Phillip J Mostert 🇿🇦

Fio Capital

Fio Capital Family Office - Connect with your next big opportunity.

www.fio.group

Fio’s purpose is to change life as we know it.  The insights and services we provide help to create long-term value for clients, entrepreneurs, people, and society, building trust in capital markets.

We believe in the vital importance of people coming together to create and grow enduring, private businesses that make a difference in the world.

OUR SERVICES

Fio Capital & the Fio Group provides access to services & opportunities that help entrepreneurs achieve financial stability, upward mobility and economic prosperity- regardless of race, gender or prosperity.

www.fio.group

Vice President

World Business Angels Investment Forum

The World Business Angels Investment Forum is committed to collaborating globally to empower the economic development of the world by fostering innovative financial instruments for startups, scaleups, innovators, entrepreneurs and SMEs and to promoting gender equality and women’s participation in all sectors of the world economy. I am honoured to have been elected as Senator for South Africa and to join the WBAF global efforts to ease access to finance, promote financial inclusion, and create more jobs and social justice.

The Forum interacts with leaders in all areas of society, first and foremost in business and political spheres, to help assess needs and establish goals, bearing in mind that the public interest is of paramount importance. We engage with a wide range of institutions – public and private, local and international, commercial and academic – to help shape the global agenda.

As an affiliated partner of the G20 Global Partnership for Financial Inclusion (GPFI), the World Business Angels Investment Forum (WBAF) is committed to collaborating globally to empower the economic development of the world by fostering innovative financial instruments for startups, scaleups, innovators, entrepreneurs and SMEs and to promoting gender equality and women’s participation in all sectors of the world economy. WBAF invites you to join our global efforts to ease access to finance, promote financial inclusion, and create more jobs and social justice.

WBAF accomplishes its mission through various parties and channels. These include: 138 high commissioners, senators and international partners from 79 countries; 7 country offices on 5 continents; the WBAF Business School and it's more than 50 faculty members from 32 countries; and 5 international working committees. WBAF also has an angel investment fund, partnerships with 12 global institutions, and economic cooperation agreements with 5 governments. 

www.wbaforum.org

Senator

Fio Group

Fio Group is a visionary business ecosystem dedicated to driving innovation, empowering entrepreneurs and creating sustainable impact. Founded on the principles of purpose-driven leadership, Fio Group operates across diverse industries including technology, finance, education, health and renewable energy, with a mission to tackle poverty and inequality through entrepreneurial empowerment.

. The group also champions impactful ventures such as Fio Academy, which provides e-learning opportunities, and Kasi-Solar, a renewable energy solution targeting underserved communities.

Guided by its vision to “make prosperity easier,” Fio Group integrates innovation, collaboration, and technology to build platforms that empower individuals, businesses, and communities across Africa. 

By combining business excellence with a commitment to social equity, Fio Group is redefining what it means to do business with purpose.

Med-e-Screen

Med-e-Screen is a cutting-edge healthcare initiative dedicated to making preventative healthcare affordable and accessible for organizations and individuals. 

By providing comprehensive employee health screenings, Med-e-Screen enables businesses to identify health risks early, empower their wellness strategies,
 and enhance workplace productivity.

Beyond healthcare, Med-e-Screen is a leader in creating meaningful employment opportunities for medical professionals, aligning with its mission to promote health equity and economic inclusion. 

With innovative solutions and actionable insights, Med-e-Screen equips organizations with detailed health reports that drive effective wellness campaigns, reduce absenteeism and foster a culture of care and well-being.

At its core, Med-e-Screen is transforming healthcare delivery, ensuring healthier workplaces while supporting systemic change and empowerment in the healthcare industry.

Board Advisor

Fio Connect Africa

Fio Connect Africa is a transformative telecommunications initiative under the Fio Group umbrella, focused on bridging the digital divide and empowering communities across Africa. 

By providing affordable and accessible connectivity solutions, Fio Connect Africa enables individuals, entrepreneurs, and businesses to thrive in an increasingly digital world.

The initiative offers innovative products and services such as Fio Connect SIM cards, mobile devices, and data solutions tailored to meet the needs of underserved markets. 

Through its distribution network, Fio Connect Africa empowers local entrepreneurs and distributors with opportunities to earn ongoing revenue while contributing to the expansion of digital access in their communities.

Fio Connect Africa is not just about connectivity - it’s about enabling education, entrepreneurship, and economic growth. With its mission to connect Africa one community at a time, it is redefining how telecommunications can serve as a catalyst for social and economic transformation across the continent.

Montriche Capital Group

www.montrichecapital.com

We help develop life changing businesses, which will serve generations to come.

“Green is not a colour - it’s an attitude”. We take an holistic and global view on how business should position itself in a global environment and change status quo.

Family Office

www.montrichecapital.com

The Montriche Group prides itself on the relationship it has developed as primary advisors for a number of private companies, in the capacity of Senior Strategic Advisors, Merger & Acquisition Specialists, Business Analysts and Restructuring Specialists.

Strategic Advisors, Mergers & Acquisitions.

BlackRock Mineral Holdings

Institute for Mergers, Acquisitions and Alliances (IMAA)

Member

International Chamber of Commerce

Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis

I help leaders unlock potential, lead with purpose, and build businesses that inspire change.

“Either write something worth reading or do something worth writing about.” – Benjamin Franklin

This wisdom inspires my journey to create meaningful change, shaped by triumphs and failures that define my leadership.

➤ 𝗠𝘆 𝗠𝗶𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻

I’m passionate about entrepreneurship, economic empowerment, and wealth creation to alleviate poverty and inequality.
With unwavering faith and resilience, I help entrepreneurs, investors, and leaders unlock potential, scale businesses, and build legacies.

➤ 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝗮𝘁 𝗙𝗶𝗼 𝗖𝗮𝗽𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗹

At Fio Capital, we embrace the Latin philosophy of “Fio” – “I become”, symbolizing transformation.
Our mission is to foster sustainable development and drive economic growth in Africa by investing in key sectors:

• 𝗔𝗴𝗿𝗶𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 – Empowering farmers through innovation
• 𝗘𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 – Promoting lifelong learning
• 𝗘𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗴𝘆 – Delivering clean, sustainable power
• 𝗛𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗵𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗲 – Investing in wellness
• 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗘𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 – Building infrastructure
• 𝗧𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘆 – Driving innovation

We go beyond profits—it’s about empowering communities, creating jobs, and building sustainable solutions.

➤ 𝗚𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽

• 𝗦𝗲𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿, 𝗚𝟮𝟬 𝗪𝗕𝗔𝗙 – Advocating for access to finance and fostering innovation
• 𝗖𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗿𝘆 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗿, 𝗪𝗕𝗔𝗙 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟯 – Earned South Africa the title of “Most Celebrated Country” and received the International Leadership Award for advancing investment and innovation.
• 𝗖𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 – Partnering with 𝗜𝗠𝗔𝗔, 𝗜𝗖𝗖, 𝗖𝗦𝗜𝗦, and 𝗜𝗜𝗕𝗔 to promote entrepreneurship

➤ 𝗙𝗮𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗣𝘂𝗿𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲

• 𝗠𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗲𝘂𝗿𝘀 to lead with purpose
• 𝗕𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀 that create jobs
• 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻 𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲𝘀 that drive growth

“𝗦𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗿 𝗙𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗹𝗶𝘀 – 𝗔𝗹𝘄𝗮𝘆𝘀 𝗙𝗮𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗳𝘂𝗹” reflects my commitment to empowering others.

