Technology is reshaping bank boardroom agendas

A decade ago, we first studied the technology experience of board members across the banking sector.  Since then we have seen digital transformation, fintech, cloud computing, scaled agile and modern engineering practices, and the rise of artificial intelligence and generative AI. Each cycle has presented significant opportunities for banks and their customers. However, we have also seen resilience challenges, stubborn legacy architectures and cyber security threats with significant financial, customer regulatory and reputational impacts.  Technology is fundamental to running and transforming any bank, yet it also presents one of the most significant areas of risk.  It’s no wonder technology has become a key topic for banking boards.

Tech experience on bank boards has improved

We recently studied the profile of the board members of over 100 banks and the profiles of over 1000 board members, evaluating whether they had worked at technology companies or in roles where they could gain significant technology experience.

The number of board members with technology experience has grown from 6% (2015), to 10% (2020) and 15% (2023), through to 16% in 2025. That 10pp increase over a period of 10 years is commendable and reflects the industry’s commitment to using technology well. 

Bank board tech-savvy members are driving digital and AI leadership

84% of bank boards have a technology experienced member – this is much improved and provides at least one point of expert oversight. 

20% of banks examined have a board where over a third of board members have technology experience.  This is more than just a lone voice – these are groups of non-executive specialists that can provide experienced oversight and support executive management with perspectives on their tech strategy and risk management to support the business.  The different perspectives possible through multiple executives with technology experience can be particularly useful when handling new areas of technology.  This is the situation for some of the highest performing banks, and many are the recognized market leaders in the use of technology and AI. 

Technology experience in boards was higher for UK, Singapore and US in the previous studies, and this has continued in these technology mature economies.  However, we have seen a significant leap in Ireland, Australia and Thailand in this last review, as these banking sectors have shifted their focus to being digital and AI leaders. 

However, 16% of bank boards do not have a single board member with technology experience. These banks may be particularly exposed to insufficient oversight of technology risks and technology-enabled growth. Interestingly enough, they saw on average 2% revenue CAGR over 2015-2024 versus 3.7% for the banks with at least one board member with technology expertise. While this difference is not solely attributed to board composition, it does underline the growing gap between banks with more mature approaches to technology investment and those lagging begin.

This gap is especially evident in regions such as Europe, the Middle East and large parts of Asia, where the average number of board members with technology experience remains low. This may present transformation and resilience challenges for banks in these markets —and in the case of Europe, may also post regulatory risks as expectations around digital oversight continue to rise.

Achieving better outcomes with a reinvention mindset

Our recent research into total enterprise reinvention and scaling AI both highlight how leadership teams who have a reinvention mindset achieve differentiated outcomes.  These leadership teams aim to reinvent continually and transform every part of their business using technology.  They place greater focus on their digital core platforms and AI – not as a standalone aspect of their business model – but approached in a human way putting colleagues and customers at the centre of transformation.  In these studies we are focused on the CXO executive group, but it is much easier to operate in this way with a board who has the expertise and understanding of what you’re trying to achieve.

These leadership teams have the means and focus to drive differentiated levels of investment – again normally an area where executives will need the board’s challenge and support.  Salvatore Cantale and Peter Nathanial wrote a interesting piece recently regarding the dual role of the board in exploitation of the bank’s use of technology (aka ‘sweating the investment’) and exploration (aka ‘breaking new ground’).  These all point to the role of senior executive and non-executive leadership in shaping and stewarding the application of technology investments to improve the bank now and in the future.

My personal experience with both boards and executive teams is aligned with this.  I’ve found many board members want to see their executive teams better scaling proven technologies to develop operational efficiency, customer experience and open up new business opportunities.  They also want to see the ability to experiment and innovate for the future with new technologies and AI, within a sensible risk appetite and areas of focus.  Board members need to be able to ask the right questions about the technology investment strategy, architecture, external ecosystem and roadmap and crucially executives need to be able to explain how these relate to business and customer outcomes. 

Often the board have more space and long-term perspective to ask some of those bigger questions.  For instance, we worked with one bank recently to address their board level questions around whether they had the strategy, architecture and roadmap, resources and skills to realize these in order to be successful.  While this was initially a challenging thing for the CIO to be asked by the board, this resulted in a different and much more valuable dialogue across the whole organization about technology and change.

Without straying into executive management responsibilities, the board will also want to understand progress against the strategy, architecture and roadmap – and its impact on business performance, transformation and risk.  Many banks have aligned business and executive Objectives and Key Results (OKRs) to the adoption and scaling of technology across the whole business.  In the client example above, the board sought this prioritization and transparency of progress.

The importance of operational resilience and regulatory compliance

Building technology experience within the board could also improve its effective oversight of how the executive team manage risks facing your bank.  These risks include platform and operational resilience, cyber security, and execution risks of major investments to name a few.  A number of regulators also are extending this to include critical third-party risks (e.g. the FCA).

