FinnOne Neo®
Transforming Digital Lending for Your Financial Institutions
Streamlining Transaction Banking for Corporates.
Transforming Digital Lending for Your Financial Institutions
Streamlining Transaction Banking for Corporates.
An advanced technology platform, designed to deliver agile and efficient solutions while drastically reducing the cost of operations.
End-to-end digital lending across the entire lifecycle of origination, servicing & collections.
Learn more
Advanced Automotive Lending Software for complete loan life cycle management.
Learn moreDigital Transaction Banking suite that is modular for a composable banking experience.
FinnAxia®, End-to-end Global Transaction Banking Suite; optimally manages Receivables, Payments, Liquidity, Financial Supply Chains and Corporate Trade.
Learn moreEnsure responsible Lending with our API-backed products for easy & seamless connectivity to the financial ecosystem.
As financial institutions increasingly adopt fintech innovations to stay competitive in a digital world, they see that continuous transformation is the only way to keep up.
This article explores the philosophical Ship of Theseus paradox in the context of this fintech landscape: If a ship has all its parts replaced, is it still the same ship? Similarly, if a financial institution adopts fintech and replaces its traditional systems and processes with new, digital alternatives, does it remain the same financial entity?
This article aims to present a perspective for financial industry leaders to consider how their organizations’ fundamental identity is evolving with modernization.
There is a fine balance between technological advancement and the persistence of core values like trust, security, and customer service. With this examination, we will understand that financial technology may not just be transforming finance but redefining its very essence.
In Greek mythology, Theseus was the heroic king of Athens, whose legendary ship sailed the seas for decades. As time passed, the ship’s planks and parts started decaying, and one by one, they were replaced with new ones. Philosophers have debated throughout history that if every original part of the ship was replaced, would it be considered the same ship? This paradox, the Ship of Theseus, raises fundamental questions about the meaning of identity and transformation.
Today, the financial sector is facing a similar situation. All financial institutions, that once were brick-and-mortar entities that functioned solely on paper-based operations, are replacing their ‘parts’ with an array of digital alternatives.
Every function, from payment processing to customer service, is under transformation to be smarter with Al, blockchain, automation, cloud computing, and more. The traditional components are now expected to be nothing less than tech driven.
With all this in mind, at what point does a financial institution cease to be what it once was? Would it still be just a bank, or has it become something entirely new?
Is it the Ship of Theseus?
The Financial sector has always evolved to meet the demands of its customers, regulators, and the market. However, in the last few decades, fintech has accelerated this transformation beyond imagination. Today’s financial services firms are not merely upgrading their functions-they are replacing entire systems, processes, and technologies at a pace never seen before.
Each replacement represents one more ‘plank’ swapped out of the Ship of Theseus.
The Key Components Being Replaced:
In the traditional banking model, operations were slow, batch-processed, and siloed. With fintech innovations like real-time payments, API-driven banking, and cloud-based infrastructure, banks are replacing their entire back-office systems. The very core of banking-processing transactions, handling data, and managing risk-is reshaping before our eyes.
One of the most visible changes in the financial sector is the shift in payment technology. Real-time gross settlement (RTGS), digital wallets, and peer-to-peer (P2P) payment platforms have taken the place of traditional methods like cheques and bank transfers.
With this transformation of manual payment functions with modern technology, can we imagine the modern-day bank as a tech service instead of a financial service?
It is hard to remember the last time any of us visited a bank branch to manage finances. With the current fintech-driven institutions and financial services, mobile apps, chatbots, and digital portals have drastically reduced human interaction. It has even changed the expectations of customers as well.
So, is the traditional bank still a customer-focused institution, or a tech company delivering financial services through apps?
Risk has always been at the heart of finance, but FinTech is redefining how it is managed. Al-powered algorithms can assess creditworthiness, fraud detection, and market volatility faster and more accurately than their human counterparts.
Does this replacement of human expertise with machine learning diminish the identity of traditional finance, or is it simply an enhancement?
We cannot see this digital transformation as just a superficial makeover of the industry -it’s a foundational change in how financial services operate. Each technological improvement we see is doing three things, adding a new layer of complexity, enhancing capability, and replacing an old system. The question is: after all the parts of traditional banking have been replaced, is the institution we see today still a bank, or something entirely new?
Financial institutions have retained their names and legal status but the way they function is not much different from a technology company. If every key process-from customer onboarding to transaction settlement-is driven by tech, does it still make sense to call these institutions ‘banks’, or should they now be considered ‘TechFins’. Do these entities offer financial services as a secondary function to their technological prowess?
The paradox of Ship of Theseus forces the question of when an object undergoes so much change, at what point does it become something else entirely?
When we talk about Financial Institutions today, we do not imagine bodies that process payments or hold money. These institutions are now tech-driven platforms that employ FinTech innovations to deliver services, manage heaps of data, and mitigate risk.
