An Empirical Analysis of Monolith-to-Microservices Migration in Enterprise Banking Systems | IJCT Volume 13 – Issue 1 | IJCT-V13I1P14

Historically, the banking sector has predominantly used large monolithic technology to perform their crucial business operational tasks (like managing accounts, processing payments, lending activities, evaluating potential risks, and producing reports required by regulatory agencies). When banks initially built their technological systems, regulations and banking operations were relatively stable; consequently, banks designed their monolithic banking systems specifically with an emphasis on stability, high levels of transaction integrity, and centralized decision-making. For years, this technology enabled banks to successfully function at the enterprise level and gave banks nearly total control over data integrity, security, and compliance with regulations. Unfortunately, as the financial services sector has changed, so too has the need for banks’ use of monolithic technology. Digital banking, faster payment methods, mobile-friendly customer experiences, new open banking and regulatory compliance rules, and continuous updates to regulations are exerting unyielding stress on banks’ existing systems. Most banks’ technologies were created to handle tight coordination between all releases, extended testing periods, and implementation of all components of an overall technology at once; therefore, introducing new features and addressing customer requests and/or compliance issues can take many months or even years to implement successfully. Since it is usually impractical for banks to scale their individual functional areas independently of each other, they tend to manage their resources and operate their systems in a less than efficient manner. Therefore, more banks are now implementing technology using a Microservices architecture model, allowing for greater agility, resiliency, scalability, and cloud compliance than monolithic architectures allowed [1][2]. This research paper analyzes both the technical and organizational lessons learned from migrating acquired inherited monolithic core banking systems to a microservice-based architecture. On the technical side, a comprehensive perspective on the many core challenges faced by organizations in their journey toward microservice implementations is explored. Such core challenges include defining appropriate service boundaries within a decomposed application ecosystem, decoupling a tightly integrated legacy database, managing distributed transactions, managing operational complexity associated with distributed systems, and (through Restructured continuous integration and continuous delivery (CI/CD) pipelines) structuring the environment to support independent service deployments [10]. In banking environments, these technical challenges can be especially challenging, as the issues of data integrity, data availability, and data consistency are critical. Additionally, the study discusses how several organizational factors greatly impact the chances for migration success. These factors include the need to restructure teams around business-aligned services, retrain skillsets toward cloud-native and DevOps methodologies [10], and evolve governance models to achieve the proper balance of service autonomy and regulatory compliance. Through a case study using two separate financial institutions’ successes and analyzing the need to remodel existing business structures through architectural patterns (the “Strangler Fig pattern”), through domain-driven designs [8], through decentralized data management and DevOps enablement [10], this research demonstrates that using an incremental migration strategy will result in significant increases in deployment frequency, improved scalability of systems, and greater operational resilience. Overall, the conclusion of the research paper is that to modernize core banking platforms successfully through microservice migrations requires businesses to view microservices migrations as a holistic transformation of their architecture, operational processes, and organization, rather than just a Technical refactoring effort.