
- Policy direction is broadly understood, but many boards have not yet adapted governance and decision‑making discipline at the pace required.
- As technology, data and AI increasingly influence outcomes, boards must ensure judgement, controls and accountability remain clear and defensible.
- Effective boards are spending less time reviewing historic performance and more time challenging assumptions, stress‑testing resilience and clarifying risk ownership.
- The greatest vulnerability today sits in how decisions are made and governed — not in any single policy or rule change.
The World Governments Summit sent a straightforward message to businesses in the UAE. Government policy is changing faster than many companies are. New expectations around governance, transparency, technology and resilience are being set at speed, and boards are now under pressure to show they can keep up.
The risk for organisations is no longer about getting the strategy wrong, but about being too slow to adjust how decisions are made, how risk is managed and how leaders take responsibility when things go wrong.
In practical terms, that pressure is coming from several directions at once. Governments are raising expectations around corporate governance, audit quality and transparency. Regulatory focus on data, technology and AI use is tightening, particularly where automated decisions affect financial reporting, compliance or public trust.
Economic policy is also pushing organisations to demonstrate resilience, through stronger risk management, more realistic stress testing and clearer accountability for long-term value. These signals are no longer abstract. They are already shaping regulation, enforcement and stakeholder behaviour.
As a result, the tone inside many UAE boardrooms has changed. Leaders are no longer debating alignment with policy direction. They are being tested on readiness. Can the organisation make decisions at pace? Can it clearly explain how those decisions were reached? Can it demonstrate that risk, judgement and accountability are understood when conditions change?
At Grant Thornton, we see a growing gap emerging. Most organisations agree with the direction coming out of the Summit. Far fewer have adjusted governance, oversight and decision-making discipline to match it. That gap, rather than any single regulation, is where exposure now sits.
Boards that are responding well tend to share a common approach. They spend less time reviewing historic performance and more time challenging assumptions. They are clear on where judgement is exercised, who owns risk, and how much assurance is needed to act with confidence.
Technology adds urgency to this challenge. Data, analytics and AI already influence key decisions across organisations. Speed without discipline quickly becomes exposure if boards lack clarity on information quality and the controls behind it.
The Summit made one thing clear. Policy is moving quickly. In our view, organisations that close the readiness gap now, by strengthening governance and sharpening decision-making, will be best placed to grow with confidence as expectations continue to rise.