𝗟𝗲𝘁’𝘀 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗰𝘁:

If you’re an entrepreneur, investor, or leader passionate about creating wealth, scaling impact-driven ventures, and leading with purpose, let’s connect and build something meaningful together.

Enabler

The biggest killer of African startups?
Copy-and-paste models.

Too many founders pitch borrowed slides from Silicon Valley.

But Africa doesn’t need the next Uber of X.
It needs the first solution to our own problems.

Copycats get headlines.
Builders get history.



🔁 Repost if you’re tired of copy-paste startups

📩 Tag a founder solving a real African problem

📌 Follow for grounded frameworks on Africa’s real economy & legacy

♾️

Faith · Structure · Impact | Helping African Leaders Build Credibility, Capital & Legacy

No alternative text description for this image

Why is Africa’s voice treated as a suggestion… while the world’s voice is treated as instruction?

This imbalance didn’t happen by accident.
It was engineered through centuries of narrative, power, and perception.

But here’s the truth:

Africa is not silent — it’s silenced.
Not because it lacks clarity, but because it threatens the comfort of old systems.

A continent rich in talent, resources, innovation, and spiritual depth should not be spoken over.
It should be taken seriously.

The world obeys its own voice.
Africa must do the same.

Because the moment we stop asking for permission, the balance of power shifts.

— Phillip J. Mostert

♾️

Author — Faith · Structure · Impact | Helping African Leaders Build Credibility, Capital & Legacy | Governance & Entrepreneurship Development | VP, Fio Capital Family Office

We are not a poor continent.
We are a mismanaged inheritance.

Africa’s people are not the problem.
In fact, our people are our greatest advantage.
Resilient. Gifted. Resourceful.
We rise from conditions that would break most nations.

But here’s the uncomfortable truth:
Africa’s struggle has never been talent —
it has been the systems surrounding that talent.

Mismanagement is not our curse.
It’s the gap where builders with conviction must step in.
And for those of us who carry a calling for this continent,
this work is not opinion — it’s obedience.

The world keeps misreading Africa.
They see chaos where God has placed potential.
They call us poor while standing on the richest soil on earth.
They underestimate the very people built to endure and innovate.

But Africa is not waiting for rescue.
Africa is waiting for structure.

Fix the architecture,
and you unlock the strength that has always been here.

Let’s start with the truth.

— Phillip J. Mostert

♾️

Who moved my cheese?

Africa keeps asking this question
as if the answer is unclear.

It isn’t.

The cheese didn’t disappear.
It was captured.
Signed away in bad deals.
Extracted through corruption.
Protected by systems that rewarded proximity to power, not service to people.

State capture wasn’t a moment.
It was a model.

While citizens were told to be patient,
others were redesigning the maze — legally, quietly, profitably.

This is not just a political failure.
It’s a geopolitical one.

Because when governance collapses,
capital migrates,
sovereignty weakens,
and dependency becomes policy.

The real question was never who moved the cheese.

It’s why we tolerated systems that allowed it to be taken at all.

Enough of pretending this is normal.
Enough of confusing stability with justice.
Enough of managing decline instead of rebuilding structure.

Faith demands truth.
Structure demands accountability.

And Africa’s future belongs to builders who reclaim systems — not those who inherit excuses.

This isn’t about cheese.

It’s about sovereignty.

— Phillip J. Mostert

♾️

SUITEKK

Company active in supporting financial & other sectors in Risk & Governance AI Agents strategization & implementation: 

- Supporting the financial sector, and other industries in transformation processes, in the development, marketing, integration, and implementation of proprietary and third-party IT solutions, with a focus on enhancing business functions, risk management, compliance, governance, digital transformation, and related activities. 

- Emphasis is with the implementation of AI, AI Agents with use of VR/AR, Metaverse and 3D solutions to make financial operations visible, risk management, compliance and governance visible functions.
	
- Engaging in partnership activities (including arts sector) with the aim to foster innovation, support creative initiatives, and promote cultural projects as part of our consulting and transformation services. 
	
- Advising on onboarding and exit strategies and supporting Boards and Managements in defining, planning, and executing strategic and technological initiatives.

- Providing or mediating related services, establishing branches and subsidiaries in Switzerland and abroad.

Founder and CEO

Businessincub

Strategic Advisor in Risk and Technology matters 🔸 AI-driven Risk, Governance & Compliance

Member of the Experts Community - Technology & Risk Expert

Antonio Natale Contemporary Artist

Antonio Natale - The Artist of Banknotes. 
The essence of the Art of Antonio Natale is an invitation to an internal as well as an external voyage. Through the stories he tells, the Artist opens a secret doorway to an enchanted universe and invites the beholder to discover a thousand messages through a game of light and transparence mixed with tenderness and sarcasm. His messages are those of silenced people, the oppressed, the weak and the forgotten. They are also poems expressed through the eyes of love and internal beauty.

Global Partner at Antonio Natale Contemporary Artist

BOARDS Interconnected Insights

Daily news shared with my LinkedIn network in five topics. Each curated topic is a separate newsletter.

1️⃣ 𝗜𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 & 𝗧𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘆 
2️⃣ 𝗕𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 & 𝗘𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗲𝘂𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 
3️⃣ 𝗘𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝘆 & 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝘀 
4️⃣ 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 
5️⃣ 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗰𝘆𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴

Each contains three articles every weekday.
Subscribe to each BOARDS Newsletter https://www.birgulcotelli.com/newsletters

Owner

ImmersiveAssetManagement, ImmersiveFinance, ImmersiveBoards, ImmersiveGovernance

Project Director

World Business Angels Investment Forum (WBAF)

Senator for Switzerland

WOMEN FOR THE BOARD

GCO, Association du Groupement des Compliance Officers de Suisse Romande et du Tessin

Serving as the President of the association in the French and Italian speaking Switzerland. Chairing the Board of the association.

Chair of the Board - Group of Compliance Officers (pro-bono)

Credit Suisse

Director Business Risks - Investment & COO - Global Asset Management

Built and led an international team of Business Risk Managers filling critical gaps in coverage; assessed business-identified risks (95) for mitigation actioning which aligned controls, hence strengthened control environment, and enhanced the resilience of business risk embracement; designed and quality-assured business controls for effective execution which improved control awareness; advised the business before, during and after the Compliance, Risk and Audit reviews for readiness which refined executive management culture and yielded better audit ratings; developed and updated business conduct metrics for monitoring which ramped up compliance with internal regulations; managed operational incidents for understanding root-cause, drawing lessons learnt and actioning mitigation which reduced recurrence; conceived and built an Intranet platform to improve information flow and communication.

