Why digital investment in financial services fails to deliver: and what to fix first

According to Gartner’s annual global survey, only 48% of digital initiatives achieve their business outcome targets. Typical responses focus on improving delivery governance, programme management, and sprint discipline. However, these do not address the core issue: most digital investments fail because their business cases defined the wrong outcomes. This misstep occurs before briefing the agency, planning the first sprint, or confirming whether the commissioned product meets actual business needs.

The number that should be on every board agenda

Gartner’s annual CIO and Technology Executive Survey states that only 48% of digital initiatives achieve their intended business outcomes. For financial services firms, this means one out of every two digital investments fails to deliver the expected return.

Deloitte’s Bridging the Tech Value Gap report, based on a survey of 314 senior UK executives, finds that most organisations believe they are missing up to 50% of expected returns from digital investment. While technology spending is increasing, the value attributed to digital transformation has remained flat for the past 3 years.

These statistics do not reflect poor execution or weak engineering. Instead, they highlight investments in products defined before the right questions were asked. While the product may function as intended, it fails to deliver returns because it was not aligned with actual business needs.

This is a definition issue. It cannot be resolved through improved delivery governance, but rather through more thoughtful planning before delivery begins.

Where the brief goes wrong and when

The decisions that create the value gap occur before delivery begins, during the drafting of briefs and business cases. In financial services firms, these decisions follow a consistent pattern.

The outcome in the business case was a feature, not a measurable business change.

A customer portal, claims app, or broker dashboard is an output that describes what will be built. A measurable business outcome defines what will change as a result, such as a 40% increase in claims handled without agent intervention, reducing broker onboarding time from three weeks to three days, or increasing customer self-service at renewal from 30% to 60%. Without a measurable outcome, there is no way to assess whether the product fulfilled its purpose. Launch should not be the default measure of success.

The success metric was delivery, not adoption.

Products delivered on time and within budget, but with low adoption, are not true successes; they reflect definition failures identified only after launch. Whether users will adopt the product and whether the business will realise value are questions that must be addressed during product definition, not after delivery.

The brief described what to build rather than what problem to solve

The most costly assumption in digital investment in financial services is that the problem has already been correctly identified in the brief. Briefs often detail the solution, screens, integrations, and user flows, but rarely specify the failing user behaviour, its business cost, or evidence that the proposed solution will address it. That evidence should form the brief; everything else is a specification.

Regulatory constraints were treated as delivery considerations rather than product requirements.

In financial services, the cost of incorrect product definition is particularly high. FCA Consumer Duty outcomes are not merely compliance obligations; they are essential product requirements. Consumer understanding, support, and fair value are fundamental deliverables. If these are not incorporated as design constraints from the outset, the product will require redesign rather than post-launch optimisation. This results not only in redesign costs but also in delays to business objectives, regulatory exposure, and diminished internal credibility when revisiting the board with a revised business case.

Why is this harder to fix in financial services than anywhere else

Every sector faces challenges in product definition, but in financial services, the consequences are more severe.

Complex integrations with third-party APIs, policy management systems, open banking infrastructure, and legacy platforms mean that a product built to the wrong specification creates issues that affect every connected system. Redefining the product after build requires unravelling dependencies established to support incorrect outcomes.

In regulated environments, live products cannot be easily withdrawn or replaced due to active customers, policies, and regulatory obligations. Remediation must occur within these constraints, making it slower and more costly than building correctly from the outset.

Deloitte’s research found that 85% of Innovation Leaders, firms consistently realising value from digital investment, consider reducing technical debt critical to transformation success. In financial services, technical debt extends beyond code; it includes the accumulated cost of products built on unvalidated definitions.

What fixing it actually looks like

Firms that consistently achieve returns from digital investment share a key trait: they define measurable business outcomes before specifying the product.

Focus on outcomes, not features or user stories. What must be true for the business twelve months after launch that is not true today? What must users be able to do that they cannot do now, and what is the cost of this gap? The product should address the intersection of these needs. All other elements must be justified against this objective.

Deloitte’s research is clear: organisations that treat the business case as a living document and link product decisions to measurable outcomes consistently outperform those that view launch as the endpoint. The business case defines success and should guide every product decision throughout delivery, not be set aside after approval.

The practical starting point is a structured discovery process conducted before the build brief is written. This should be a diagnostic that asks critical questions: What problem are we solving, for whom, and what evidence supports that this product will address it? What does measurable success look like? What regulatory constraints must shape the product definition from the outset?

At Sonin, our discovery process for financial services digital products addresses these questions. The result is a validated product definition, a prioritised roadmap, and a shared understanding of the optimal product before any budget is committed. This is not a delay; it is the difference between delivering on the business case and ongoing optimisation that never closes the value gap.

The fix starts before the brief.

If digital investment returns are not meeting the business case, the solution is not to improve the existing product, but to revisit the product definition before allocating additional budget.

A Discovery Session is designed for this purpose. It is a structured diagnostic, not a sales process, that provides clarity on the accuracy of the product definition, identifies gaps, and outlines necessary changes before the next investment cycle.

To learn more, contact the Sonin team.