For decades, many Nordic business leaders operated under a comforting illusion: our companies compete in markets and technologies, while geopolitics happens somewhere far away, handled by diplomats and superpowers. That world is gone.

Today, geopolitics sits directly inside your supply chain, your regulation pipeline, your customer access — and increasingly, your R&D roadmap. Trade routes, energy security, semiconductor access, data sovereignty, AI controls, sanctions regimes, and defense-related dual-use technologies are no longer abstract policy themes. They are board-level business risks and opportunities.

And while some Nordic leaders may still feel that geopolitics lies outside their personal interest or operational responsibility, geopolitics has become intensely interested in them. In their technology, their data, their infrastructure, and their people.

Technology and geopolitics have become inseparable

Every major technology domain we touch — from telecom and batteries to AI, quantum, biotech, and energy — is now a strategic asset in the global contest of power. Some industries, like telecom, have known this for decades. Battery and energy value chains are increasingly shaped by national dependencies, while quantum, space, and biotech startups now operate in an environment where export controls, sanctions, and competing sovereignties determine their market access.

Rising tariffs, expanding trade restrictions, the EU’s push for technological sovereignty, and the resurgence of dual-use technologies make the picture undeniable: the central axis of global competition now cuts directly through technology. 

This is precisely why leading global companies are now appointing chief geopolitical officers. In Finland, some companies have been ahead of the curve. Nokia, for example, has long integrated geopolitical expertise into its top-level decision-making, drawing on figures such as former ambassador Mikko Hautala and earlier Esko Aho, former prime minister of Finland, to help interpret how shifting power dynamics, security policy, and regulation translate into corporate risk and opportunity.

Supply chains: The fragility we can no longer ignore

If the fusion of technology and geopolitics is the first awakening, the second comes from supply chains. Nothing has exposed corporate vulnerability more brutally than the shocks of the last fifteen years. The Japanese earthquake in 2011 forced Nokia to confront how little it understood about the extent of its own supply chain; critical components were sourced from sub-tier suppliers nobody had fully mapped. Covid-19 revealed the fragility of globalised efficiency models when every region faced disruption at the same time. The war in Ukraine then demonstrated how a single factory producing a seemingly insignificant automotive component could halt production lines across Europe.

Again and again, Nordic leaders discovered how deeply their operations depended on places and suppliers they had never considered politically risky. Supply chain security has become geopolitical security. It requires a new level of visibility, data, and foresight — not only knowing direct suppliers but understanding the entire ecosystem behind them. It demands scenario planning for tariffs, export controls, and political crises, and elevates procurement from an operational function to a strategic one. Boards must ask a different kind of question: not merely how much a supplier costs, but what kind of geopolitical exposure that supplier represents.

The dual-use pivot: From taboo to strategic necessity

Another shift has transformed the corporate landscape: the rapid normalisation of defence-related and dual-use technologies. For years, defence was considered a taboo sector in the Nordics. Investors avoided it; startups avoided it; ESG frameworks left little room for products with military relevance. Only a small number of companies in Finland, such as Patria, operated comfortably in this space. Everything changed with the war in Ukraine. The moral compass moved, and the idea of national resilience and security — once confined to policy circles — became a shared responsibility across society and business.

This shift has already reshaped investment and innovation. Companies like ICEYE show how space technologies built for civilian use can become essential tools for national defence and European security. Solidium’s investment in ICEYE signalled that public capital now recognises defence tech as legitimate and necessary. Nokia has openly integrated defence considerations into its strategy, and AI, quantum, robotics, and energy startups across the Nordics are being drawn into resilience and sovereignty initiatives. Meanwhile, the ESG conversation is evolving from avoidance to responsibility: strengthening democratic resilience is a moral duty. Defence is no longer a liability; it is a necessity.

Boards must see the world as it truly is

These geopolitical forces place new demands on Nordic boards. Many still operate as if geopolitics were an occasional external shock rather than a structural force shaping markets, investment flows, and technological trajectories. 

Boards must understand their long-term geopolitical exposure, ensure they receive structured intelligence, and integrate geopolitical considerations into everything from supply chain planning and customer focus to R&D investment. Short-term shocks such as Ukraine must be distinguished from long-term structural changes that are reshaping the global economy. Resilience must be built before it is needed, not after a crisis hits.

Nordic companies may prefer to see business as clean, predictable, and global. But geopolitics no longer respects those boundaries. Even if technology is not interested in geopolitics, geopolitics is very interested in technology — and in the companies that build it. The leaders who recognise this early will shape the next decade of Nordic competitiveness. The rest will discover, too late, that geopolitics was the blind spot that determined their fate.


|

Voices

The new executive blind spot: Why every Nordic company now needs to think geopolitics

The new executive blind spot: Why every Nordic company now needs to think geopolitics

·

5 min read

Credit: Antti Vasara

Credit: Antti Vasara

For decades, many Nordic business leaders operated under a comforting illusion: our companies compete in markets and technologies, while geopolitics happens somewhere far away, handled by diplomats and superpowers. That world is gone.

Today, geopolitics sits directly inside your supply chain, your regulation pipeline, your customer access — and increasingly, your R&D roadmap. Trade routes, energy security, semiconductor access, data sovereignty, AI controls, sanctions regimes, and defense-related dual-use technologies are no longer abstract policy themes. They are board-level business risks and opportunities.

And while some Nordic leaders may still feel that geopolitics lies outside their personal interest or operational responsibility, geopolitics has become intensely interested in them. In their technology, their data, their infrastructure, and their people.