Head of Business Risk Management - Asset Management Switzerland - EMEA

Deutsche Bank (Switzerland) Ltd. and 2 Deutsche Trust Entities (DFS and DTTC)

• Regulatory developments, updates, and ensuring their implementation,
• Compliance Code of Conduct, policies and procedures,
• Compliance risk assessments,
• Suitability and appropriateness of products, 
• Cross-border risk management,
• Securities trading risk controls (insider dealing, employee trades, best execution, etc.),
• Marketing material review, 
• Conflicts of interest management,
• Dormant accounts,
• Other 2nd level spot checks for the asset management (investment compliance risk controls) and wealth management businesses,
• EMEA and Swiss new product and business initiative approvals committees member,
• EMEA Regulatory and Infrastructure Compliance committees member,
• Global Alternatives, Actif and Passif Products committees member,
• Advice to Global Client Group teams and Active, Passive, Alternatives, Deposits and Loans teams,
• Managing relationships with FINMA and investigations with different regulatory authorities,
• Leadership and management of double digit team.
• Served on the Switzerland Executive and Supervisory Board for regulatory risks.

Head of Compliance & Regulatory Risks - Asset and Wealth Management, Switzerland

🔸 Artificial Intelligence, AI Agents / VR / AR Strategist
🔸 Digitial Transformation Strategist
🔸 Economist 
🔸 Financial Professional with Background in Banking / Asset Management / Wealth Management 
🔸 Risk, Compliance and Governance Specialist
🔸 Responsible AI Advocate
🔸 Content Creator
🔸 Speaker

🔸🔸Passionate about Digital Business Transformation, Web3, Quantum Technology, Workforce Transformation and Economic Impacts of Technology & Innovation on Society and Humanity

🔸🔸Passionate about the crossroads between Art and Finance

🔸🔸As a seasoned finance professional with longstanding experience leading risk management, compliance, strategy and transformation for global financial institutions, I specialize in guiding organizations through complex regulatory landscapes and harnessing innovative technologies to achieve operational resilience. With senior roles at Deutsche Bank, Barclays, HSBC, BCGE and Credit Suisse, I’ve built and led multi-disciplinary teams to address critical financial, non-financial, compliance and risk challenges, establishing frameworks that not only meet regulatory standards but also strengthen business integrity and resilience.

🔸🔸I hold a Ph.D. in Finance from the University of Lausanne, complemented by cutting-edge certifications from MIT in AI, Virtual Reality, and Augmented Reality, alongside a COO credential, and a Certificate in Risk Governance. This blend of technical expertise and strategic acumen uniquely positions me to drive transformation in today’s evolving financial sector, where technology and governance increasingly intersect.

🔸🔸At the core of my approach is a commitment to ethical innovation and responsible AI. I’ve developed AI-driven frameworks for governance, risk, and compliance (GRC), enabling clients to adopt forward-thinking solutions that are as secure as they are compliant. As a recognized speaker and thought leader, I’m passionate about sharing insights on the future of disruptive technologies in finance, championing responsible and sustainable tech practices.

🔸🔸I welcome connections with those seeking a strategic partner in risk, compliance, strategic transformation or thought leadership in GRC, digital transformation, and innovation in financial services.

✔️ Board Member
✔️ Risk & Compliance Director  
✔️ Strategic Transformation in Finance  
✔️ AI, VR & AR Expertise  
✔️ Ethical AI & Responsible Innovation  
✔️ Global Financial Regulation

Birgul COTELLI, Ph. D.

Building AI governance that scales: the BLUEPRINT from institutions getting it right.

In architecting AI governance frameworks for banks, I've identified what separates leaders from laggards:

Banks scaling AI effectively have discovered something powerful.

They've built authority maps that enable confident decisions when model behavior becomes ambiguous.

Here's how to solve reporting line pain point that usually leads to organizational ambiguity.

𝗧𝗵𝗿𝗲𝗲-𝗹𝗮𝘆𝗲𝗿 𝗕𝗟𝗨𝗘𝗣𝗥𝗜𝗡𝗧

Three questions to test your structure transforms the framework from information into a diagnostic tool that you can use immediately.

𝟭 - 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗰 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 (Board + CEO)
• Risk appetite definition
• Model class approval authority definition
• Quarterly performance review against business outcomes

Insight -> focus on deployment parameters, not individual model approval.

𝟮 - 𝗢𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 (CRO + CTO + Chief AI Officer)
• Real-time model validation
• Drift monitoring with automated escalation thresholds
• Exception management with clear SLAs

Advantage -> fast-path authority for pre-approved model classes instead of centralized bottlenecks.

𝟯 - 𝗘𝘅𝗲𝗰𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝘂𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 (Business units)
• Deployment within pre-defined risk guardrails
• Exception reporting with root cause analysis
• P&L ownership for AI-driven decisions

Benefit -> accountable owners of business outcomes, not passive consumers of centralized AI.

𝗖𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲

Chief AI Officer reports directly to CEO, not CTO.

AI is a business transformation function, not an IT implementation project.

Model Risk reports to CRO, not IT.

Risk oversight requires independence from technology delivery.

Business AI leads maintain dual reporting: solid line to business unit head, dotted line to Chief AI Officer.

This structure enables banks with 4x faster deployment velocity while maintaining tighter risk controls.

The difference is in design. Structure that enables decisions, not structure that requires consensus.

The breakthrough: authority thresholds instead of approval chains.

Pre-approved model classes deploy confidently faster with automated monitoring.

Novel model classes trigger structured escalation with defined timelines.

Every decision has a Direct Responsible Individual (DRI), not a committee.

This approach turns governance from a gate into an accelerator.

What's the biggest opportunity to improve AI deployment velocity in your organization right now?

Guiding Boards Through Technological Disruption🔸Expert in Digital Governance, AI Ethics & Innovation Oversight🔸Board Director🔸Top 100 Thinkers360 Thought Leader🔸LinkedIn Top Voice in VR (May-Aug 24)🔸Speaker

Last week, I was surrounded by CROs from major banks.

CROs are veterans who've mastered Basel frameworks and regulatory compliance. People who don't flinch easily.

The room went silent mid-sentence.

David Leppan, founder of World-Check (now part of LSEG World-Check), had just said something that landed like a wake-up call.

'Compliance became a monster'.

But in that moment, something shifted.

Because he was talking about AML systems, KYC processes, transaction monitoring tools we built for compliance that we stopped questioning.

We built systems that became sacred.
Tools we treat as gospel.
Processes we follow because 'that's how regulators expect it'.

Meanwhile, financial criminals aren't following any playbook.
They're exploiting real-time payments, layering through digital wallets, and moving money across borders faster than our regular reviews.

I watched bank executives who've navigated every regulatory cycle pause.
Lean forward.
Reconsider assumptions they'd held since Dodd-Frank.

The real insight wasn't about sudden collapse. Banking governance doesn't fail overnight.

It erodes slowly, in the gaps between what our transaction monitoring flags and what we assume it catches.

Because we stopped questioning them.

We trust our AML algorithms too easily.
We assume our KYC data is current.
We believe suspicious activity reports capture the real threats.

That's the real risk in financial services today.

David was right. Our oversight isn't failing from lack of data. It's failing from blind spots in how we interpret alerts (or lack thereof), validate customer identities, and monitor cross-border flows.

