Insights
Observations from the practice — on the challenges facing financial institutions, the patterns that determine whether transformation succeeds, and the leadership questions that matter most.
Featured
Boards and executive committees invest considerable effort in designing technology governance frameworks. Most of them do not work as intended. The failure is rarely in the design — it is in the gap between the framework on paper and the institutional behaviour it is meant to shape.
After two decades of leading and recovering large-scale transformation programmes, the causes of failure are remarkably consistent — and almost never the ones cited in post-mortems.
The role of the Chief Information Officer has shifted fundamentally over the past decade. The governance structures most boards use to oversee technology have not kept pace — and the consequences are becoming visible.
Core banking transformation is the most consequential technology decision a financial institution can make. The gap between vendor promises and programme reality is wider than most executives realise before they commit.
Most institutions treat regulatory compliance as a cost to be managed. The institutions that navigate regulatory change most effectively treat it as a capability to be built — and the difference in outcomes is significant.
SAFe® and other scaled agile frameworks have become standard in large financial institutions. The results are mixed. Understanding why requires looking beyond the framework itself to the organisational conditions that determine whether it can work.
The advisory market is structured in ways that make genuinely independent counsel difficult to find. Understanding the conflicts that shape most advisory relationships is the first step to getting advice you can actually rely on.
Digistrate publishes occasional perspectives on the challenges facing financial institutions. To be notified when new pieces are published, arrange a discussion — or reach out directly.
