News

Casey Merolla, President, Community Financial Institutions, SRM.

gettyIf you’ve led a major system conversion, you likely know the anxiety of waiting for something to break at 2 a.m. on cutover weekend that will lead to your name headlining the postmortem.​ I’ve spent much of my career advising organizations through these decisions and know that fear is not irrational. We all love to recount the conversions that have gone sideways. But the fear of conversion risk has convinced a lot of leaders to sit still when sitting still has frequently become the more expensive choice. It’s just harder to see the cost.​

Why The Fear Is Outdated, But The Cost Isn’t​A generation ago, replacing a major operating platform typically meant years of internal headaches and customer disruption with a real chance of something going wrong. Deferring it was often the rational call, or at least the call that would not get you fired. But that’s not the environment we’re in now. Today’s platforms do more, and the playbooks for implementing them are far more mature than they were even five years ago.​

What hasn’t changed, however, is the psychology of the conversion decision. While just over half of bankers (53%) say they are satisfied with their current core provider, far more (69%) say they’d likely stick with that same provider at the next contract renewal anyway, according to the American Bankers Association. Only 19% say they’d actually switch.​

Financial services executives still focus on the worst-case conversion examples and customer horror stories. The cost of standing still is quieter and easier to ignore. Integration options stay limited. The customer experience gap widens a little more every quarter. Good people leave because they’re tired of working around old infrastructure.​

So, here’s a different question worth asking: Rather than, “What could go wrong during conversion?” consider what your current platform is going to keep you from doing three to five years out. What will that cost?​

How Organizations Can Unlock The Decision To Move Forward​I’ve seen two things get a stalled modernization decision moving again, more than anything else. The first is making the case beyond the balance sheet. Most organizations run the ROI on hard costs and stop there. The bigger gains are usually the ones that never make it into a spreadsheet: faster product deployment, better talent retention, actually being able to integrate with the tools your team wants to use. Those factors get underweighted in the original business case almost every time, and they’re often the difference between a decision that is approved and one that gets tabled again.​

The second is solving the process problem. The fear driving inaction is almost never about the destination. It’s about not knowing how to get there. “Do we have the resources?” “Do they have the capacity?” “How long is this going to take, really?” Break the modernization into milestones, with known risk points and a mitigation plan at each one, and the whole process feels less like a jump off a cliff and more like a managed transition.​

For example, a $4 billion-asset bank in Massachusetts illustrated this approach well. Rather than attempt one all-or-nothing conversion, it ran a separate digital-only brand on a cloud-native, next-generation core for several years, proved the platform out on a smaller slice of the business, then converted the full institution, going live ahead of its own schedule. Prove it, then commit. That’s a very different bet than converting everything on day one. ​

A third, often underused, option is simply talking directly to industry peers who have gone through similar conversions. Those conversations can move a stalled decision faster than another round of internal analysis ever will.​

The Capacity Constraint To Plan AroundAnother critical issue is one most leaders aren’t planning for at all, and it has nothing to do with their own readiness. Many of the large firms and specialists who execute large-scale technology transitions are operating at capacity. Multiyear backlogs are the norm now across several categories of enterprise modernization.​

If your organization decides today that it’s time to modernize a mission-critical platform, you may be looking at a two-to-three-year runway before execution can even begin. That completely changes the planning horizon. Leaders who assume they can time this decision with the next contract renewal or budget cycle may find the window already closed while they are waiting for the perfect moment.​ The organizations with the most flexibility are the ones who started evaluating early enough to have real options. Wait too long, and you don’t get to choose your path. You get whatever’s available when the urgency becomes impossible to ignore.​

If you’re running an aging platform right now, here’s where I’d start: Audit what it is that’s actually keeping you from acting, not today, but 18 months from now. Run the full ROI analysis and make sure it includes what doesn’t show up as a line item: speed, agility, talent, compliance flexibility. Estimates are OK. You will argue them within the organization, but by having the conversations you have already started to change the mindset. Map your modernization timeline against your contract cycle now; assuming you can time this to renewal is increasingly unrealistic. And go talk to someone who’s already been through it.​

The fear of conversion is real. But the cost of standing still doesn’t announce itself, it just compounds quietly until it’s too late to do much about it. The organizations still serving their customers well five years from now will be the ones making decisions this year, not the ones waiting for the perfect moment.​

Forbes Business Council is the foremost growth and networking organization for business owners and leaders. Do I qualify?