Three things became clear:

1. Blind trust in legacy monitoring systems = the new conduct risk vector.
2. Transaction data without behavioral context = noise, not financial crime intelligence.
3. AI-screening without questioning = regulatory negligence, not innovation.

Bank Boards can no longer rely on compliance checkboxes.
They must rely on inquiry into what their systems actually see or don't see.

So here's the question that stayed with me:

Is your Board really seeing your risk and compliance blind spots or just assuming the monitoring system does?

PS: Thanks Swiss Risk Association and Jean-Pierre Colombara for this amazing organization and invitation

Your board asked for AI ROI last quarter. What did you tell them?

Not the narrative. The number.

Here's what separates ROI-disciplined institutions from expensive experiments:

𝟭 - 𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗸-𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗥𝗢𝗜 𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗿𝘆 𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗲

Financial services can't afford consumer tech's 'move fast' luxury. Every AI deployment carries operational, regulatory, and reputational risk.

The framework that works:

→ Calculate risk-adjusted NPV (Net Present Value) before any model goes live. Factor in compliance costs, model drift, and potential failure scenarios.

→ Demand minimum 150% ROI thresholds for process automation (the median benchmark for proven finance AI deployments).

→ Tie every initiative to measurable business outcomes: basis points of margin improvement, percentage reduction in false positives, days cut from tasks processing.

𝟮 - 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲-𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗴𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗽𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘀

Most firms lack the discipline to kill underperforming AI initiatives. They become zombie projects consuming resources indefinitely.

Elite institutions use hard gates:

→ Proof-of-concept must demonstrate quantifiable value within 90 days or terminate.

→ Pilot-to-production requires documented ROI validation and risk assessment.

→ Quarterly portfolio reviews with mandatory sunset decisions for bottom performers.

𝟯 - 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗰 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱 𝘃𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆

AI costs hide in cloud bills, vendor contracts, and distributed team budgets. Without line-item transparency, you're flying blind.

The control mechanism:

→ Model-level cost attribution for compute, storage, and maintenance.

→ Utilization metrics that expose unused or redundant deployments.

→ Commercial reviews treating AI spend like capital allocation, not R&D discretion.

The institutions winning this are the ones who can prove every dollar deployed returns measurable value.

If your team can't produce that proof on demand, you don't have an AI strategy. You have an expensive hope.

What's the hardest question your board will ask about AI spend in your next quarterly review?

The AI advantage nobody talks about. Your size is your liability.

For decades, scale meant safety.
• Bigger budgets
• Larger teams
• More resources

The reversal is already underway.

Nimble firms are crushing established players in AI execution.
Not through brute force.
Through surgical precision.

𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝘁𝗼 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 ...

𝗦𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲𝗱 𝘀𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗲 𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰.

Small teams ship solutions in weeks.
Large organizations spend months in alignment meetings while opportunities vanish.

𝗖𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗻 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗯𝗲𝗮𝘁𝘀 𝗯𝗶𝗴 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲.

Targeted datasets drive real results. Enterprises drown in:
• Fragmented systems
• Legacy tech debt
• Compliance paralysis

𝗣𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝘀 𝗮𝗺𝗯𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗹𝘆.

Narrow use cases generate measurable ROI.
Sprawling transformation programs create beautiful decks and zero accountability.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗼𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗰𝗸 𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗹.

• Bureaucracy kills experimentation
• Internal politics dissolve ownership

AI doesn't fail in large organizations. Your operating model does.

𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗲𝘅𝗲𝗰𝘂𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴

The boards seeing results changed three things:

1. They gave small teams real authority to execute
2. They tied outcomes directly to commercial impact
3. They eliminated legacy processes that block speed

AI exposes what you've been avoiding.

It rewards focus. It punishes comfort.

The question is beyond whether you're investing in AI. It's whether your organization can actually execute on it or if you're still protecting the system that got you here.

What's blocking speed in your organization right now?

*******

DM to get link to Calendly

Most AI governance programs are built for the boardroom, not the front line.

They look impressive in strategy decks.
They establish important principles.
They create necessary frameworks.

But the real opportunity lies in connecting those principles to operational excellence.

Because foundational governance without execution is half-done governance.

Here's what separates foundational from operational governance:

𝗙𝗢𝗨𝗡𝗗𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡𝗔𝗟 𝗚𝗢𝗩𝗘𝗥𝗡𝗔𝗡𝗖𝗘

• Ethics framework on the website
• Annual AI principles document
• Vendor questionnaires filed away
• Quarterly 'AI update' slides
• Risk register that never changes

𝗢𝗣𝗘𝗥𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡𝗔𝗟 𝗚𝗢𝗩𝗘𝗥𝗡𝗔𝗡𝗖𝗘

• Contractual liability clauses with vendors
• Automated audit trails for every decision
• Board dashboards tracking AI incidents
• Pre-deployment impact assessments
• Documented rollback procedures

The difference creates competitive advantage.

➟ Foundational governance asks 'What are our values?'
Operational governance asks 'How do we prove them?'

➟ Foundational governance creates strategic committees.
Operational governance creates clear accountability.

➟ Foundational governance produces principles.
Operational governance produces defensible evidence.

If your AI governance can answer 'Who's accountable when this succeeds or fails?' in under 30 seconds, you've built something powerful.

The financial institutions that lead through the next wave of AI transformation won't be the ones with just the best frameworks.

They'll be the ones with operational rigor that turns principles into provable action.

Because sustainable competitive advantage comes from execution excellence aligned with strategy documents.

Where does your governance framework stand? Foundational only or operational aligned with foundational?

Most companies treat AI governance like a seatbelt.

Necessary. Boring. Annoying.

One enterprise didn't.

Not long ago, they were drowning in shadow AI, unapproved models, and inconsistent controls everywhere.

The board thought their AI exposure was a legal problem.

It wasn't. It was a value problem disguised as compliance.

What did they do differently?

When they rewired governance from box-ticking to board-level discipline:

𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗸𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝟰𝟮% 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗔𝗜 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘀

➜ No clarity? No controls? No greenlight.

➜ Dead weight disappeared. Resources shifted to models that actually moved revenue and reduced loss.

➜ The CFO: 'We finally know which projects are worth funding'.

𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝟭𝟵 𝗔𝗜 𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺𝘀 𝗵𝗶𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗼𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝘀

➜ Procured years earlier. Never disclosed as AI. Quietly influencing thousands of decisions daily.

➜ Governance gave them bargaining power. Vendors agreed to new terms and model-level accountability.

𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗻𝗲𝗱 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗮𝗱𝘃𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲

Instead of 'monitoring for compliance', they used drift reports to:

• Anticipate fraud patterns
• Re-price risk faster
• Adjust credit strategies mid-cycle
• Improve customer experience with fewer false declines

The CRO: 'Governance became the radar, more than paperwork'.

𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝘁 𝗮 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗻

For the first time, the board had a view of:

• Every model in production
• Dependencies between models
• Which decisions were automated
• Where humans had real vs. illusionary oversight

𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝘀𝗽𝗼𝘁𝘀.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗼𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝘆𝗯𝗼𝗼𝗸 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗴:

➜ AI governance creates the conditions for scaled, defensible, high-ROI innovation.

➜ The companies winning the next decade will be the the ones governing AI, well enough to deploy it with confidence.

