets and could walk shoulder to shoulder with Dresdner Kleinwort Benson. Now it is being trounced by DrKB and it can't see Deutsche Bank for dust. What went wrong? Normally you would line up the senior operating managers (Vorstand members are untouchable) and say "off with their heads'. However, despite the fact that Commerzbank has been left standing with its feet in cement by the two main German competitors, both its debt and equity capital markets divisions not only make good money but are a major contributor to group profits. The Vorstand member responsible for international investment banking, Klaus Patig, has every reason to feel satisfied with the division's performance in 1999. Although Commerzbank is not renowned for its compensation generosity compared with the main US houses, I understand that bonus payments are expected to be the best for many years. If Commerzbank's international investment banking group is cruising along smoothly and making money, why doesn't it score more Brownie points with customers? The hard-driving Mehmet Dalman, who now controls fixed income as well as equity and has become a celebrated Euromarket figure in a very short time, is no doubt looking for answers to that question. Take debt capital markets first, as this is the sector which is the most immediate case for treatment. The main problem with Commerzbank in bonds is that the division has had a succession of mediocre managers and has never been able to retain the handful of serious professionals who could really make a difference to the business. The most recent head of fixed income, Regis Fraisse, resigned on New Year's Eve after rumours of a trading loss in long-dated Pfandbriefen zero coupon bonds and having been superseded by Dalman. Should Fraisse have been held accountable for Commerzbank's steady decline in fixed income? He might not see it that way but to me he always seemed to be an unlikely choice to be running the group. Here was a French derivatives specialist with only limited experience in conventional fixed income running the whole debt group for a German bank in Frankfurt. By all accounts, he didn't enjoy meeting borrowers and concentrated most of his time and attention on his specialist derivatives team. The calls which I made to Fraisse were never returned.However, to give Regis some credit, his derivatives group consistently made money, at least until the problem in long-dated, zero-coupon Pfandbriefen, about which Commerzbank is saying very little. Was Klaus Patig, the Vorstand member to whom Fraisse reported, so keen to hold on to the derivatives profits stream that he turned a blind eye to the slippage of Commerzbank in the broader fixed-income business? Perhaps Patig should have acted sooner to shore up Commerzbank's bond defences, but there's no point in closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. The most pressing need for Mehmet Dalman is to restructure the bond group, bring in new and better fixed-income professionals and to lessen the dependence on debt derivatives. Commerzbank has to be perceived as a fixed-income equal with Dresdner Kleinwort. Anything else is unacceptable. That's a tall order, especially as DrKB is on a charge under the leadership in fixed-income of "TJ' Lim. However, Mehmet Dalman performed miracles for Commerzbank in equities over a short period of time which astounded competitors. In equities Dalman has proved himself to be a highly regarded leader who has been able, against general expectations, to hire some of the best individuals in the industry. Dalman has already moved quickly by cutting around half a dozen fixed-income jobs in London. His priority now is to recruit one or two recognised market heavyweights who can build an integrated European and Far Eastern (Commerzbank can't reasonably be expected to compete in the US) bond business which has skills in sectors other than Pfandbriefen. Dalman only has to look at Dresdner's success in corporate bonds to see what needs to be done. In the Euromoney poll for the calendar year 1999, Commerzbank was ranked 24th out of 25 in terms of underwriting capability, but didn't make the top 25 in either trading or advisory. Clearly the bank has a mountain to climb.Mehmet Dalman would, no doubt, admit that there have been shortcomings in the bond group which is precisely why he has been brought in and given a large broom by the Commerzbank Vorstand. However, he may also believe that his prized equities group is not receiving the recognition it deserves from the institutions who respond to the Euromoney polls. In the one poll in which Commerzbank is listed, the bank's underwriting capabilities received a score of just 0.40 out of 100. Is Commerzbank not a powerhouse in equities trading? According to the polls it isn't, which surprised me considering that the group made a substantial amount of money in 1999 and would, therefore, have transacted large volumes of turnover unless its positions were purely proprietary. If I were Commerzbank chairman Martin Kohlhaussen or Vorstand member Klaus Patig, I would find out the German translation or version of the English expression "in for a penny, in for a pound' and ask Mehmet Dalman to also take over the bank's corporate finance and M&A advisory group. Do you know one ranking Commerzbank M&A specialist or dealmaker? I can't think of any and the polls, if they are to be believed, are saying that the bank doesn't feature at all in this hugely lucrative business. Almost certainly this means that Commerzbank hasn't hired the right people which is precisely why Dalman should be given a large broom to sweep away the dead wood and an open cheque book to recruit some star replacements. If Commerzbank is not quite cutting the mustard in bonds or in corporate finance, it has only itself to blame. Fixed income should be a natural business for the bank with its huge customer base and the traditional preference of German retail clients to buy bonds rather than equities. If Dresdner can win year-end awards for its success in corporate bonds backed up by superb credit research, Commerzbank should aspire towards a similar goal. In corporate finance and M&A, Commerzbank has its own stable of tame corporate clients which is a useful starting platform on which to build. However, without good investment bankers and rainmakers, there will be no deal flow. Yes, crackerjack investment bankers are hard to find but not impossible. All Commerzbank has to do is to find a top pairing such as Guy Dawson and Justin Dowley who toiled at Deutsche Bank before seeing the light and moving to Merrill Lynch where they are both scaling new career heights. Over to you, Mr Dalman, for the next move.