In today’s complex financial landscape, financial innovation and risk are no longer opposing forces—they are two sides of the same coin. Disruption isn’t just a buzzword anymore; it’s a strategic necessity. As global challenges escalate—from geopolitical conflict to economic volatility—the banking and fintech sectors are under pressure not only to adapt, but to lead with foresight and resilience.

Two compelling viewpoints underscore this shift. One explores how structured innovation can break entrenched business models and spark long-term growth. The other examines rising geopolitical risks—some slow-burning, others sudden—that demand agility and a fresh approach to strategy. Together, these perspectives form a critical roadmap for navigating the future of financial services.

Disruption Isn’t Chaos—It’s a System Upgrade

Many in banking still flinch at the word “disruption.” It conjures fears of compliance nightmares, cybersecurity threats, or the dreaded loss of customer trust. But as innovation expert Luke Williams explains, this fear stems from misunderstanding what disruption really is.

Disruption, done right, isn’t about instability—it’s about resilience.

Using a cooking metaphor, Williams breaks down innovation into something anyone can grasp. Just as a recipe is simply a new way to arrange ingredients, an innovative idea is a new configuration of resources that creates more value. Anyone can innovate. The key lies in learning the process and practicing it, just like a chef experiments in the kitchen.

Critically, Williams urges leaders to stop mimicking the personalities of innovation “heroes” like Steve Jobs or Elon Musk. Innovation isn’t about ego or eccentric behavior. It’s about frameworks, tools, and repeatable methods that challenge old assumptions and build stronger systems.

Foundational Ideas Are Holding Back Progress

Williams points out that many industries—including financial services—are still operating within frameworks developed 50 to 100 years ago. These outdated ideas create invisible boundaries that limit what’s possible.

We may be obsessed with operational efficiency, but in doing so, we risk becoming unstable. Companies that optimize without introducing new thinking—what Williams calls “reinforcing feedback loops”—eventually collapse. That’s what happened to Kodak, Blockbuster, and Nokia. Their internal systems, once powerful, became their downfall when the market changed.

To stay relevant, financial institutions must introduce deliberate “discontinuities.” These are ideas or models that may seem at odds with existing operations but create long-term stability. It’s about asking: “What if everything we believe is wrong?” and working forward from there.

This is especially relevant in fintech, where product cycles are fast, but mental models lag. Leaders must develop the courage to break with tradition—even when tradition has been profitable.

Geopolitical Risk Is Not a Niche Concern

While innovation shakes up internal systems, external threats loom just as large. Manas Chawla, founder of London Politica, emphasizes that geopolitical risk is no longer the domain of governments and NGOs—it’s a front-line concern for fintechs, banks, and investors.

Why? Because the next crisis won’t always come as a surprise.

Chawla introduces the concept of the “gray rhino”—a slow-moving, high-impact threat we can see coming but often ignore. Unlike black swans, which are truly unforeseeable, gray rhinos are right in front of us. Think of supply chain fragility, inflation, or the overdependence on semiconductor production in Taiwan. All are predictable. Yet few companies build contingency plans.

The fintech industry, in particular, has been slow to embrace this reality. Fast-moving startups often focus on growth and compliance, relegating geopolitical threats to the back burner. But that’s a mistake. From the war in Ukraine to the potential of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, global events now shape financial operations, customer behavior, and regulatory conditions.

Digital Currencies and the Future of Sovereignty

One area where geopolitics and fintech intersect is in the rise of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). Nearly every major central bank is exploring them. But China leads the way, with trials already reaching hundreds of millions of users.

This digital rollout isn’t just about tech—it’s about power. An authoritarian regime with total visibility into consumer spending poses ethical and strategic questions for the West. And as U.S.–China tensions grow, financial systems may splinter into incompatible global frameworks.

The implications for fintech are huge. Companies must prepare for a future where different regions operate under different digital rules, values, and platforms. That means building adaptable infrastructure today.

Fintech Can Influence Geopolitics—If It Chooses To

Chawla also highlights an emerging role for fintechs—not just as responders to global shifts, but as shapers of them. Like Big Tech companies that now engage in digital diplomacy, fintechs can step into leadership roles around policy, ethics, and regulation.

Few have done so yet. Most fintechs are still small and fast-growing, focused on their product or compliance issues. But there’s growing opportunity for them to influence everything from CBDC frameworks to global financial inclusion strategies.

This influence isn’t just ethical—it’s strategic. Those who help shape the future of money will also shape the future of markets.

Prepare for the Long Game

So what can financial leaders do right now?

First, treat geopolitical risk as a board-level issue, not a compliance checkbox. Make it part of business strategy. Consider both threats and opportunities.

Second, balance short-term crisis planning with long-term scenario modeling. Don’t just react—anticipate. Build flexible systems that can evolve as the world does.

Third, embrace innovation as a daily practice, not a one-time transformation. Teach it. Test it. Make it part of company culture.

Above all, remember that assumptions are the biggest threat of all. As Williams says, the leaders who challenge assumptions will shape the future. Those who defend them may become irrelevant.