And that always starts in the boardroom.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁'𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗽𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗯𝗼𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗔𝗜 𝗴𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝘁𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗮𝗱𝘃𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗰𝗸𝗯𝗼𝘅?

If you already know you need to:
- lay your AI systems onto the table
- discover your shadow AI exposure
- uncover blindspots
- and rebuild the decision chain

✍️ DM me
📩 to birgul.cotelli@suitekk.com

Your board approved AI strategy. But can they answer the one question that predicts failure?

Most boards are flying blind. They're approving budgets, nodding at demos, and trusting dashboards that obscure reality.

Meanwhile, critical decisions are being made by systems no one fully understands, dependencies are stacking up with vendors no one has validated, and exposure is growing faster than governance.

The gap between what boards think they control and what they actually control has never been wider.

Boards don’t need more decks. They need sharper questions.

Boards that stay in command ask:

1. What portion of revenue depends on AI systems we don't fully control?
2. Can we quantify exposure if a core model fails tomorrow morning?
3. Which decisions became machine-influenced without formal approval?
4. Do we have one accountable owner for AI risk, or is this scattered?
5. What percentage of third-party AI has been independently validated?
6. Where are we using black box outputs when regulators expect traceability?
7. Are we measuring model drift as seriously as cyber threats?
8. Which systems affect customers without human intervention?
9. Is the board getting real data or theatre?
10. What triggers a model shutdown? Who has authority?
11. How are we protecting proprietary data in external AI ecosystems?
12. Are we capturing ROI or funding experiments with no exit criteria?
13. How many critical processes stall if one vendor fails?
14. Which risks are compounding because teams assume AI will handle it?
15. If an incident hit tomorrow, could we defend our governance without hesitation?

Most boards ask some of these.

Very few ask all of them.

If your leadership can answer these questions directly, you're ahead of most competitors.

If not, make this your next board session.

Which of these questions would expose the biggest blind spot in your AI governance today?

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗸 𝗶𝗻 𝟲𝟬 𝘀𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗱𝘀 🗓️ 1st - 5th Dec 2025

You’re running out of time to keep up with relevant information on the market.

In the weekly newsletters, information is compiled, and ideas are built for decision-makers like you.

This week's BOARDS Newsletter maps macro and micro forces into strategic moves for leaders running major financial institutions:

• AI safety failures became investment risk: independent audits reveal gaps in alignment and monitoring. Capital now prices governance competence.

• Compute centrality hardened: on-prem AI factories and GPU capex are converting into strategic infrastructure, not just cost items.

• Operational velocity rewrites competition: 30-minute logistics tests and task-level automation remap who controls margins.

• Macro signal recalibration: central bank ledger recovery and steady Swiss inflation free up policy bandwidth even as tariffs depress trade.

• Tactical imperative for boards: treat governance as product design, embed verifiable controls into systems, or accept restricted market access.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

The full analysis connects innovation velocity, business transformation, macro signals, investor behavior, and AI risk into one strategic map.

This is for leaders building strategies that work across different scenarios.

Enjoy the full edition here:
https://lnkd.in/dBQDjkcD
by BOARDS Interconnected Insights

78% of enterprise AI deployments lacking proper security protocols despite

$18B annual investment in tech
$2B annual investment in AI

But why do even the world's most sophisticated financial institutions struggle to operationalize AI at scale?

It's called ...

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝗜 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗼𝘅

Research from JPMorganChase reveals the hidden friction points:

The bank invests $2B annually in AI yet admits a massive 'value gap' between what AI can do and what organizations can actually deploy.

Despite 450+ pilots (with ambition of 1,000 pilots), integration across 100,000+ legacy systems takes months per use case.

Not surprisingly, AI vulnerabilities have tripled since mass adoption, forcing security reviews that slow everything down.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗼𝗻: AI transformation is an organizational infrastructure problem.

It's like when you buy a Ferrari but your garage door is too narrow. The car works perfectly. Your infrastructure just can't support it.

𝗦𝗼, 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗱𝗼?

Start with the boring wins: contract automation, coding assistants, meeting summarization.

It's possible to save annually

360,000 hours of work
$1.5B costs

like JPMorgan did it. It saved 360,000 hours annually not from cutting-edge agentic AI, but from secure ChatGPT-style contract automation tools.
200,000 employees (out of 317,000) are using other similar tools daily.

This is massive. And ...

These 'simple' implementations deliver immediate ROI while you modernize data architecture, build governance frameworks, and retrain teams.

This is the foundational work that makes advanced AI possible.

So next time you find yourself chasing the latest AI breakthrough, remember the Implementation Paradox and the importance of building infrastructure before deploying innovation.


Which phase are you at?

✍️ DM me
or
📩 to birgul.cotelli@suitekk.com

𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙐𝙣𝙚𝙖𝙨𝙮 𝙀𝙭𝙥𝙖𝙣𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣: 𝙏𝙧𝙖𝙙𝙚 𝙁𝙧𝙞𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣, 𝙋𝙤𝙡𝙞𝙘𝙮 𝘿𝙤𝙪𝙗𝙩 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝙀𝙪𝙧𝙤𝙥𝙚’𝙨 𝙉𝙚𝙬 𝙍𝙚𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮

The global economy is entering a peculiar moment: trade barriers are biting harder, Europe is straining to hold its delicate momentum, and the US Federal Reserve Board is wrestling with its own convictions. Tariffs, consumption resilience, currency effects, labor-market fatigue, and political volatility are all pressing against each other at once. What emerges is a world where growth still materializes, but its foundations feel thinner and its outlook more fractured.

The following three articles capture that fracture with clarity: from the worldwide toll of US tariffs, to the European Union’s recalibration of its growth hopes, to an American central bank wrestling with internal discord.

1️⃣ 𝗛𝗶𝗴𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗧𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗳𝗳𝘀 𝗧𝗮𝗸𝗲 𝗧𝗼𝗹𝗹 𝗢𝗻 𝗚𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹 𝗚𝗿𝗼𝘄𝘁𝗵, 𝗔𝗻𝗱 𝗜𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝗜𝘀 𝗦𝗲𝘁 𝗧𝗼 𝗟𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗿
2️⃣ 𝗘𝗨 𝗟𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗚𝗿𝗼𝘄𝘁𝗵 𝗢𝘂𝘁𝗹𝗼𝗼𝗸 𝗙𝗼𝗿 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟲 𝗢𝗻 𝗛𝗶𝗴𝗵𝗲𝗿-𝗧𝗵𝗮𝗻-𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗨𝗦 𝗧𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗳𝗳𝘀
3️⃣ 𝗙𝗲𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲 𝗢𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹𝘀 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗴𝗹𝘆 𝗗𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝗢𝗻 𝗗𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿 𝗥𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗖𝘂𝘁

Read more in my 𝗡𝗲𝘄𝘀𝗹𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗘𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝘆 & 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝘀 𝗕𝗼𝗮𝗿𝗱.

Sources: Wsj.com Ft.com

European Commission European Union Federal Reserve Board The World Bank Bank of England OECD - OCDE Bureau of Economic Analysis J.P. Morgan The Wall Street Journal Federal Reserve Board CME Group Bureau of Labor Statistics Financial Times Wikipedia

Enjoyed my 𝗕𝗢𝗔𝗥𝗗𝗦 𝗡𝗲𝘄𝘀𝗹𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀 series?

