These are the corporate governance trends for 2026

Division
Our respondents were presented with ten statements about trends that are currently in the spotlight. About two-thirds agree that AI will replace more jobs this year than in 2025, that boards will be insufficiently prepared for cyber risks in 2026, and that transparency towards stakeholders will become even more important.
Opinions on the remaining seven statements differ widely. Of the questions on whether AI will play a greater role in decision-making in 2026, corporate culture will receive at least as much attention as other risk factors, remuneration should be brought into line with international peers, ESG objectives will become less important, and whether the focus on diversity and inclusion on Dutch boards will increase, for example, none have a majority answer.
The questions on whether cooperation with China will become more important than cooperation with the United States and whether European companies will be able to reduce their economic and technological dependence on China and the United States in 2026, were also not answered conclusively.
Why are opinions so sharply divided? There is a high degree of uncertainty in the world, and perhaps our results confirm this. The divergent answers raise interesting questions. Could these become the questions of the year? Will the answers perhaps become less cautious as the year progresses? It will be interesting to keep an eye on this, and at the same time, important to consider.

New skills
Respondents were also asked which new skills directors and supervisory board members need to develop for the future. A number of themes emerged strongly from the responses. Conspicuous at the top of the list is the unpredictability of the world. Our respondents believe that directors and supervisory board members must be able to provide leadership under pressure, anticipate crises and risks, and maintain a keen geopolitical awareness.
Risk assessment and response are also frequently mentioned. Many respondents indicate that directors and supervisory board members need to have more knowledge of technology, particularly AI, both technically and strategically.
Another major overarching theme is professional knowledge. For example, several respondents suggested that more emphasis should be placed on scenario thinking. Another finding is that directors and supervisory board members are too far removed from content, execution, and technology, while the role of the supervisory board member is becoming increasingly strategic and important. This makes it essential to be close to management.
A number of directors and supervisory board members, furthermore, advocate for a broad perspective across sectors, while one supervisory board member notes that, to the contrary, more experience and knowledge of the relevant sector is needed. A fresh perspective can be beneficial, but not if people have too little substantive knowledge. According to several supervisory board members, there should be less focus on procedures and ticking off of lists. Respondents advocate, furthermore, against non-binding governance and for appropriate, serious and substantial remuneration for supervisory board members.
Several directors and supervisory board members mention the importance of personal competencies, such as reflection, ownership, courage, curiosity, and democratic leadership.
Finally, networking (with politicians) is mentioned as an important skill, as is broad orientation toward society as a whole and stakeholder management.

(Un)foreseen risks for 2026
What are the (un)foreseen risks for 2026? In answer to this question many point to the increased geopolitical tensions and the threat of war in Europe (‘we are very naïve’), global risks that could affect the business community, and international uncertainty, for example surrounding US policy: on the one hand, the rapid decoupling from the US, on the other, the continuing focus on, for example, IT services and products from the US. A number of national risks are identified. These include an aging population, changes in legislation and regulations, and dysfunctional politics and regulators. AI, digitization, and cybersecurity are regularly mentioned.
Other risks raised by respondents relate to corporate governance. Overregulation, a dominant shareholder focus and short-term thinking are mentioned. A few point to the risk that ESG, inclusivity, and diversity will become less important.
Some respondents predict risks within the organization, such as inefficient or ineffective governance structures, ‘thinking small and holding your breath,’ and ‘blind spots.’ In addition, some point to insufficient preparation for crisis management. Loss of integrity and mutual trust in boardrooms are discussed, with the risk of supervisory board members accumulating positions for personal gain, only complying with governance structures for form’s sake, thereby endangering the supervisory board becoming an empty shell. At the same time, directors and supervisory board members should refrain from panicking. They are warned against giving in to trepidation, as this can hinder a critical perspective.

Prepared for uncertainty
GenAI, cybersecurity, and geopolitics are all interrelated. It is therefore not surprising that many respondents consider these topics to be key issues for the coming year. The competencies that respondents consider most important are noteworthy too, i.e. competencies mainly related to adaptability. The clear sense of the importance of being able to respond quickly to current developments is also reflected in the question about (un)foreseen risks, where, for example, the danger of insufficient preparation for crisis situations is noted.
Even more interesting is the identification of doubts, for example, regarding the importance of relations with China and addressing ESG objectives. It is understandable that as a director or supervisory board member, you cannot focus on everything, but it remains important—as several responses indicate—that attention to ESG and potentially contentious issues such as remuneration does not weaken in the (geopolitical) frenzy of the day. This is for the broader benefit, but also of course, with an eye on reputational risks.

This article was published in Management Scope 02 2026.