In the world of finance, regulations act as the legal parts that ensure stability and trust. As the infrastructure of financial institutions is evolving, the regulatory frameworks that govern them are evolving with them. With its innovative and disruptive nature, the rise of fintech has compelled regulators to rethink their traditional approaches to compliance, governance, and oversight.
As traditional financial institutions adopt new fintech solutions, they must also adapt to new compliance requirements. Regulations that were intended for in-person banking, physical data records, and slow-moving transaction systems are being replaced with new frameworks designed for the digital age.
However, this regulatory evolution poses a new question: if the legal frameworks governing financial institutions have changed, is the industry still fundamentally the same?
Many governments, including India, have introduced regulatory sandboxes to support and encourage fintech innovation. These controlled environments allow fintech companies to test new solutions with minimized risk under the oversight of a regulatory body. With the possibility of this level of experimentation, governments are essentially replacing older regulatory ‘parts’ with more flexible, tech-focused ones.
Does this mean, the strict boundaries that once defined the financial industry are now wearing?
As financial services more deeply integrate with tech, the regulatory focus is shifting towards data security and privacy (e.g., GDPR in Europe or CCPA in California). Such new regulations reflect the changing nature of what financial institutions do now-manage data rather than just capital.
Related Read: Cybersecurity Risks Faced by Financial Institutions
So, if a bank is primarily focused on securing customer data, is it more of a tech company or a financial institution?
As fintech transforms the global financial landscape, regulators face the daunting task of harmonizing rules across borders. Cross-border payments, transactions based on blockchain, and the existence of digital currencies are challenging the centuries-old frameworks of finance. New international regulatory standards, like the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) for cryptocurrencies, are being introduced to address these issues. And the regulatory parts of the ship that were designed for a localized, physical banking world, are being replaced with these.
However, as these new standards emerge, so does the paradox: Are these regulations still being designed for ‘banks’, or a new category of ‘techfins’?
Knowing the story of this transformation now, we can imagine what the future identity of financial institutions will look like. Are we moving towards a future where traditional banks, as we know them, no longer exist? Are we building a new breed of institutions that are as much tech companies as they are financial service providers?
The concept of ‘Finance 2.0’ consists of the idea that fintech is not just a means to improve existing financial institutions but to create a new version of finance itself. This substitution of traditional methods with digital solutions, like cloud computing, Al, and blockchain, indicates that the very structure of global finance is changing.
Much like the Ship of Theseus, the identity of financial institutions is transforming – part by part.
As traditional banks shift to digital-only platforms, we see an entirely new definition of what it means to be a bank. Neobanks, for example, don’t operate with physical branches; they deliver all services online. While these banks are still governed by the same regulatory frameworks and serve the same purposes, their digital nature has significantly changed how they function and how they are perceived by customers.
Techfin, a term used to describe technology companies that offer financial services (e.g., Google Pay, Apple Pay), represents another such transformation. These companies are not financial institutions in the traditional sense, but they have become essential players in the financial ecosystem.
In many ways, they reflect the Ship of Theseus paradox, since they offer financial services without being limited by the traditional structures of a bank.
Now, the question becomes: if these tech companies can offer the same services as a bank, what makes them different from a traditional financial institution?
Maybe the most radical transformation in the financial sector comes from decentralized finance (DeFi). DeFi platforms democratize financial operations and aim to cut out traditional intermediaries entirely. They offer financial services like lending, borrowing, and asset trading, without any centralized control. This is a full ‘replacement of parts’ scenario: not only the traditional banks are being replaced, but the whole concept of centralized finance is being challenged.
As DeFi continues to grow, it forces us to ask: what is finance, if not a service provided by centralized financial institutions?
With so many changes taking place, the role of traditional financial institutions is being redefined. They are no longer the custodians of wealth and payments. They are becoming platforms, and data managers, and even tech innovators. This new identity requires them to think beyond their historical roles and consider how will they position themselves in a tech-driven future.
Many financial institutions are adopting a platform-based model, where they act as intermediaries between various fintech solutions and their customers. For example, open banking allows customers to access financial services from multiple players through a single bank’s platform. This effectively turns the bank into a marketplace or aggregator for fintech solutions, rather than financial services provider itself.
At this point, it is evident that a bank is not a ‘bank’ anymore.
If every component of a financial institution is replaced with technology-driven solutions, is it still a financial institution?
As banks and fintech companies are blurring the lines between finance and technology, the future of finance may not be about financial institutions, but who can leverage technology better.
The Ship of Theseus paradox is an apt metaphor for understanding the transformation of the financial sector. Fintech has not only replaced individual components of traditional financial institutions but has redefined what it means to be a financial institution.
The future of finance will not be defined by traditional banks but those who can adapt and innovate better and faster in a tech-driven world. Whether through fintech, techfin, or DeFi, the financial sector is becoming something new – a ship transformed, yet still navigating the waters of commerce and trust.
Lending
Transaction Banking
Financial Inclusion
