Globale Wirtschaft und Märkte
Experten, die die sich wandelnden Finanzmärkte, politische Entscheidungen und makroökonomische Kräfte analysieren und erklären
Speakers Associates represents 237 speakers on Globale Wirtschaft und Märkte, including Stephen Foerster, Lord Kim Darroch, Marcelo Carvalho, Elena Boheme, Jean Asselborn, Margarida Matos Rosa, Juliet Mann, Katie Prescott, Omar Christidis und Dan Walters.
Most organisations now run two AI agendas in parallel and neither one is working. The compliance agenda is ahead of the strategy agenda, and the strategy agenda is ahead of the operating model. Boards need a coherent way to think about AI as economic infrastructure, not as a procurement question, while the technology is still moving faster than their policies, their hiring, and their planning cycles can absorb.
Boards and executives operate within governance structures they did not design and often do not fully understand. The rules governing corporate ownership, shareholder power, and financial regulation are products of political bargaining, not economic optimisation. When organisations misidentify the source of a structural constraint – blaming short-termism for problems caused by political uncertainty, or blaming regulation for trends driven by market consolidation – they pursue the wrong remedies and expose themselves to risks they have not diagnosed.
Capital decisions are being made against a backdrop of stalled productivity, contested financial regulation, and a generative AI build-out whose macroeconomic payoff is still unproven. Boards need to read the policy weather accurately and price the implications into operating assumptions. The hard part is separating durable structural shifts from cycle noise and political theatre.
Building brand value in Asia is not a translation problem. It is a strategy problem that asks Western playbooks to do work they were never designed for, and asks family-controlled businesses to professionalise without losing what made them defensible in the first place. Most boards underestimate how much of that distance is leadership work, not marketing work.
Senior leaders increasingly stage their highest-stakes conversations on stage: investor days, ministerial panels, all-hands moments, awards nights. The person at the front shapes whether those conversations land or stall. Most events fail not because the content is weak but because the chair cannot pace a room, press a guest, or hold a live audience when the script slips.
Boards now meet against a backdrop of war in Europe, an unstable transatlantic relationship, and a US administration whose decisions reset global risk calculations week by week. Most senior teams know the headlines. What they need is a reader of the system who has stood in those rooms, on those frontlines, and can tell them which signals matter and which are noise.
European political risk is rarely as simple as reading election results. Governments form and fall through coalition mechanics that most business advisers, and most executives, cannot reliably read from the outside. For organisations operating across EU markets, the question is how to build genuine political intelligence into strategic planning before regulatory or institutional disruption arrives.
A panel on geopolitics or macro risk only earns its place on the agenda if the chair can move it. Most senior audiences have already read the headlines. What they need is a host who can press a finance minister, redirect a CEO, and surface the answer the room actually came for, on the clock, on camera, without losing the temperature of the discussion.
Boards and investment committees are now making capital decisions inside a global monetary system whose architecture is under open political pressure. Tariff regimes, sanctions, dollar reserves and central bank independence are no longer settled background conditions; they are live variables. Senior leaders need a way to read these signals that goes beyond the daily headlines and connects trade, currency and fiscal policy as one system.
Boards are making bets on Europe, India, and the transatlantic relationship without anyone in the room who has actually negotiated at that table. Macro briefings explain the weather. They do not tell you how Berlin will react to a tariff letter, what New Delhi will accept on market access, or how Washington reads a European industrial policy move. The gap between geopolitical headline and commercial decision is where serious money is being lost.
Boards and executive teams in the UK and Europe are operating against a backdrop of unstable politics, contested public finances, and shifting defence and security priorities. The risk is no longer that policy is hard to read; it is that decisions inside government move faster than the assumptions underpinning corporate strategy. Senior leaders need someone who has sat at the Cabinet table and can explain how those decisions actually get made.