The ECB supervisory priorities highlight the need for having non-executive oversight of these risks: “the management body should have at least one non-executive member with relevant and recent knowledge of, and expertise in, ICT and security risks (experience has shown that five years of relevant practical experience is an adequate threshold to ensure good management and decision making at board level)”. 

Board members need to oversee management’s risk management capabilities related to the use of technology, particular as it relates to the rapidly shifting cyber risks posed both by threat actors and the level of change across the bank’s technologies, including their critical supply chain partners. According to research from my colleague Valerie, while the majority of customers trust their bank to protect their data, this trust does not extend to their bank’s use of their data with AI or the bank’s technology partners. 

Another rapidly evolving topic of board interest is responsible AI. This is about how AI is delivered and used within the bank in a responsible way – and also the bank’s risk appetite for where and how AI should and shouldn’t be used. Boards need to steward these strategic questions with the executive aligned with the values of the business and a set of rapidly evolving set of market dynamics, social norms and regulatory rules. Within this overall direction the executives will need to put in place effective accountabilities, policy, controls, delivery practices, monitoring practices and governance. This adds to how they already gather, govern, use and protect data, but also needs to address transparently where and how they are using AI. Boards will be interested in how these practices are being consistently put in place and where they are weak or failing. Critically responsible AI and board oversight is not about slowing down or diluting the potential for AI – but about establishing the trust and consistently high standards of delivery and use that will help scale value from AI.

Creating effective boards for technology transformation

The level of tech experience ‘in the room’ is one ingredient for bank boards to oversee and steward technology. It will be impacted by how the Board is working together and with the executive team overall – and within this how tech experience from the Board is effectively leveraged. Do the technology experienced non-executives have a voice, are they listened to, are they effectively educating the non-tech members, is there still constructive challenge and how do these non-executives work with the CEO, CIO and other CXOs? Is their presence something that is valued and used by the CIO and wider CXO team? Does the board have regular discussions regarding technology and AI, both its business impact and risks?

Some banks are deepening the focus on technology risk within their board risk sub-committees or even set up specific technology sub-committees for the board.  These can be useful but shouldn’t remove the broader discussion about technology from the boardroom.

Building TQ across the board

Not all directors can or should be technology specialists.  Diverse experience and cognitive diversity on boards usually increases their performance.  Bringing board members with banking, customer, operations, financial, risk and people expertise together with technology experienced board members will result in a richer discussion of all board topics.

However, all board members need a level of technology fluency – or ‘TQ’ as we like to call it – in order to understand and contribute to technology discussions.  This fluency helps them interact effectively with technology specialists, as well as bring their diverse experience to the table in discussions regarding technology.  For instance, the non-executive director experienced in commercial banking, when they know enough about AI and its capabilities, can support the executive team as they explore opportunities to apply AI to transform the business. Or the former CPO on your board can help you explore the people, skills and cultural change needed around AI. 

For all directors, including the specialists, the world of technology, cybersecurity and AI is changing fast.  We don’t need non-executive directors (NEDs) to be able to code, but we do need them to understand the changing technology landscape, both its potential and risks.  Again, the ECB call out that “all members of the management body should undertake regular training (at least once a year) to ensure that individual members possess sufficiently up-to-date knowledge and skills to allow them to understand and assess a bank’s business and its main ICT and security risks”.

It’s for this reason that we have both executive and non-exec/board personas within our academies and learning pathways in LearnVantage (our market leading platform for skills).  This has the latest content on technology, security, data and AI and is designed in a way to help business people understand technology.  Moving beyond the ‘101’ briefing on key topics like cloud or AI is essential.  To do this, we facilitate rich expert-led discussions regarding the business application of technology, deeper university-based education, peer client visits and innovation centre sessions for individual directors and whole boards and executive teams. 

Key takeaways

• • Technology has moved from the periphery to a critical topic for performance, risk, resilience and transformation in banking
  • Technology experience on bank’s boards is important for both stewardship of growth and transformation, as well as effective oversight of technology and security risks
  • Specialist technology experience within bank boards is increasing across the sector, but with much higher levels in leading companies
  • Some banks have no specialist tech experience on their board
  • Technology capabilities and risks are evolving rapidly, so regular learning, discussion and building curiosity for all directors is important
  • Technology experience on the board is one aspect of effective oversight and stewardship of the technology agenda

If you’d like to discuss how to increase TQ on your board or executive team – or if you’re a director and would like to find out more – please get in touch with me.

With thanks to our research team – Francesca Caminiti, Gururaj Rao and Edvina Kapllani – and Frederic Brunier, Valerie Abend and Nicola Tavender for their contributions to this blog.