North America is not converging toward a single digital identity model. Fragmentation is structural, not transitional, and reflects how identity systems have evolved across sectors and jurisdictions. The challenge is no longer to create identity, but to make it work across systems. The next phase will be defined by interoperability and the ability to establish and maintain trust across different contexts.
Fragmentation is not a temporary state.
Most conversations about digital identity start from the same assumption. Fragmentation is a problem to be solved. Given enough time, the market will converge on a unified model or a dominant platform.
In North America, that assumption does not hold.
Fragmentation is not a temporary state. It reflects how the system is built.
There is no national identity layer. Identity is created and used in context. Banks establish identity to onboard customers and manage risk. Mobile network operators rely on subscriber data and device signals. Healthcare systems manage identity within regulated patient environments. State governments are introducing digital credentials, but those remain scoped to specific jurisdictions and use cases.
Each of these systems works, often very well. But they were never designed to connect to one another.
Where the friction actually begins.
As more services move online, identity no longer stays within a single domain. A user moves between financial services, government portals, and healthcare providers, often in the same day. The experience feels continuous, but underneath, identity is being re-established each time.
It is easy to look at this and assume the answer is a single, unified model. Something centralized that simplifies the experience.
However, the forces that created fragmentation are still in place.
Regulatory authority is distributed across federal, state, and provincial levels. The private sector continues to build identity capabilities tied to specific business needs. And there is a strong cultural resistance to centralized identity systems that aggregate personal data.
These dynamics are not temporary. They reinforce the current structure.
The real issue is isolation, not failure.
This is why most progress in North American identity has not come from building a single system. It has come from improving how systems operate within their own domains.
Over time, a pattern becomes clear.
The issue is not that identity systems are broken. It is that they are isolated.
And if that is the case, the path forward is not to replace them. It is to connect them in a way that allows identity to move across boundaries while maintaining trust.
This shifts the conversation. Instead of asking what the right identity model is, the better question becomes how trust is established and carried across systems. How assurance is communicated. How a relying party can act on identity that originated somewhere else.
These are practical challenges. They show up in onboarding, authentication, and compliance. And they define what comes next.
From identity to trust.
This is where much of the current work is focused. The objective is not to create a universal identity layer, but to make existing systems usable in real world conditions.
Across financial services, telecommunications, and public sector programs, the challenge is to translate standards into deployments and to ensure that technologies can be trusted beyond their original context.
This is also where Fime and Consult Hyperion are working with organizations. Their role is to help bridge the gap between specifications and implementation through testing, certification, and integration in complex, multi stakeholder environments.
What comes next.
In the next blog article, the focus will shift from identity to trust in greater detail, and explain why verification alone is no longer sufficient. It will explore how assurance is defined, communicated, and acted upon across systems.
Organizations that are navigating these challenges across sectors, jurisdictions, or technologies need to make identity systems interoperable and trusted in practice. Fime and Consult Hyperion work with clients to address these issues and would welcome further discussion.
Howard Hall, Vice President of Growth
Howard Hall is Vice President of Growth at Fime, a global leader in payments testing, certification, and advisory services. He brings over 20 years of experience across strategy, product marketing, business development, and corporate development in the IT, electronic security, business intelligence, digital identity, and payments sectors, with a strong track record of driving revenue growth and market expansion.
Prior to joining Fime, Howard served as Managing Director of Chyp USA, the U.S. subsidiary of Consult Hyperion. He founded and scaled the company’s North American operations, building the U.S. office, recruiting the team, and delivering strategic consulting and technology initiatives for leading enterprise and financial services clients. He also held senior leadership roles at Vericept, Trustwave, and RiverGlass, contributing to growth and successful acquisitions.
Howard began his career at Goldman Sachs & Co. In addition to his operating roles, he is an active investor and advisor to startups, supporting go-to-market strategy, fundraising, and operational scaling. Howard is a graduate of Northeastern University.
