Board Priorities in a Geopolitical Landscape: Risk, Compliance, and Supply Chain Resilience

As the impact of global interdependencies becomes increasingly complex, boards and executive management are guiding and governing their companies in an unpredictable environment. That was the central theme of the recent May 2025 webinar, Geopolitical Issues Impacting Global Supply Chains and National Security, hosted by the Nasdaq Center for Board Excellence and the Program on Corporate Compliance and Enforcement at NYU School of Law.

The webinar brought together a panel of experts, including Ed Knight, Executive Vice Chairman at Nasdaq, Will A. Clarke, Partner at Newport LLC, Jana del-Cerro, Partner at DLA Piper, and Bets Lillo, Board Member at Entara and River Logic and Executive in Residence at Texas Christian University. They offered a clear-eyed view of how boards and executive management must adapt to effectively lead amid a world where national security, economic policy, and supply chain resilience are deeply intertwined. Five key takeaways from their discussion are outlined below, alongside practical implications for boardroom oversight and planning.

1. Geopolitics Has Moved to the Center of the Boardroom

National security interests are now driving economic policy, which is a reversal from the globalist era of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and World Trade Organization (WTO) expansion. Boards and executive management must recognize that decisions once made purely for growth are now filtered through the lens of national interest. Geopolitical awareness is no longer a peripheral concern or sidebar topic—it’s central to corporate governance and long-term planning.

This shift requires boards to embed geopolitical risk into their decision-making frameworks and ensure that directors are regularly briefed on global developments that could impact operations, markets, or supply chains. As Knight noted, geopolitical fluency is no longer a luxury for global companies—it’s a prerequisite for sound, strategic, and tactical decision-making.

2. Compliance Expectations Are Expanding—and Intensifying

Companies are increasingly expected to serve as a front line of enforcement for export controls and sanctions for the U.S. government, del-Cerro explained. This shift means that even companies producing lower-tier commercial products (not military or dual-use technologies) must now conduct deeper due diligence of their supply chains, stakeholders, and end users. The extraterritorial reach of the U.S. further extends these obligations to companies outside the U.S., even those without U.S. personnel.

To meet these heightened expectations, companies should ensure their compliance functions are well-resourced and empowered to act quickly, with clear reporting lines to the board or audit committee. This includes investing in talent, developing internal policy playbooks, and equipping teams with access to real-time intelligence. Companies that manage this well also help foster strong internal communication. For example, companies should ensure that insights from sales and operations, such as customer behavior or in-country developments, are shared with compliance leaders to surface risks that traditional screening tools may miss.

3. Supply Chain Disruptions Include Digital Risk

From geopolitical flashpoints to climate-related constraints, supply chains are under pressure from multiple, overlapping disruptions. But Clarke and Knight noted that these challenges extend beyond the movement of physical goods—they also involve the flow of information, data, and capital. Disruptions to cyber infrastructure or financial systems from non-state actors, for example, can be just as damaging as port closures or shipping delays.

Boards must push for a more integrated approach to risk management that addresses both physical and digital vulnerabilities. This includes supporting investment in technologies that provide real-time visibility into supply chain performance and resilience. Knight also noted that boards are beginning to institutionalize their responses, moving toward a permanent set of best practices for managing supply chain uncertainty.

4. Scenario Planning Is a Strategic Imperative

Boards and executive management must move beyond reactive risk management. Clarke suggested that proactive scenario planning can help companies anticipate disruptions, develop contingency plans, and test their resilience. This includes identifying how logistics could be contested—such as the sudden loss of access to critical suppliers or shipping routes—and determining how the company would respond. Clarke emphasized the importance of involving “tier-two” and “tier-three” suppliers in these exercises to ensure alignment across the value chain.

In addition to examining multiple tiers of the supply chain, companies should look both forward and backward in time. As del-Cerro noted, this approach can help mitigate compliance risk by revealing historical patterns and anticipating regulatory shifts. A well-developed playbook of policies and procedures allows companies to quickly pressure-test assumptions against both past disruptions and future uncertainties.

Directors should treat scenario planning as a recurring, well-resourced component of strategic oversight—not a one-off exercise. They should also expect to see cross-functional collaboration between supply chain, legal, compliance, and strategy teams, with clear accountability for implementing lessons learned and allocating resources accordingly.

5. A Culture of Informed Optimism Matters

While the risks are real, the panelists agreed that optimism, grounded in data and preparation, is a strategic asset. Boards and executive management play a key role in setting the tone for how companies respond to uncertainty. Knight urged corporate leaders to use their credibility and competence to be a force of hope. Clarke echoed this sentiment with a quote from Colin Powell: “Perpetual optimism is a force multiplier.”

Boards and executive management can help reinforce this mindset by modeling transparency, agility, and resilience, and by recognizing examples of successful adaptation in the face of global challenges.

Conclusion: From Awareness to Action

Geopolitical risk is no longer a distant or abstract concern—it is a daily reality for global businesses. Whether navigating evolving interstate dynamics, responding to sanctions, or preparing for the next supply chain shock, boards and executive management should expect the unexpected and lead with foresight and resilience. Effective leaders will be those who treat geopolitics not as background noise, but as a strategic signal.

To navigate this complex landscape, boards and executive management should consider:

• Embedding geopolitical risk into long-term strategic planning.
• Strengthening compliance and due diligence capabilities.
• Prioritizing supply chain resilience by addressing both physical and digital vulnerabilities.
• Institutionalizing periodic, proactive scenario planning across the company and including strategic partners as appropriate.
• Fostering a culture of informed optimism.

Doing so can help mitigate risks and position companies to seize opportunities for growth and resilience in an increasingly unpredictable world.

To receive exclusive corporate governance insights for board members and leaders, join the Nasdaq Center for Board Excellence. 

The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the panelists and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.