👍 Like | 💬 Comment | ♻ Repost | 🗞 Subscribe | 🔔 Follow | 🤝 Connect | 💾 Save

📌📢 Follow my BOARDS Newsletters series by BOARDS Interconnected Insights

The global economy is entering a peculiar moment: trade barriers are biting harder, Europe is straining to hold its delicate momentum, and the U.S. Fe

Open article: The Uneasy Expansion: Trade Friction, Policy Doubt And Europe’s New Reality by Birgul COTELLI, Ph. D. • 7 min read

The Uneasy Expansion: Trade Friction, Policy Doubt And Europe’s New Reality

Most bank failures in 2023 shared one fatal flaw: they governed for a single future.


But why do Boards still ask CROs:

'What do you think will happen?'
instead of
'What if your plan hits reality and breaks?'


𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗺𝘂𝗹𝘁𝗶-𝗳𝘂𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗴𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲

Research shows the strongest banks don't predict one path.
They prepare for multiple paths simultaneously.

1. JPMorganChase ran severe internal stress tests for decades, proving resilience under extreme recessions. 

2. Bank of America built diversified earnings and strong capital buffers to withstand multiple downturn paths.

3. U.S. Bank, PNC, and Truist all cleared the 2025 Federal Reserve Board  stress tests with comfortable margins.

The main reason this works is simple:
they assumed the macro story would surprise them, so they rehearsed those surprises.

It's like when a pilot trains for engine failure, bird strikes, and weather emergencies, not just smooth landings.


Meanwhile, others had bet the franchise on a single scenario.

1. Silicon Valley Bank collapsed after rate hikes crushed its unhedged long-duration securities.
2. Signature Bank failed two days later due to rapid uninsured deposit flight.
3. First Republic Bank unraveled under intense interest-rate sensitivity and massive deposit outflows.


𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗵 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱

- Stop asking CROs to predict the future.
- Start asking them how many futures the institution is prepared for.

Governance wins when you stress-test multiple futures, not forecast one.


And the reality nobody reflects on yet:

𝗔𝗜 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗳𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗴𝗮𝗽 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆

When your assumptions are wrong, AI doesn't warn you, it accelerates you toward the wrong future with precision and speed.

That's why multi-future governance is survival.


Here's your 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝘅𝘁 𝗕𝗼𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗺𝗲𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴

Before the meeting:

- Audit your current scenarios. If you can count them on one hand, you're exposed.
- Challenge each assumption: what breaks if rates spike, if liquidity dries up, if correlations flip?

During the meeting:

- Replace 'What's our base case?' with 'Show me three radically different futures we're stress-testing'.
- Demand quantified exposure across each scenario, not just the comfortable middle path.
- Rehearse decision trees: if X happens, we do Y within 48 hours.

After the meeting:

- Assign ownership. Who monitors early warnings for each future? Who pulls the trigger on contingency plans?
- Schedule quarterly scenario reviews, not annual checkbox exercises.

The question that separates prepared institutions from failed ones:

⛔ Don't ask 'What will happen?'
✅ Ask 'How many futures are we ready for, and can we prove it?'

Boards stopped asking 'are we digital?' two years ago.

Now they ask: 'where's the economic return?'

Digital transformation delivered better systems. Economic transformation delivers better unit economics.

The difference? Spatial and data-driven platforms that turn information into capital efficiency.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗱 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗼𝗮𝗿𝗱𝗿𝗼𝗼𝗺

➟ Traditional digital: cleaner dashboards, faster workflows, incremental gains.

➟ Economic transformation: measurable balance-sheet impact, margin durability, defensible advantage.

➟ Technology is not the story anymore. Economics is.

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝘀𝗽𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘄

➟ Data without context is noise.

➟ Spatial platforms immerse location, time, assets, and behavior into one operational view.

➟ That's what lets you price risk correctly, deploy capital precisely, and eliminate structural waste.

In global lending alone, the institutions that can see risk spatially will capture efficiency gains measured in billions...

... from pricing each one right.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝗯𝗼𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀

• Where is value leaking today?
• Which decisions improve if we see the full system, not silos?
• How fast can we convert insight into action?
• What platforms still pay us back in five years?

𝗕𝗲𝗰𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗲

➟ Projects expire. Platforms compound.

➟ They learn, adapt, and keep producing returns across cycles: operations, supply chains, customer value, risk control.

➟ When spatial and enterprise data converge, strategy stops living in decks. You can simulate scenarios, stress-test assumptions, and act before lagging indicators show damage.

Boards that recognize this early build spatial platforms as economic infrastructure.

Those that don't will keep modern systems and old results.

What question would you ask your team tomorrow if you could see every lending decision in spatial context?

𝟴𝟱% 𝗼𝗳 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗻𝗲 𝟱𝟬𝟬 𝗯𝗼𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗳𝗶𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗱𝘂𝘁𝘆

Yet, most of us in the C-suite & boards still haven't recognized how vendor AI creates personal liability for directors.

Ethisphere's 2025 report confirms what courts have been signaling: Directors who ignore third-party AI risk are now legally exposed.

Here's the reality

Your bank signs vendor contracts every day.

Those vendors deploy AI to screen transactions, assess credit risk, process customer data, make lending decisions.

You never verified their AI governance. Never audited their algorithms. Never added AI liability clauses.

When their system fails? Your balance sheet. Your shareholders. Your reputation.

This isn't traditional vendor management anymore. It's systemic risk architecture.

Courts are extending enterprise liability to AI systems operated by third parties. If your institution benefits from the algorithmic output, you're a joint controller under emerging frameworks.

Translation: your vendors' AI failures become your regulatory violations.

Let me take the example of Delaware's Caremark doctrine. The fiduciary dimension most boards could use:

→ Caremark duty of oversight now extends to AI systems across your value chain

→ Failure to implement adequate AI governance frameworks = potential breach of fiduciary duty

→ Delaware courts signaled this in 2024. Enforcement accelerates in 2025.

→ SEC disclosure requirements and EU AI Act obligations are converging fast

The arbitrage window is closing.

What actually works in systemic banking institutions

→ Contractual AI clauses with audit rights and clear liability allocation

→ Human-in-the-loop requirements for all high-stakes credit and risk decisions

→ Board-level AI risk dashboards with real-time vendor metrics

→ Risk-tiered due diligence protocols matching governance intensity to algorithmic impact

The controversial truth

Most banks have AI ethics principles on their website while their vendors run unaudited AI systems processing billions in transactions.

That's not governance theater. That's liability architecture.

The question isn't whether your bank uses AI responsibly.

The question is whether your thousands of vendors are using AI responsibly.

And whether your governance framework can prove it when regulators, plaintiffs, or shareholders demand answers.

𝟴𝟱% 𝗼𝗳 𝗺𝗮𝗷𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝗻'𝘁.

That's a fiduciary failure with balance sheet implications.

How is your institution closing the third-party AI governance gap?

Every AI initiative looks bulletproof in the pitch deck.

The best ones deliver billions in sustainable advantage.

The difference?

One capability: the clarity to back winners decisively and the confidence to redirect everything else toward strategic priorities.

You don't need another innovation program.

