 is entering one of its most demanding eras. As boards head into 2026, they face a convergence of rising risk, regulatory pressure, geopolitical uncertainty and accelerated technological change, all of which are reshaping what effective oversight requires. Expectations are higher, scrutiny is sharper, and the pace of decision-making has never been faster.

The most effective boards are shifting from passive oversight to active, data-driven governance, where disciplined human judgment works alongside artificial intelligence (AI) to enhance strategic decision-making and risk management.

Despite this rapid transformation, significant gaps remain: while governance technology adoption accelerates, many organizations still struggle with fragmented systems and manual processes that limit strategic agility.

Ana Dutra, Global Veteran Board Director, two-time CEO and Fortune 250 Senior Executive, told Diligent Institute, “The winners will be the companies that recognize that risk and opportunities need to be standing discussion topics on the board agenda.

 to reflect this — and make sure that you aren’t throwing everything under the audit committee’s purview. Beware of the dangers of a purely check-the-box mindset when it comes to preparing for these risks and identifying emerging opportunities.”

What do boards need to know about how corporate governance will evolve in 2026 and beyond? Here, we will unpack:

The emerging trends shaping the future of corporate governance

External factors affecting corporate governance today

Key governance trends influencing global markets

Professional governance technology infrastructure to address modern challenges

The world has changed significantly in the past year. These trends reveal how internal and external forces will fundamentally reshape corporate operations and what boards need to know to stay ahead.

Trend 1: AI-powered governance platforms will separate leaders from laggards

Board technology has evolved far beyond simple 

 to become AI-enhanced governance platforms that change how directors prepare for meetings, assess risks and make strategic decisions.

Leading boards pair AI insights with disciplined human judgment, measure real usage of AI tools rather than just survey sentiment, and pilot “lighthouse” projects to prove tangible value before scaling. AI literacy, bias testing, and human-in-the-loop oversight ensure responsible adoption, while stepwise integration enables measurable improvements in board efficiency and strategic decision-making.

According to the 2026 What Directors Think report, U.S. public company directors rank deploying AI technologies as their second-highest organizational priority, their top area to focus capital investment and the second-highest board agenda item for 2026. APAC directors also rank 

deploying AI technology second on their list of organizational priorities

The opportunity is massive, with rapid expansion underway:

66% of directors are now using AI for board work

; of these, 50% are using it for meeting preparation, and 46% reported using a tool like ChatGPT. Yet, only 22% have AI usage policies in place.

Early adopters are experiencing transformational efficiency gains: 

Organizations that have successfully integrated 

report dramatic improvements in board preparation time and faster responses to internal stakeholder requests. These efficiency gains translate directly into more strategic board discussions and proactive risk management that impacts business performance.

AI is democratizing sophisticated governance capabilities: 

Previously, advanced features like AI-powered document analysis, automated 

 were available only to large enterprises. Today's leading governance platforms scale these enterprise-grade capabilities from startup boards to Fortune 500 requirements, enabling smaller companies to implement professional governance infrastructure without traditional resource constraints.

Automate and summarize every board meeting for faster decisions and stronger compliance oversight.

AI supercharges your board

Trend 2: Corporate culture will reckon with financial fraud and abuse

 can plague even the most outwardly successful organizations. In 2026, the challenge is building a corporate culture that roots out bad actors. This is easier said than done, given that corporate culture isn’t always effective at promoting transparency.

“There’s often an inclination to avoid bad news, with a hope that problems will be resolved before they escalate to the board level," says Pav Gill, CEO of Confide.

Boards should embrace culture oversight as a strategic asset. In addition to traditional compliance metrics, they can leverage anonymized data streams — like intranet messages or chat trends — to identify early warning signals of misconduct or ethical concerns. A strong speak-up culture, with closed-loop reporting and board visibility, enables boards to detect fraud or ethical lapses early and respond swiftly, guided by pre-defined escalation protocols for the first 72 hours following a crisis.

“There should be a direct, consistent line of communication from the Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) or General Counsel (GC) to the board,” says Gill.

