Challenge:

I was given an opportunity to lead a core banking replacement program on a large program. I work for  the Vendor company and we deliver ready made banking products and typically each bank is unique and  there would be number of regulatory changes for the country we embark on and customization changes  for the specific bank. Typically this takes 3+ years.  I challenged myself to put a task of achieving this in  an year after completing all regulatory changes for the country. This happened more than 15 years back.

Selection:

The methodology I adopted was to different from traditional approaches of requirement gathering,  development, testing and implementation. I did a market study and fulfilled the gap of compliant with  market and regulatory changes. I convinced the customer using mind mapping on the benefits of going  in an incremental manner to production module by module and with Minimum Viable product. Then we  broke down the implementation into smaller chunks instead of big bank implementation. Basically break  the work into smaller chunks to manage rather than large work which is typical (being agile in a time  when agile was not there) .

Application:

We broke away from traditional method and decided the split the implementation into friends and  family. This means risk is taken by bank staff and their relatives instead of all customers and since they  are all stakeholders of the program, vast majority of the risk is mitigated and everyone gained confident  of achieving the goal. The method applied is break into small manageable pieces and not a large  monolith implementation.  Then we put an aggressive goal achieving first module to go live in 4 months  which shocked everyone as everyone was thinking for an year. However breaking down the structure  into simple pieces (agile was not so popular in those days or non-existent) and focusing on limited set of  accounts it turned out very well.

Mind mapping techniques of convincing every stakeholder was a big task as it was difficult to visualize  since it is not an experimented method. New method involved lot of learning for everyone for good and  collective team leadership and intrinsically convincing everyone this is achievable. We did not get scared  by the huge task in front of us, instead of manage it through small chunks of work. This method indeed  introduced some additional work to manage multiple systems (coexistence) for sometime however that  additional work is small compared to the larger risk we were vying to take when we do everything  together.

The first milestone in 4 months (which was considered impossible when we started with), every one felt  the alignment of things to fall in place once we break down the components and overall program was  done in 1/3rd of the time initially estimated.

Insight:

The biggest learning on design thinking was to instead of getting scared with the challenge, we took up  to break into multiple pieces and address it one by one. Even if this meant additional work, that is a  small investment to make in the path to success rather than taking the risk continuously. The positive  attitude of moving forward and balance between risk and small increments led to the success of this  huge program in short timeframe.

Approach:

This happened quite sometime back when we did not had much tools and agile was not so popular  among decision makers. With today’s world, this would be much easier to convince and take forward. I  would use all of the agile tools available in the market and effectively implement. I would also take a  different breakdown structure for intermediate milestones so that number of intermediate milestones  could be lesser.


Challenge : I was given an opportunity to lead a core banking replacement program on a large program . I work for the Vendor company and we deliver ready made banking products and typically each bank is unique and there would be number of regulatory changes for the country we embark on and customization changes for the specific bank . Typically this takes 3 + years . I challenged myself to put a task of achieving this in an year after completing all regulatory changes for the country . This happened more than 15 years back . Selection : The methodology I adopted was to different from traditional approaches of requirement gathering , development , testing and implementation . I did a market study and fulfilled the gap of compliant with market and regulatory changes . I convinced the customer using mind mapping on the benefits of going in an incremental manner to production module by module and with Minimum Viable product . Then we broke down the implementation into smaller chunks instead of big bank implementation . Basically break the work into smaller chunks to manage rather than large work which is typical ( being agile in a time when agile was not there ) . Application : We broke away from traditional method and decided the split the implementation into friends and family . This means risk is taken by bank staff and their relatives instead of all customers and since they are all stakeholders of the program , vast majority of the risk is mitigated and everyone gained confident of achieving the goal . The method applied is break into small manageable pieces and not a large monolith implementation . Then we put an aggressive goal achieving first module to go live in 4 months which shocked everyone as everyone was thinking for an year . However breaking down the structure into simple pieces ( agile was not so popular in those days or non - existent ) and focusing on limited set of accounts it turned out very well . Mind mapping techniques of convincing every stakeholder was a big task as it was difficult to visualize since it is not an experimented method . New method involved lot of learning for everyone for good and collective team leadership and intrinsically convincing everyone this is achievable . We did not get scared by the huge task in front of us , instead of manage it through small chunks of work . This method indeed introduced some additional work to manage multiple systems ( coexistence ) for sometime however that additional work is small compared to the larger risk we were vying to take when we do everything together . The first milestone in 4 months ( which was considered impossible when we started with ) , every one felt the alignment of things to fall in place once we break down the components and overall program was done in 1/3rd of the time initially estimated . Insight : The biggest learning on design thinking was to instead of getting scared with the challenge , we took up to break into multiple pieces and address it one by one . Even if this meant additional work , that is a small investment to make in the path to success rather than taking the risk continuously . The positive attitude of moving forward and balance between risk and small increments led to the success of this huge program in short timeframe . Approach : This happened quite sometime back when we did not had much tools and agile was not so popular among decision makers . With today ’s world , this would be much easier to convince and take forward . I would use all of the agile tools available in the market and effectively implement . I would also take a different breakdown structure for intermediate milestones so that number of intermediate milestones could be lesser .