Assessing Digital Transformation Strategies in Retail Banks: A Global Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a PRISMA-guided systematic literature review (2015–2025) of 20 empirical studies on digital transformation in retail banking, examining how artificial intelligence (AI) strengthens cybersecurity, enables FinTech collaboration through interoperable APIs and open-banking infrastructures, and embeds data-driven decision-making across core functions. We searched major databases, applied predefined eligibility criteria, appraised study quality, and coded outcomes related to digital adoption, operational resilience, and customer experience. The synthesis indicates that AI-enabled controls and API-mediated partnerships are consistently associated with higher digital-maturity indicators, conditional on robust model-risk governance and prudent third-party/outsourcing management. Benefits span improved customer experience, efficiency, and inclusion; however, legacy systems, regulatory fragmentation, cyber threats, and organizational resistance remain binding constraints. We propose a unified framework linking technology choices, regulatory design, and organizational outcomes, and distill actionable guidance for policymakers (e.g., interoperable standards, proportional AI governance, sector-wide cyber resilience) and bank managers (sequencing AI use cases, risk controls, and partnership models). Future research should assess emerging technologies—including quantum-safe security and central bank digital currencies (CBDCs)—and their implications for digital-banking stability and trust.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.029 | 0.065 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.030 | 0.027 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".