While boards traditionally held senior leaders 

, integrating leadership with board directors can advance the processes, talents and best practices that compliance depends on. This ethical culture also has tangible benefits for the bottom line. LRN’s research shows that organizations with strong ethics outperform others by up to 

AI deployment introduces ethical considerations that require rigorous oversight. Boards should implement a robust ethical framework from the outset, systematically testing for bias and privacy concerns and ensuring human judgment remains central. Ethical oversight should tie directly to measurable adoption metrics, linking technology usage to culture and risk management outcomes.

"Implementing a robust ethical framework from the beginning of your AI strategy will keep ethical standards at the forefront — no matter what regulatory changes are up ahead." — Sophia Velastegui, AI Expert and Board Member

Ethics aren’t just about regulations either. AI brings numerous well-documented risks, including unintended bias and invasions of privacy. 

 details several questions corporate AI strategies must answer, including:

How might the AI we design, procure, and deploy present ethical risks that cannot be avoided?

How do we systematically and comprehensively identify and mitigate them?

If we ignore them, how much time and labor would it take us to respond to a regulatory investigation?

How large a fine might we pay if found guilty, let alone negligent, of violating regulations or laws?

How much would we need to spend to rebuild consumer and public trust if money could solve the problem?

Trend 4: Cybercrime is on the rise, emphasizing the need for strong controls

Cybercrime is the biggest risk most organizations will face in 2026. The ever-increasing value of data largely fuels this threat.

“Digital assets drive valuation, and the most valuable businesses are data-centric. This means the bread and butter of your business would then be impacted in a cyber incident,” says Anastassia Lauterbach, CEO and founder of AI Edutainment.

Generative AI has also increased organizations’ attack surface by 

. The cost of breaches is projected to rise from $9.22 trillion in 2024 to $13.82 trillion by 2028. Cyber breaches are the third-biggest organizational risk, behind a sharp downturn in the U.S. economy and black swan events, and cybersecurity is also ranked the biggest “underrated risk” of 2026 by U.S. public company directors, according to the 2026 What Directors Think report. In APAC, 

46% of respondents prioritize managing cyber risk in 2026

 as their most urgent board discussion topic.

Over the next year, boards must remain vigilant. Infrastructure and data upgrades of all sizes must be considered high-risk. Implement software and configuration changes carefully and strategically to avoid widespread disruption or damaging breaches.

Take CrowdStrike, for example. This U.S. cybersecurity company deployed a faulty CrowdStrike Falcon software update in July 2024 that triggered an outage affecting roughly 

 using Microsoft systems worldwide. The insurance costs are still mounting but are expected to reach 

 — costs that could have been twice as high, if the outage had been malicious. More robust change management and a strategic approach could have mitigated this far-reaching crisis.

Trend 5: Real-time governance dashboards enable strategic agility

The quarterly board meeting model is being disrupted by real-time governance capabilities that enable continuous oversight and more agile decision-making.

"The quarterly board meeting will probably be a lot shorter because the board will have met several times in between." — Dottie Schindlinger, Executive Director, Diligent Institute

Governance platforms like Diligent provide 

 that consolidate risk data, performance metrics, and compliance status into real-time visualization tools. Only 23% of boards currently make moderate use of AI-powered dashboards for risk oversight, despite enhanced use of AI-powered technology ranking third among strategies to improve board oversight.

"Boards are going to have to be a bit more fluid and flexible. Dashboards are really the only way forward." — Dottie Schindlinger, Executive Director, Diligent Institute

These capabilities enable boards to identify emerging issues quickly, track strategic initiatives, and respond to market changes with unprecedented speed and accuracy.

Gain unmatched clarity on risks, streamline meetings.

Make dashboards your edge

Trend 6: Corporations need to nurture and attract young talent

The workplace will transform over the coming years. 

 will be Millennials or younger by 2030, many of whom were hired during the pandemic and have primarily worked remotely. Job hopping — switching jobs frequently — has also emerged as a break from traditional corporate culture.

“They’ve never been in an office. They don’t know what corporate culture looked like pre-pandemic because they’re not a part of that history,” says Schindlinger.

