The supervisory mandate has never been simple, but today it is made more difficult by a set of seemingly competing priorities: promote growth and competitiveness while preserving safety and stability; enable innovation and support productivity while safeguarding prudential integrity, preventing misconduct, and anticipating emerging risks in a world that has grown increasingly complex, uncertain, and volatile.
The balance once struck through periodic intervention and post-hoc enforcement no longer holds. What’s required now is a re-architecting of supervision itself — one that moves it from retrospective to real-time, from episodic to continuous, and from discretionary to evidentiary. Across global jurisdictions, industry overseers are experimenting with technologies that will allow supervisors to become more adaptive, to act sooner, and to align mandates that, to some, seem to pull in contrary directions.
This content is available to both premium Members and those who register for a free Observer account.
If you are a Member or an Observer of Starling Insights, please sign in below to access this article.
Members enjoy full access to all articles and related content from past editions of the Compendium as well as Starling's special reports. Observers can access a limited number of articles and may purchase articles on an ala carte basis.
You can click the 'Join' button below to become a Member or to register for free as an Observer.
Join The Discussion