I had a good laugh when I recently read these “worst practices and scary stories” from core banking modernization projects – but with the laughter was a sad acknowledgement that these projects typically don’t go off seamlessly. Yes, they are complex and challenging but I think (because of this and other factors) they also fail to fit into existing project structures and methodologies.
These are large projects that involve technology and business transformation and operate within a volatile environment with products that typically have areas with unprecedented deployment. These projects require a unique disciplined methodology that is focused on controlling and managing the risk of major design issues impacting the integrity of the solution or the business outcomes. I don’t think there is a ‘one size fits all’ approach to core banking modernization, but what is lacking is a collection of tools and best practices within a framework that enforces the discipline in the areas that are essential regardless of product, vendor, or bank.
Part of the reason that these worst practices occur is that organizations think that core banking modernization projects are different (and therefore throw out the project delivery discipline) yet what I think is required is more structure and discipline in key areas with more flexibility in others. Perhaps these methodologies will soon emerge and modernizing a core banking landscape will become as simple as deploying a new annual tax table?