As a result, talent, risk and culture have dominated the board agenda. Businesses are grappling with significant demographic shifts as baby boomers near retirement and new generations take their place. Additionally, 

 may become challenging as experienced board directors near retirement without qualified younger talent to replace them.

Companies should start nurturing young talent by considering which tools and structures can facilitate innovation and mentoring; many organizations are renaming committees to highlight “talent” and “culture.” This includes thinking about job hopping differently.

“Rather than saying they only stay for two years, you say, hey, this person stayed for two full years,” says Schindlinger.

Boards must also think beyond tradition and consider whether hybrid work models that appeal to young talent can bolster the productivity their organizations need.

“Boards should be asking: What do we need to do differently? What are the tools we have in place to keep everyone connected? How do we keep the board connected?” says Schlindlinger.

can keep the board connected and engaged in strategic conversations about talent. Using these tools advances conversations about nurturing young talent rather than waiting for board meetings.

Trend 7: Board effectiveness measurement drives competitive advantage

, significant gaps remain in evaluation practices. Leading organizations are achieving measurable improvements through comprehensive evaluation frameworks, while many boards struggle with 

 processes that fail to drive meaningful change.

The root challenge lies in execution, not intention. While 

88% of directors trust their board to effectively assess its own performance

, and 74% say their board leader effectively deals with underperforming directors, there's a critical disconnect. Among directors who view their assessment process as ineffective, 44% attribute it to members being insufficiently invested in the process itself.

To take this corporate governance trend seriously, boards must commit to thorough, confidential 

that foster honest dialogue and translate insights into tangible actions. This requires full participation from every member and a commitment to implement changes based on the evaluation findings.

External market, regulatory and political factors shaping governance now

Factor 1: Political dynamics reshape ESG governance approaches

Many view the UN's 2004 Who Cares Wins report as the document that made 

environmental, social and governance (ESG)

mainstream. While ESG principles remain important, the political scene has significantly complicated implementation and strategic positioning.

Politicians on both sides of the aisle have different opinions on ESG and, as a result, different ideas about 

. The 2024 U.S. presidential election only underscores the worldwide shift to the right, opening the door to changes in ESG policy and governance more broadly.

“A political party comes in and sweeps away what was existing, a trend seen over the past decade, especially in the U.S. This makes the job of corporate boards increasingly difficult," says Schindlinger.

Now, modern boards will likely have to chart their paths forward individually, toeing the line between complying with the SEC, other regulatory bodies and the Trump administration while meeting the expectations of their shareholders and customers.

Political winds in the U.S. are shifting, which might upend existing focus on sustainability in the States. However, most other major economies in the world are 

Factor 2: Boards are facing increased scrutiny from all sides

In the post-universal proxy era, shareholders continue to hold boards accountable — often in surprising ways. Governance proposals increased for the first time in recent years during the 2024 proxy season, as did compensation proposals.

Support for say-on-pay proposals also remained high, underscoring shareholders’ desire to have their voices heard. The universal proxy process has also opened doors for unions following recent high-profile strikes, with many unions submitting more proposals in 2024 than they did in years prior.

 also echoed the political unrest many organizations have faced in the past year. Anti-ESG proposals soared, even though support for them has not. Companies submitted no-action requests in connection with 

 from anti-ESG proponents, compared to 25% for others.

Boards can prepare for these shareholder-centric trends in corporate governance by continuing to align closely with their

. Consider why shareholders invest in your company and their goals beyond profitability, then offer transparency around board decision-making in those areas. A company-specific strategy for engaging with shareholders around key issues can avoid unrest.

Factor 3: Regulatory compliance costs create strategic pressures

Regulatory compliance is a growing challenge for mid-market companies facing disproportionate cost burdens. American businesses spend approximately 

$300 billion annually on regulatory compliance

, but these costs are distributed unevenly across company sizes.

For enterprise organizations, the challenge isn't just cost — it's the exponential complexity of managing compliance across multiple jurisdictions, business units, and regulatory frameworks simultaneously. Only 

 globally say their GRC and financial systems are fully integrated for transactions, while 

 at least one major challenge in being transaction-ready.

