Thank you for Subscribing to Insurance Business Review Weekly Brief
Thomas Lagriffoul is a European legal and compliance professional with nearly two decades of Asian experience. Before transitioning into compliance, he began his career as a lawyer at a leading law firm. He currently serves as Regional Director of Compliance, APAC, at Coface, focusing on the intersection of regulatory requirements and geopolitical developments. Over the years, Thomas has closely observed the evolving dynamics between the U.S. and China, particularly the increasing impact of bilateral sanctions on business operations.
Through this article, Thomas Lagriffoul emphasizes that compliance is no longer just about following rules; it actively helps financial institutions navigate a complex, geopolitically influenced landscape. Institutions can anticipate risks and respond proactively by integrating compliance into strategic decision-making and operational processes, supported by the board and cross-functional teams. Adapting to a Changing Global Landscape From my vantage point here in APAC, I’ve come to believe we’ve crossed a threshold that fundamentally changes how financial institutions must operate. For the first time since the Cold War ended, I’m watching political and international affairs drive decisions that used to be purely economic. We’re simply not in the 1990s or early 2000s anymore. I don’t think we’re heading toward complete deglobalization, but I am seeing something different emerge. The global economy appears to be reorganizing itself into regional blocks, each with its own power center. This shift means financial institutions can no longer rely on universal approaches. Instead, they’ll need to localize and segment their operations in ways we haven’t seen before. I’m observing across markets that countries increasingly assert sovereign control over data, cloud infrastructure, sanctions and regulatory frameworks. Each jurisdiction wants its rules followed, so institutions need dedicated teams and specialized processes to navigate these growing differences. The operational implications go deeper than structural changes. I’ve learned that the old model of periodic reviews and reactive responses no longer works. The institutions I see succeeding have shifted toward continuous monitoring, regular stress testing and processes designed for anticipation rather than reaction. My view is that the objective now is maturity through preparation. The organizations that will thrive in this environment are those building the capability to navigate uncertainty with foresight, not those still trying to operate as if the world hasn’t fundamentally shifted beneath us. Operationalizing Compliance for Agility and Resilience In my experience, effectively embedding compliance without paralyzing decision-making requires treating it as a fully integrated organizational capability rather than a separate function. Methodology and rigor matter as much as structure itself. What works best is using a structured geopolitical framework that creates repeatable processes. This transforms insights into actionable guidance instead of generating more memos and presentations that sit unread. At the operational level, dedicated teams should handle localized issues like tensions along the Thailand-Cambodia border. These teams can review and manage smaller risks regularly without everything escalating to senior leadership. This prevents bottlenecks while ensuring nothing falls through the cracks.Emerging compliance professionals must think beyond the traditional scope of rules and regulations. Today, geopolitical tensions directly impact regulatory frameworks, making broader awareness essential for effective practice.
I agree We use cookies on this website to enhance your user experience. By clicking any link on this page you are giving your consent for us to set cookies. More info
However, if you would like to share the information in this article, you may use the link below:
https://www.insurancebusinessreviewapac.com/cxoinsight/thomas-lagriffoul-nwid-1033.html