You need a decision architecture that identifies strategic weapons and concentrates capital where it multiplies enterprise value.

Let's talk about the strategic clarity every financial services leader needs to win with AI.

𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗙𝗜𝗟𝗧𝗘𝗥 𝗜𝗦𝗡'𝗧 𝗖𝗢𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗜𝗖𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗗. 𝗜𝗧'𝗦 𝗣𝗥𝗘𝗖𝗜𝗦𝗘.

Here's what earns capital:

𝟭. 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗰 𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗵𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴

Does this system strengthen a core revenue engine or critical risk position?

If it's adjacent or experimental without clear enterprise leverage, redirect the investment. Vision with strategic mooring creates competitive separation.

𝟮. 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲

Can you explain the model's behavior under adversarial pressure, regulatory scrutiny, and operational stress?

If the answer involves uncertainty about model mechanics, you're not ready to scale. Confidence comes from clarity.

𝟯. 𝗚𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝘀 𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗿

Does the governance structure accelerate value capture or create unnecessary complexity?

If compliance becomes a constant negotiation, if audit trails multiply without adding control, you need better alignment between oversight and execution.

𝟰. 𝗗𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼

What's the cost-to-dominance ratio? Not cost-to-savings. Dominance.

If the initiative can't materially widen your competitive gap or fortify your risk position, redirect the capital. Efficiency plays are table stakes. Strategic separation is what justifies bold investment.

𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗣𝗔𝗧𝗧𝗘𝗥𝗡 𝗧𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗪𝗜𝗡𝗦

The financial institutions winning this decade aren't deploying the most models. They're backing the right ones with conviction and reallocating resources with absolute clarity.

Firms with mature oversight frameworks consistently outperform on value realization, operational control, and strategic confidence.

Governance isn't the constraint. It's the targeting system that enables bold moves.

𝗬𝗢𝗨𝗥 𝗗𝗘𝗖𝗜𝗦𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗙𝗥𝗔𝗠𝗘𝗪𝗢𝗥𝗞 𝗙𝗢𝗥 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟲

If the model can prove strategic fit, controllable risk, and material advantage simultaneously, it earns full backing.

No hesitation. No incremental funding. No pilot phase that never scales.

The financial services leaders with enough governance clarity to make high-conviction bets and enough strategic discipline to concentrate resources on what truly matters will dominate the next cycle.

𝗛𝗘𝗥𝗘'𝗦 𝗠𝗬 𝗤𝗨𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗙𝗢𝗥 𝗬𝗢𝗨

If your board applied this filter to every AI initiative in flight today, how many would earn immediate scaling?

Drop a number in the comments.

🚀 The Strategic Intelligence Brief - weekly newsletter - 8th - 12th Dec 2025

Most people won't see it for another 6-12 months.

But if you're building strategy, you need to see it now.

Here's what I'm covering this week:

• Innovation that matters: the actual technological shifts reshaping competitive advantage in the next 18 months.

• Where the money's moving: capital allocation patterns that reveal strategic intent and what's coming.

• Global strategic moves: the geopolitical chess game impacting your business environment, supply chains, and market access.

• Governance and control: new regulations and power structures defining your operating landscape.

This is for leaders who need to understand what's really happening beneath the headlines.

You can't build strategy on surface-level news.

The leaders who win see connections others miss.

➡️Follow the link by clicking on this post.
➡️Subscribe if you're building strategy, not just following headlines.

Thank you for reading!

1. 🧠 The Executive and Board View The transformation that matters most This week, infrastructure innovation and talent strategy are the headline topi

Open article: The Week Compute Broke Free: Power, Talent, And Control In The New AI Order by Birgul COTELLI, Ph. D. • 2 min read

The Week Compute Broke Free: Power, Talent, And Control In The New AI Order

⚠️The next wave of systemic risk won’t come from climate, credit, or capital.
It will come from cognitive reliance, interdependence, AI behavior, too much algorithm and invisible infrastructure.

Layers nobody supervises, yet everyone depends on.


🔍Here are five blind-spot risks that deserve immediate attention

1️⃣🧠 Cognitive infrastructure risk

•  Markets now rely on AI-filtered judgment
•  A single modeling bias can spread across institutions
•  Creates correlated misperception across credit, trading, and compliance
•  Distorts market intelligence, not just outputs

2️⃣🏗️Structural interdependence risk

•  Swiss institutions specialize heavily in narrow economic roles
•  Weakness in one pillar (e.g., cross-border flows, wealth structuring) cascades fast
•  No backup to absorb the shock → capability collapse. When one specialized function fails, the system stops rather than slows 
•  Strategic over-specialization risk → being so narrowly excellent at one role that the system becomes incapable of adapting when disruption hits 

3️⃣🫥Invisible infrastructure exposure

•  Financial institutions depend on unseen utilities:
 – identity rails
 – behavioral-analytics engines
 – data integrity layers
 – custody micro-services
•  These don’t appear on outsourcing maps
•  A failure here causes synchronized operational disruption

4️⃣👩‍💻Algorithmic feedback-loop risk

•  AI tools increasingly react to each other’s decisions
•  Micro-adjustments cascade across pricing, scoring, liquidity
•  Creates volatile, self-reinforcing loops
•  A system that becomes too algorithmic to self-stabilise

5️⃣🎯Competence risk in hyper-complex regulation

•  Regulation evolves more complex than capability
•  Institutions struggle to absorb and operationalise expectations
•  Not non-compliance — institutional cognitive overload
•  A hidden drag on risk management quality


❓Which blind spot deserves priority? 
💭Drop your thoughts in Comments.

‼️The smartest insights often come from practitioners on the ground. 


📌📢 Follow my BOARDS Newsletters series by BOARDS Interconnected Insights

Is your board incinerating capital on AI projects?

Most financial institutions treat AI like discretionary R&D, experimental budgets, pilot programs, innovation labs that never scale.

Meanwhile, the market is advancing. Your competitors are doing more than just experimenting. They're executing.

The damage is opportunity cost at institutional scale.

Every quarter without a disciplined AI strategy is market dominance you won't recapture.

Every vendor pitch that lands without scrutiny is liability you can't quantify.

Every pilot that dies quietly is capital that could have compounded.

𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲'𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻

⛔️ Stop funding AI projects.
✅ Start approving AI capital investments.

Identical rigor you apply to M&A, infrastructure, or treasury operations.

𝗛𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗰𝗸 𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿𝘀

➢ What's the quantified downside if this fails?
Not theoretical. In dollars, regulatory exposure, reputational damage.

➢ Does the ROI withstand stress scenarios?
Market downturn, vendor collapse, model drift?

➢ Can we terminate fast if performance deteriorates?
Or are we locked into multi-year contracts with embedded dependencies?

➢ Who owns the liability?
Us or the vendor selling us their black box?

If boards can't answer these, that's the vulnerability.

I'm architecting the framework that makes these questions standard, not aspirational.

Because your fiduciary duty is to protect capital while capturing asymmetric upside.

Otherwise, there'll be real cost of waiting another year while your competitors build moats you can't cross.

If your board needs this filter, let's build it together.

✍️ DM me
or
📩 to birgul.cotelli@suitekk.com

$400B question every board should be asking: why do we still make decisions like it's 2008?