Global enterprises face overlapping requirements from dozens of agencies while navigating different regulatory approaches across international markets, creating administrative overhead that can overwhelm even well-resourced compliance teams.

Factor 4: Stakeholders want greater CEO oversight

 isn’t new. Many consumers and even many shareholders believe CEOs are overcompensated. More transparent compensation packages can counter this scrutiny, but CEOs will likely remain in the spotlight.

Over the past year, boards and executives have taken that attention seriously. In 

PwC’s Annual Corporate Directors Survey

, 71% said their boards took action related to shareholder activism in 2024. This action has largely been driven by boards’ desire to engage with shareholders proactively. In fact, 26% of directors say they also revised compensation structures to keep with shareholder expectations.

Now, shareholders will want to see CEOs performing, specifically making what shareholders see as the “right” decision to maximize returns. At the same time, rising inflation and supply chain issues have renewed the call for corporations and their CEOs to act ethically and responsibly.

Growth strategies are also a top priority. Pursuing growth through M&A and strategic partnerships is listed as the top organizational priority for 2026 and ranks third on board agenda items, according to the 2026 What Directors Think report.

Global trends in corporate governance to watch in 2026

Trend 1: AI regulations worldwide are evolving with significant jurisdictional differences

Global AI regulations are fragmenting quickly, with different regions pursuing distinct approaches that create complex compliance challenges for multinational organizations. The 

 is the most comprehensive current framework, with fines up to €35 million or 7% of worldwide turnover, and staged obligations now entering enforcement.

This regulatory fragmentation creates challenges for enterprise organizations operating across multiple jurisdictions. Companies must navigate varying requirements for AI governance, risk assessment, and transparency while maintaining operational efficiency.

Trend 2: Geopolitical tensions remain a challenge

 continues to strain Europe’s economy via energy shocks and higher security, refugee and energy‑independence spending, reinforcing the need for continuous monitoring. These geopolitical dynamics create complex risk assessment challenges that require continuous monitoring and strategic adaptation.

Top risks for GCs now include changes in the regulatory environment, tariffs/trade, geopolitical conflicts, inflation, workforce management, and technology adoption/implementation. Overall risk levels for GCs have risen from 

 of this year, and 84% of boards have changed their scenario planning approach in the last five years due to heightened risk, according to the 2026 What Directors Think report from the Diligent Institute.

For organizations with global operations, supply chain governance has become a critical board-level concern. In fact, CEOs now identify supply chain issues 

, reflecting increasing complexity and vulnerability of global networks.

Trend 3: Regional economic pressures create governance adaptation requirements

Different regions face distinct economic pressures that influence governance practices. Health crises continue to 

, while emigration and political instability shape Latin America's business landscape. China's economic posture influences operations throughout the Indo-Pacific region, creating strategic complexities for multinational organizations.

These regional variations require sophisticated risk assessment capabilities and flexible governance frameworks that can adapt to local conditions.

Trend 4: Trade policy uncertainties demand adaptive governance frameworks

The Trump administration's trade policies are creating immediate governance challenges for multinational corporations. While tariffs on China have been temporarily paused, the administration has implemented sweeping tariff increases on other trading partners, with threats of additional measures that could reshape global supply chains.

Top corporate governance trends for 2026

As median CEO pay across many European indices begins to outpace the FTSE 100, speakers at DMI’s recent Stewardship Series conference in London argued that the U.K. market is grappling with its own distinct cultural and structural barriers when it comes to modernizing executive compensation. With international competition—particularly from the US—heating up, boards and investors alike are wrestling with how to remain competitive while staying within the U.K.’s tight pay norms.

The November 11 invite-only event heard that moves by the U.K. to modernize pay to consider alternatives such as restricted share plans (RSPs) or hybrid models amid such strict pay norms can present a challenge for compensation committees. “I think if you look across Europe, there’s more shareholder concentration and therefore it’s easier sometimes to get things through," Stephen Cahill, partner at Farient Advisors, told delegates. “In the U.K., however, often we have much more diversified shareholder bases, therefore getting that level of backing is more challenging."

