Qualitative case study examines barriers and solutions for integrating continuous improvement in banking, suggesting practical strategies for competitiveness.
Purpose This study aims to examine the integration of continuous improvement (CI) and innovation thinking in the banking sector, identifying the differences between CI and innovation thinking, the root causes of non-integration and proposing actionable solutions. Design/methodology/approach A qualitative case study using semi-structured interviews was conducted at a central South African bank. The data was analyzed through thematic analysis. Findings This study identifies seven primary barriers to CI and innovation integration: cultural resistance and resistance to change; siloed structures and poor communication; insufficient awareness and training; lack of clear frameworks; limited resource allocation; lack of strategic buy-in; inadequate customer and stakeholder engagement; and the lack of performance measures and feedback loops. Solutions include training, strategic buy-in, centralized CI and innovation functions and proposed strategies for integration. Practical implications This study offers practical strategies for integrating CI and innovation thinking into banking operations, thereby enhancing competitiveness and customer satisfaction. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first empirical study focusing on integrating CI and innovation thinking in a South African banking context.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Richards et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: