When it comes to geopolitics, today’s CEOs are navigating rugged, unpredictable terrain. The imposition of new tariffs, export controls, investment restrictions, industrial policies, or sanctions is disrupting organizations’ direction of travel and business executives’ carefully laid plans. In fact, it is shifting the entire competitive landscape. The CEO’s every decision, whether to push forward, change course, or retreat, must be carefully considered—and then reconsidered.
Finding calm in the geopolitical storm: An action plan for CEOs
Given the tumultuous geopolitical environment, CEOs will need to stay plugged into current events and use solid scenarios to inform their decision-making. A review of two potential worlds can help leaders find their strategic footing.
- In a diversified world, geopolitical frictions are limited to critical goods and technologies, immigration rules are eased, and investments flow across borders. Bold CEOs can seize opportunities in new trade corridors, talent pools, and industrial incentive programs.
- In a fragmented world, trade restrictions are implemented more broadly, labor mobility narrows, capital flows retreat, and technology transfer slows. In this scenario, CEOs face rising costs, regulatory dissolution, and sharper choices about where—and with whom—to do business.
CEOs can use this “two worlds” framework not just to mitigate risk but also to identify opportunities to create and capture more value. For instance, which businesses will thrive in a diversified world versus a fragmented world? How should CEOs allocate resources to seize new trade opportunities while hedging against restrictions? Additionally, CEOs may need to develop new core capabilities and rethink their organizational design to accommodate both worlds—for instance, making operations more flexible so they can react quickly when opportunities arise or retreat with minimal cost when markets close. Above all, CEOs must do these things quickly while preventing their teams from freezing in place.
Our research and experience point to five cross-cutting imperatives for CEOs seeking to create and sustain business opportunities amid geopolitical disruption:
- build proprietary geopolitical foresight
- capture opportunities and mitigate risks from geopolitical realignment
- take an active role in shaping the external agenda
- build organizational and operational resilience
- transform regulatory change into competitive advantage
Build proprietary geopolitical foresight
Traditionally, CEOs have viewed geopolitics as a risk to be managed, not necessarily a vector of opportunity. But given the steady advance of globalization over the past three decades,6 CEOs must now examine geopolitics through several lenses—strategy, planning, and foresight—and they must establish a clear, company-wide perspective on geopolitics, or the house view.
Doing so can be challenging, however: Geopolitical events unfold quickly, and public data alone is often insufficient for developing a deep corporate perspective. But even when data is incomplete or missing, teams need to act; they cannot simply observe and wait for events to unfold. The CEO will need to orchestrate the development of scenarios, such as the two-worlds framework, that can help teams make decisions while still accounting for potential first-, second-, and third-order effects of actions taken in response to geopolitical shifts. CEOs are uniquely suited to orchestrate this effort, given their direct and privileged access to just-in-time business information as well as the scope and number of relationships they have across the organization.
CEOs in the highest-performing organizations establish dedicated “nerve centers” and cross-functional foresight teams. Standing up a nerve center allows the CEO and leadership team to continually scan the geopolitical environment for general developments that may affect the organization. Pairing that nerve center with the cross-functional foresight team allows the CEO and leadership team to pressure test strategy, capital allocation, and other decisions against the scenarios they have developed. Shell’s scenarios team, for instance, uses energy-transition and trade-flow modeling to develop a perspective on possible geopolitical and economic shifts and embeds those insights into its planning processes.7 It uses these scenarios to inform major strategic choices and long-term portfolio decisions.
CEOs in high-performing organizations also use advanced analytics to help build the house view. This includes using AI tools to monitor regulatory filings, sanctions listings, and policy changes in real time. These CEOs also treat geopolitical scenarios in the same way they do economic or financial forecasts, considering them all at the same level. For instance, some CEOs in consumer-goods multinationals are now presenting to their boards estimates of how changes in the geopolitical landscape (such as tariffs) could affect their financials, alongside traditional financial projections.8
Meanwhile, other CEOs are relying more heavily on market-based indicators that summarize which risks markets are pricing, the triggers to watch, and the assets most exposed. Such tools can help CEOs provide structured input to the board and to strategic-planning and resource-allocation discussions.
In some cases, the CEO may choose to intervene directly to mitigate geopolitical risk. Apple’s CEO, Tim Cook, anticipated increasing trade frictions between the United States and China and decided years ago to diversify from China. He and the leadership team sought new opportunities for the iPhone in India. By fiscal year 2024, roughly 14 percent of iPhones were assembled in India—about $14 billion in output—and the move was integrated into supply risk discussions with the board.9 This positioning has helped Apple mitigate its exposure to tariffs on US-bound devices and secure policy support under India’s incentives—turning geopolitics into operational advantage.
Take an active role in shaping the external agenda
CEOs enjoy a powerful trust advantage over government leaders: According to Edelman, 67 percent of respondents trust “my chief executive officer,” compared with just 47 percent who trust government leaders.12 This credibility gives CEOs more than a license to respond; it grants them influence to actively shape the rules. Nvidia’s CEO Jensen Huang, for example, repositioned the company from primarily a graphics chip designer to a broader AI infrastructure provider, advancing the concept of “AI factories” and engaging directly with governments on the idea of sovereign AI.13
The “how” involves engaging policymakers early, bringing data to regulatory debates, and forging coalitions with like-minded partners and even some nontraditional stakeholders—not just regulators but also chambers of commerce, ministry heads, labor unions, or business cooperatives in emerging markets.
Rasmus Errboe, CEO of Ørsted, has worked directly with European regulators to shape offshore wind frameworks. He and his team brought insights and a clear articulation of the potential effects of policy changes to regulators. That effort helped generate supportive policies that accelerated renewable deployment across the continent and unlocked new growth opportunities for Ørsted.14
CEOs should focus on the most strategically significant relationships, particularly those that involve governments or sensitive industries. These interactions can help deepen the CEO’s understanding of local dynamics and uncover opportunities for collaboration that might otherwise be missed. During the US–Mexico CEO Dialogue hosted by the US Chamber of Commerce and Mexico’s CCE (Business Coordinating Council) in 2023, executives from companies including 3M, Pfizer, and Walmart met directly with senior government officials and business associations. This allowed them to shape bilateral trade priorities—especially nearshoring incentives and regulatory clarity—ensuring stronger resilience in North American supply chains.15
CEOs have access to information that others don’t, and while that privileged (and protected) access can make the CEO’s role feel lonely at times, CEOs are not alone. They should tap into the knowledge of industry peers and those in other sectors, share best practices, and, most important, listen with empathy to absorb valuable lessons. CEOs can then bring that knowledge back behind their own walls. As Steve Collis, the former CEO of Cencora, notes, “I’ve been a beneficiary of amazing calls with other CEOs who have been willing to share their knowledge. This has been such a growing experience.”16
Given their packed agendas, CEOs will need to rely on their policy teams for day-to-day monitoring of regulatory developments and broader stakeholder relationships. The chief legal officer, chief of corporate affairs, and other senior executives can credibly carry many conversations. But when it comes to discussions about market access, or national industrial policy, the CEO’s direct involvement is essential. Knowing when to delegate and when to engage personally is itself a leadership choice, and in moments of geopolitical flux, silence from the top can be as consequential as action.