Finding alignment with longterm shareholders

The session heard that investors want to see companies paying fairly and competitively but are more willing to give well-governed boards more flexibility if a thoughtful and transparent process has been demonstrated.

Companies were advised to examine what structure would best align with long-term shareholders while also focusing on transparency and what is being incentivized. “Just give executives long-term, time-restricted stock – five-to-10 years vesting regardless of resignation or retirement. It is the simplest, cleanest way of aligning and incentivizing," said Amy Wilson, head of stewardship at Norges Bank Investment Management.“ We are often wrongly quoted as not supporting performance-based pay, but we would argue that long-term exposure to the share price is performance-based."

Boards looking to present a new pay policy – especially one involving increased executive pay – should provide detailed disclosure and rationale around why the increase is warranted and how that applies to its business strategy. Without such an approach, compensation committees are likely to invite increased scrutiny and potential protest votes. 

Generic justifications that suggest "everyone is doing it" will not satisfy investors. "It all depends on the explanation. Does the structure fit the company, its strategy and time horizons," asked Andrew Ninian, director at The Investment Association - a trade body that represents investment managers and investment firms in the U.K. that last year relaxed guidelines to provide more flexibility around pay structures. "Some companies use generic explanations like 'we have a cyclical business.' Companies need to explain why RSPs work for them."

The discussion also touched on the role of non-financial metrics. While many companies have incorporated ESG-related measures, it was argued that not every strategic priority needs to sit in the incentive framework. The message: compensation design should be business-specific, not a tick-box exercise.

“Our approach is to have a strong link between pay and performance. We review annually whether ESG metrics should be included in our incentive framework," said Anne-Sophie Blouin, who heads up rewards at RELX. “Some metrics like diversity and engagement for example are very important and the board receives detailed updates on these, but these are not included in our incentive framework.”

From high pay to low pay, another session saw the conversation shift to the workforce where pay inequality and living wage commitments were also cited as among the areas to draw increased investor focus amid a cost-of-living crisis with ShareAction pointing to its recent campaign targeting the retail sector. “It's clear that up and down the high street, businesses are facing a challenging environment, but from our conversations and engagement it's also encouraging that many now recognise the strong case for paying a real living wage," said Louise Eldridge, head of the good work team at ShareAction. "Investors increasingly understand that long-term returns depend on healthy, stable workforces and cohesive societies."

Low pay, she noted, can contribute to high turnover, reputational risk, operational disruption, and broader social instability.

Moving to the importance of the worker voice, Tom Powdrill of Social Governance Solutions added that employees can be a critical source of insight into operational risks and efficiencies. “Employees often know where operational issues or inefficiencies lie, or what causes frustration in the workplace. That’s valuable intelligence.”

The social-governance focused panel also addressed emerging challenges around AI while emphasizing the importance of strong internal structures to help companies navigate such fast-moving technological change. "Investors are in a much stronger position to engage effectively if companies have the right people, structures, systems, and processes in place to help navigate the uncertainties and fast-moving developments in AI," Caroline Escott, head of investment stewardship at Railpen, told the event.

Preparing for a new chapter in the UK Stewardship Code

As the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) prepares to roll out the new UK Stewardship Code in 2026, another panel discussed the various changes and how they aim to reduce the overall reporting burden going forward. "We hope to see clearer, more focused reporting. We want stewardship teams to have confidence to tell their story, not simply produce boilerplate text or try to guess what the FRC wants," said Ruth Nash, project manager at the FRC." The key point is that the fundamentals of what we expect haven’t changed dramatically. We want clear, consistent reporting and an understanding of how stewardship is applied in practice."

Reflecting on the event, Diligent’s Editor-in-Chief Josh Black noted that the insights from the three stewardship-focused panels offered companies a sharper sense of how investor expectations are evolving. "As we approach proxy season, investors are looking for demonstrated board oversight of emerging risks while also encouraging companies to pursue sustainable growth. Well-informed engagement can lead to a successful partnership."

