ING Bank in 2012 faced a fundamental question: Who are we? ING's history was fragmented. It started as insurance, became retail banking, became a diverse financial services company across 40 countries. Customers didn't know what ING stood for. The organization didn't know either.
The market was changing. Fintech startups were launching digital-first banks. Traditional banks were slowly digitalizing. Customers expected mobile banking. But ING's branches were still the center of the business. Half of customer interactions happened in physical branches. Technology was treated as a support function, not a strategic driver.
ING needed transformation. But what kind?
Strategy A: Become a digital-first bank (disrupt yourself)
Shut down most branches. Invest heavily in mobile and online. Compete directly with fintech startups. This requires offending existing branch-based customers. It requires completely different organizational structure. It's high-risk but high-reward.
Strategy B: Become a trusted advisor (premium personal banking)
Keep branches. Deepen relationships with high-net-worth customers. Become the "advisors" rather than pure providers. Technology serves the advisor, not the customer. This protects existing customer base. It's lower-risk but lower-growth.
Strategy C: Become a hybrid (we do everything, well)
Offer both digital and branch services. Don't offend anyone. Try to serve traditional customers and digital natives equally. This sounds good but requires resources to do both well. Often fails because it requires maintaining two separate operating models.
ING's leadership made a deliberate choice: Strategy A. Become digital-first while maintaining trust relationships.
This was not obvious. This was not safe. This was strategic clarity in the face of risk.
Strategy demanded: Mobile and online must be primary. Customer can do anything from phone. Branches are backup for exceptions.
Technology choice: ING invested €800 million (2014-2020) in mobile-first technology. But not just "build an app." The entire backend was redesigned for digital. Account opening happens on phone in 10 minutes instead of requiring branch visit. Loan applications happen digitally. All services are available digitally first, branch second.
The trade-off: This required essentially rebuilding the entire technology stack. Legacy systems that powered branches became secondary. Branch banking systems that had worked for 30 years became "old technology" that had to be maintained while new systems were built.
Strategy demanded: Digital teams should have authority equal to or greater than branch managers.
Organizational choice: ING created a "digital-first" operating model. Mobile app development, online platform development, and digital product teams were elevated. They reported directly to executive leadership, not "through" branch banking division.
Concrete example: When the mobile app and online platform needed a new feature, they didn't request it from "banking operations." They decided independently, built independently, deployed independently. Branch managers had to accept these changes.
The trade-off: This created tension. Branch managers felt sidelined. Traditional bankers saw technology experts gaining power. But this was intentional. The strategy required technology to lead.
Strategy demanded: Prioritize digitally-native customers. These are the future growth.
Customer choice: ING focused on younger customers (18-40) and small business owners. These segments wanted digital-first banking. They didn't care about branches. Older customers who wanted branch banking? They were serviced adequately but not prioritized.
Concrete example: ING launched "ING Easy" targeting young customers with no experience in banking. It was app-only. No branch access. No desktop website (only mobile). This was radical—banks don't usually say "branch access not available."
The trade-off: This alienated some traditional customers. But it was necessary. You can't serve "everyone equally" with a digital-first strategy. You must prioritize.
Strategy demanded: Become the "infrastructure" for fintech. Open APIs. Let others build on top of ING.
Partnership choice: ING created developer platforms. Third-party companies could build apps and services on top of ING infrastructure. This was radical for traditional banks (which jealously guarded their data). But it was essential for digital-first strategy.
Concrete example: A fintech company could build expense management software using ING customer data. This drives ING customers to the app more frequently. The fintech company drives users to ING. Mutually beneficial.
The trade-off: This exposed ING to security and regulatory risks. Opening APIs meant data flows through third-party systems. But it was necessary for digital-first strategy.
Digital adoption: In 2014, 40% of customer interactions were digital. By 2023, 75% were digital. Branch visits declined naturally as customers discovered digital was easier.
Customer acquisition: ING added 3+ million new customers in Europe. Most were young, digitally-native customers. Many had never used a traditional bank branch.
Product velocity: New features launched on mobile platform every 2-3 weeks. Branch services remained largely unchanged (because they're low-priority).
Financial results: Despite lower margins than traditional banking, digital segments were more profitable (higher volume, lower cost per transaction). Digital revenue grew 15% annually while traditional banking was flat.
Market position: ING became known as "the digital bank." When young customers wanted to open an account, they thought of ING. When traditional customers wanted digital, they switched to ING.
Compare ING to a competitor bank that tried Strategy C (hybrid—serve everyone):
The competitor bank spent as much on transformation as ING. Same budget. Different clarity.
ING's case illustrates three truths:
When ING's board debated "should we close this branch?" the answer was clear if strategy was clear. Digital-first means most customer needs met digitally. This branch serves primarily elderly customers resistant to digital. Closing it makes sense. Without strategy, you debate endlessly.
ING allocated budget to what mattered. Mobile platform got 40% of technology budget. Branch systems got 10%. This sounds harsh until you realize: without strategy, budget gets spread equally. Mobile gets 20%, branches get 20%, infrastructure gets 20%, legacy systems get 20%. Nothing gets enough to truly succeed.
ING decided they're NOT a premium advisory bank (Strategy B). This meant they wouldn't invest in ultra-high-touch service for ultra-wealthy customers. They decided they're NOT a hybrid bank (Strategy C). This meant they wouldn't try to maintain world-class branch and digital simultaneously.
Defining what you're not is as important as defining what you are.
ING's CEO made a strategic choice and communicated it relentlessly. Every quarterly earnings call reinforced: "We are building the digital bank for the modern customer." This wasn't marketing. It was the strategy governing investment, organizational design, hiring, and partnerships.
Without this clarity from the top, the organization would have splintered. Digital teams would have fought with branch managers for resources. Technology investments would have been scattered. Market position would have been confused.
Strategic clarity doesn't guarantee success. But its absence almost guarantees failure.