The institutions capturing efficiency gains in today's $12 trillion lending market are architected to make bad decisions structurally impossible.

Credit velocity, regulatory latency, and capital efficiency now move at incompatible speeds.

Running 20th-century command structures against this reality doesn't just slow you down. It bleeds margin.
The gap is structural.

I'm breaking down what separates institutions capturing efficiency gains from those watching margin compression accelerate:

𝟭. 𝗗𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘃𝗲𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝘃𝘀. 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗲 𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘀𝗶𝘀

Traditional credit committees were built for quarterly reviews, static models, and sequential approvals.

You've likely watched a deal slip away while waiting for committee approval.

Adaptive banks run real-time intelligence loops where:

• Credit signals flow directly into decisions
• Portfolio shifts trigger instant recalibration
• Every day of delay costs you basis points

Speed isn't just efficiency. It's your competitive edge.

𝟮. 𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝗮𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝘁𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲

Legacy frameworks treat risk as compliance overhead.

You've probably watched risk teams catch problems after they've already cost you.

Elite institutions flip this:

• Detecting stress signals while you can still act
• Spotting deterioration when rebalancing actually works
• Catching dislocations before everyone else reprices

This is where AI stops being an expense and starts generating alpha.

𝟯. 𝗖𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝗿𝗴 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗿𝘁𝘀

Banks organized around product silos can't compete with institutions that deploy talent as dynamic capability.

You know the bottleneck: waiting days for the right expertise while deals slip away.

Leading teams now deploy talent fluidly by matching capability with data scientists, credit analysts, automation specialists to opportunity in hours, not weeks.

𝟰. 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 𝗮𝘀 𝗹𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝘆𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗺

Annual strategic plans are artifacts in an industry where conditions change quarterly.

You've seen this: strategy decks gathering dust while markets shift.

Leading institutions treat strategy differently:

• Test like startups
• Validate ruthlessly
• Cut losses fast
• Scale what works

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘁𝗵

Banks pulling ahead are led by architects who build systems incapable of producing bad decisions

by

leadership as infrastructure design

not executive presence.

𝗟𝗲𝘁 𝗺𝗲 𝗮𝘀𝗸 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀

What if your board's biggest liability isn't bad decisions, but the architecture that makes reversing them impossible?

*************

To build it together

✍️ DM me
or
📩 to birgul.cotelli@suitekk.com

Your lending institution is accountable for AI decisions you never approved.

Most bank boards believe their AI exposure lives in models they commissioned.
Credit risk engines.
Fraud detection.
Portfolio analytics.

That's 10% of the picture.

The other 90% runs through vendor systems you procured years ago, before anyone asked if machine learning sat inside them.

Credit decisioning platforms. Third-party data enrichment. KYC screening tools. Collections optimization. Loan origination software. Risk scoring APIs.

These were sold as solutions.

Now they govern billions in lending decisions daily.

This is what a Third-Party AI Risk Heatmap reveals and why it belongs in every board pack:

→ Embedded AI in systems you believed were deterministic

Vendors replaced rule-based logic with probabilistic models. Without disclosure. Without your ML governance applying. Without your risk function aware.

You're accountable for those decisions. Regulators won't accept 'we didn't know' as a defense.

→ Data provenance you can't verify

Your vendor's model may train on:
• Scraped datasets
• Inferred demographics
• Consent chains that don't meet your standards

When fair lending violations surface, the OCC investigates you first. Not your vendor.

→ Concentration risk across your vendor stack

Multiple tools in your ecosystem likely share the same foundation models or upstream data providers.

One failure point → cascades across credit, compliance, and operations simultaneously.

→ Illusory human oversight

You believe loan officers retain final authority. The heatmap often shows otherwise: they're rubber-stamping model outputs with no practical override capacity.

That's automated lending. With your institution holding full liability.

→ Contract gaps that evaporate under scrutiny

Your vendor agreements cover:
• Uptime ✓
• Cybersecurity ✓
• Model behaviour ✗
• Fairness obligations ✗
• Error correction ✗
• Explainability rights ✗

When a model misfires and regulators demand answers, those contracts offer no protection.

→ Cross-border decision exposure

A vendor routing decisions through offshore infrastructure can trigger jurisdictional penalties, even when your operations are fully domestic.

You're responsible for every jurisdiction your vendors touch.

× × ×

The board-level reality:

You have an AI supply chain you've never stress-tested.

The heatmap is a fiduciary instrument.

It surfaces the AI estate you don't control but will answer for when lending decisions go wrong, when bias claims emerge, when regulators investigate.

Every AI-influenced decision made in your institution's name is your accountability.

Regardless of who built the model.

That principle changes everything.

My question to you:
❓What did you learn the hard way?

The board meeting just got more interesting.

48% of Fortune 100 companies now explicitly cite AI risk in their board oversight disclosures. That's triple last year's 16%.

Not because it's trendy. Because employees are feeding your proprietary data into ChatGPT at an alarming rate.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗰𝗸

➤ 78% of employees admit to using AI tools at work. 58% confess to sharing sensitive company information with large language models.

➤ Meanwhile, deepfakes have become the second most common cybersecurity incident after malware.

➤ Ransomware attacks jumped over a third in the past year.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗕𝗼𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗴

➤ 73% now align to external frameworks like NIST CSF 2.0 (up from 4% in 2019)

➤ 58% conduct cyber preparedness simulations and tabletop exercises

➤ 40% assigned AI oversight to specific committees, usually audit

➤ 44% updated director bios to include AI expertise

The disclosure gap is widening between companies that treat this as compliance check-the-box exercise  and those building genuine governance muscle.

𝗧𝗵𝗿𝗲𝗲 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗕𝗼𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝘀𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗾𝘂𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗲𝗿

1. Does your audit committee have bandwidth for AI oversight, or does this need a dedicated technology committee?

2. When did your board last participate in a cyber incident simulation? Not review a plan. Actually run the drill.

3. Can you articulate which external cybersecurity framework you use and why you chose it over alternatives?

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗴𝘂𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗶𝗻 𝗡𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗵 𝗔𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮

The environment is in flux:

➤ SEC Chair Atkins rescinded several proposed cybersecurity rules

➤ California and New York are writing their own AI laws

➤ Federal CISA 2015 expired in September

Governance quality matters more than regulatory compliance.

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘄

Investors, customers, and regulators are reading your proxy statements. They're comparing your AI risk disclosures to your competitors'. They're noticing which boards added AI expertise and which didn't.

➤ The companies getting this right are doing more than just checking boxes.
➤ They're asking harder questions, bringing in outside expertise, and stress-testing their response capabilities.

Your next board meeting is the right time to start.

What's the biggest gap between your board's AI risk awareness and your actual employee AI usage?

taplio

The Battle

Phillip J Mostert 🇿🇦

Birgul COTELLI, Ph. D.

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScorePhillip J Mostert 🇿🇦's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreBirgul COTELLI, Ph. D.'s LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Phillip J Mostert 🇿🇦

Birgul COTELLI, Ph. D.

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Phillip J Mostert 🇿🇦's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreBirgul COTELLI, Ph. D.'s LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScorePhillip J Mostert 🇿🇦's LinkedIn Performance