The Stewardship Series' next stop will see the event return to New York in the first quarter of 2026. For more information on sponsorship opportunities, get it touch 

High pay, low pay, and the rise of AI 

This article originally appeared in our November 20th edition of the Diligent Minute Newsletter. For more insights like these, delivered straight to your inbox, subscribe

Boards in transition: Why active, data-driven governance is the 2026 imperative

Boards entered 2025 facing rising heightened risk, economic volatility, and an urgent mandate to modernize oversight. We recently hosted Diligent’s Elevate Leadership Summit, a by-invitation event where corporate directors, executives and leading experts gathered for candid, Chatham House Rule-style discussions on today’s challenges and the future of corporate governance.

Top Board Governance Trends for 2026: Active, Data‑Driven Oversight

Across sessions, a clear throughline emerged: the most effective boards are shifting from passive oversight to active, data-driven governance with disciplined processes and human judgment at the center. Here’s what our expert speakers and experienced director attendees had to say about the trends to watch in 2026:

From passive to active GRC, augmented by AI

Active GRC is replacing passive oversight as directors confront increasing risk and low confidence in near-term conditions. 

Speakers urged leaders to augment teams with AI agent

s to handle foundational tasks and “ask the next question,” freeing capacity for strategy amid resource constraints. The shift isn’t about automation for the sake of it; it’s about using technology to strengthen discipline, improve foresight and increase resiliency in governance processes.

AI governance: Measure what people actually do

The biggest AI risk isn’t only technical, it’s invisible usage

. Effective AI governance should incorporate real usage metrics

, not just periodic sentiment surveys, so boards and management can see where tools are actively embedded in work and where shadow adoption may be creating risk. Pair cultural encouragement (safe experimentation and knowledge sharing) with “lighthouse” projects that prove measurable value, building confidence while establishing standards that scale.

Culture oversight is expanding and needs better data

Board oversight of culture has outgrown legacy tools as public trust shifts towards employers and brands, and employees increasingly make choices based on societal values. Activism is rising, yet many boards still haven’t addressed company stances on social issues. Leaders discussed responsibly tapping a broader range of anonymized, unstructured data, such as employee intranet messages and chat activity, to surface actionable insights, while ensuring that individual employees aren’t singled out or penalized for raising concerns.

Board Priorities and Next Steps for 2026 and Beyond

The year ahead will reward boards that turn judgement into action: clear crisis protocols, richer data streams on people and culture, pragmatic compensation strategies, and stepwise AI adoption grounded in how employees actually use it. The common denominator is disciplined curiosity. The best directors will ask sharper questions, measure what matters and adapt faster.

If these insights resonate with your board or leadership team, start with a structured review of your speak-up mechanisms, succession playbooks, culture data sources and AI governance metrics to ensure they match today’s pace of change. Then, pick one “lighthouse” initiative to prove value within the next two quarters — and use what you learn to scale.

 to dive deeper and benchmark your board’s readiness for 2026 and beyond.

Ten insights shaping boards in the year ahead

Boards entered 2025 facing rising risk, economic volatility, and an urgent mandate to modernize oversight. At Diligent, we recently hosted the Elevate Leadership Summit, a by‑invitation gathering of corporate directors and executives alongside a curated set of experts, for confidential, Chatham House Rule-style discussions to dissect these issues and look to the future of corporate governance.

Across sessions, a clear through‑line emerged: the most effective boards are shifting from moving from passive oversight to active, data‑driven governance with disciplined processes and human judgment at the center. Here’s what our expert speakers and experienced director attendees had to say about the trends to watch out for in 2026:

1) From passive to active GRC—augmented by AI

Active GRC is replacing passive oversight as directors confront increasing risk and low confidence in near‑term conditions. Speakers suggested augmenting teams with AI agents to handle foundational tasks and “ask the next question,” freeing leaders to focus on strategy amid resource constraints.

2) AI governance: Measure what people actually do 

The biggest AI risk isn’t only technical, it’s invisible usage. AI governance should incorporate real usage metrics, not just periodic sentiment surveys, and pair cultural encouragement (safe experimentation and knowledge‑sharing) with “lighthouse” projects that prove measurable value to employees and shareholders.

