A Hamburg fintech: what we built and what we would build differently today
A look back from our own practice. Stefan Link was CTO of a Hamburg fintech for more than five years; we do not name it for confidentiality. This is what worked in the organization, where it got stuck, and the three things we would build differently today.
Starting point
The company is a Hamburg-based platform for comparing loans and financial products, with around 200 employees at the time.
Next to product and engineering there was a credit unit, where specialists guided customers through their financing.
The challenge
The company had to scale fast: bring a product to market that pays its way, in a short time and against tough competition. That called for an organization able to decide quickly, without every question going through hierarchy and sign-offs.
What we built
Steering by the market, not by plan
There was an overall budget as a frame, but money was spent as needed. We worked with a rolling forecast only, not with fixed targets. Numbers and priorities were discussed every week.
Open numbers and consent
Everyone could see all business figures, and salary bands were open. Decisions were taken by consent, and anyone affected could shape them.
Leadership that supports
No company cars, no private offices. Leaders supported rather than directed, and on expert questions the person who knew best decided. Performance was assessed with feedback from the team.
Learning in rhythm
Many small experiments and A/B tests, regular retrospectives, mistakes as a reason to learn. Work was pulled rather than assigned, anyone could stop on a defect, and we dropped whatever did not help customers.
Close to the customer
Teams had direct contact with borrowers and partner banks and coordinated with each other without assignment from above. We carried out the transformation through structures, not as a culture program.
By our assessment grid, the company met 45 of 75 principles of the Beta schools.
Where it got stuck
- Teams were organized by function, not by customer journey. No team owned a loan from application to payout.
- The credit unit was run conventionally, with individual bonuses. Beta did not apply there.
- The way of working was not anchored among the shareholders. Only leaders and some employees shared in the success, and job descriptions remained.
What we would build differently today
This is our picture of today, not a report.
Teams along the customer journey
One team owns a whole journey, for example “loan from application to payout”: product, engineering and credit specialists together, with their own result. No longer backend, frontend, marketing and credit side by side.
Bring the credit unit along
No more individual bonuses, not even for credit specialists. Instead everyone shares in the common result, so Beta does not stop at the border of a unit.
Get the owner on board
The shareholders explicitly back the way of working, for instance through agreed principles that also apply among the shareholders. Tolerating is not enough to survive the next change.
What would this look like for you?
Together we look at where decisions get stuck in your organization.
Write to us!