3) Culture oversight is expanding and needs better data

Board oversight of culture has outgrown legacy tools. Public trust continues to concentrate on employers and brands, and employees increasingly make choices based on societal beliefs. Activism is rising, and many boards still haven’t discussed company stances on social issues. Our speakers discussed the possibility of utilizing a broader range of anonymized unstructured data - such as employee intranet messages and chat data - into decisio useful insights, while ensuring individual employees aren’t being singled out or retaliated against for escalating concerns.

4) AI literacy and security remain non‑negotiable

Boards need AI literacy and strong cyber foundations; there’s no leapfrogging weak security into trustworthy AI. Keep a human in the loop, test for bias systematically (using available benchmarks), and consider experimenting with smaller models and improved licensing terms where they fit the use case and data‑governance needs.

Early red flags require pre‑defined protocols, not improvisation. The first 72 hours following a crisis event should trigger escalation playbooks, evidence preservation (including email freezes), independent counsel where appropriate, and non‑retaliation toward whistleblowers, all paired with board‑level visibility and documented independence.

Continuous monitoring (increasingly AI‑enabled) can surface fraud risk indicators earlier, narrowing the expectation gap around what audit and compliance actually do.

6) Speak‑up culture is a strategic asset

A speak‑up culture with higher hotline usage is a positive signal, but only if organizations close the loop, protect anonymity, and report metrics to the board. Leaders should be encouraged to normalize and celebrate reporting, which reduces fear and builds trust across the enterprise.

7) Board-executive dynamics are shifting under scrutiny

Executives are pushing for director refreshment, and more of them see boards overstepping compared to last year. Meanwhile, CEO turnover is up, with most U.S. departures described as unplanned. These themes raise the premium on preparedness, role clarity, and disciplined engagement between boards and management.

8) Succession planning must be continuous and robust 

Effective succession planning should be continuous and discussed at every meeting, with directors knowing the pipeline at least one level down and preparing for unexpected transitions – including mission-critical roles beyond the CEO.

The board chair’s (or independent lead director’s) role in tone‑setting and inclusion is pivotal. Boards can benefit greatly from periodic third‑party evaluations to raise effectiveness.

9) Executive compensation is evolving amid volatility

Executive compensation committees are recalibrating discretion, which allows boards to award compensation based not only on results, but qualitative assessment. COVID‑era lessons showed shareholders tolerate discretion in executive compensation when the rationale is strong and disclosure is clear.

Executive security as part of the compensation package is rising as a governance and risk issue; Policy and regulatory discussions happening at the SEC point to potentially simpler disclosures as early as the 2027 proxy season, while state‑level rules are reshaping proxy‑advisor practices.

10) Better questions and diverse composition strengthen oversight

Directors who ask, “What do I need to understand?” and “Do I have all the information?” sharpen risk oversight. Building formal and informal trusted channels with audit and compliance leaders can improve signal quality, while targeted training helps boards recognize fraud indicators. Evidence that boards with a broader range of perspectives are more effective highlights the value of having a well-balanced and diverse composition.

The year ahead will reward boards that operationalize judgment: clear protocols for crises, richer data streams on people and culture, pragmatic approaches to compensation, and step‑wise AI adoption that starts with the reality of how employees are using it. The common denominator is disciplined curiosity. The best directors will ask better questions, measure what matters, and adapt faster.

If these insights resonate with your board or leadership team, consider a structured review of your speak‑up mechanisms, succession playbooks, culture data sources, and AI governance metrics to ensure they’re meeting today’s pace of change. Then, pick one “lighthouse” initiative to prove value within the next two quarters and use the learning to scale.

Note: The Elevate Leadership Summit is an annual, by‑invitation gathering of corporate directors and CEOs, alongside a curated set of experts, for confidential, Chatham House Rule-style panel discussions.

Diligent

Blog

Top corporate governance trends for 2026

High pay, low pay, and the rise of AI

Your Data Matters