Technology and geopolitics have become inseparable

Every major technology domain we touch — from telecom and batteries to AI, quantum, biotech, and energy — is now a strategic asset in the global contest of power. Some industries, like telecom, have known this for decades. Battery and energy value chains are increasingly shaped by national dependencies, while quantum, space, and biotech startups now operate in an environment where export controls, sanctions, and competing sovereignties determine their market access.

Rising tariffs, expanding trade restrictions, the EU’s push for technological sovereignty, and the resurgence of dual-use technologies make the picture undeniable: the central axis of global competition now cuts directly through technology. 

This is precisely why leading global companies are now appointing chief geopolitical officers. In Finland, some companies have been ahead of the curve. Nokia, for example, has long integrated geopolitical expertise into its top-level decision-making, drawing on figures such as former ambassador Mikko Hautala and earlier Esko Aho, former prime minister of Finland, to help interpret how shifting power dynamics, security policy, and regulation translate into corporate risk and opportunity.

Supply chains: The fragility we can no longer ignore

If the fusion of technology and geopolitics is the first awakening, the second comes from supply chains. Nothing has exposed corporate vulnerability more brutally than the shocks of the last fifteen years. The Japanese earthquake in 2011 forced Nokia to confront how little it understood about the extent of its own supply chain; critical components were sourced from sub-tier suppliers nobody had fully mapped. Covid-19 revealed the fragility of globalised efficiency models when every region faced disruption at the same time. The war in Ukraine then demonstrated how a single factory producing a seemingly insignificant automotive component could halt production lines across Europe.

Again and again, Nordic leaders discovered how deeply their operations depended on places and suppliers they had never considered politically risky. Supply chain security has become geopolitical security. It requires a new level of visibility, data, and foresight — not only knowing direct suppliers but understanding the entire ecosystem behind them. It demands scenario planning for tariffs, export controls, and political crises, and elevates procurement from an operational function to a strategic one. Boards must ask a different kind of question: not merely how much a supplier costs, but what kind of geopolitical exposure that supplier represents.

The dual-use pivot: From taboo to strategic necessity

Another shift has transformed the corporate landscape: the rapid normalisation of defence-related and dual-use technologies. For years, defence was considered a taboo sector in the Nordics. Investors avoided it; startups avoided it; ESG frameworks left little room for products with military relevance. Only a small number of companies in Finland, such as Patria, operated comfortably in this space. Everything changed with the war in Ukraine. The moral compass moved, and the idea of national resilience and security — once confined to policy circles — became a shared responsibility across society and business.

This shift has already reshaped investment and innovation. Companies like ICEYE show how space technologies built for civilian use can become essential tools for national defence and European security. Solidium’s investment in ICEYE signalled that public capital now recognises defence tech as legitimate and necessary. Nokia has openly integrated defence considerations into its strategy, and AI, quantum, robotics, and energy startups across the Nordics are being drawn into resilience and sovereignty initiatives. Meanwhile, the ESG conversation is evolving from avoidance to responsibility: strengthening democratic resilience is a moral duty. Defence is no longer a liability; it is a necessity.

Boards must see the world as it truly is

These geopolitical forces place new demands on Nordic boards. Many still operate as if geopolitics were an occasional external shock rather than a structural force shaping markets, investment flows, and technological trajectories. 

Boards must understand their long-term geopolitical exposure, ensure they receive structured intelligence, and integrate geopolitical considerations into everything from supply chain planning and customer focus to R&D investment. Short-term shocks such as Ukraine must be distinguished from long-term structural changes that are reshaping the global economy. Resilience must be built before it is needed, not after a crisis hits.

Nordic companies may prefer to see business as clean, predictable, and global. But geopolitics no longer respects those boundaries. Even if technology is not interested in geopolitics, geopolitics is very interested in technology — and in the companies that build it. The leaders who recognise this early will shape the next decade of Nordic competitiveness. The rest will discover, too late, that geopolitics was the blind spot that determined their fate.


Board Programme

Built for Nordic listed company boards.

The only programme in the Nordics designed specifically for listed-company board work.
Five sessions, one cohort, twenty leaders in one room - Helsinki, 2026.

Board Programme

Built for Nordic listed company boards.

The only programme in the Nordics designed specifically for listed-company board work.
Five sessions, one cohort, twenty leaders in one room - Helsinki, 2026.

Authors

Guest columnist

Antti Vasara is a Finnish technology and innovation leader with extensive experience across research, growth companies, and listed companies. He currently serves on the boards of Stora Enso, Detection Technology, Bioretec, Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation, QMill Oy, and SemiQon Technologies Oy. Vasara was CEO of VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland from 2015 to 2025, leading the country’s largest research and innovation institution of its kind through a decade of transformation. Prior to that, he held senior executive roles at Tieto and Nokia, and served as CEO of SmartTrust. Earlier in his career, he worked as a management consultant at McKinsey & Company.

Guest columnist

Antti Vasara is a Finnish technology and innovation leader with extensive experience across research, growth companies, and listed companies. He currently serves on the boards of Stora Enso, Detection Technology, Bioretec, Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation, QMill Oy, and SemiQon Technologies Oy. Vasara was CEO of VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland from 2015 to 2025, leading the country’s largest research and innovation institution of its kind through a decade of transformation. Prior to that, he held senior executive roles at Tieto and Nokia, and served as CEO of SmartTrust. Earlier in his career, he worked as a management consultant at McKinsey & Company.

Authors

Guest columnist

Antti Vasara is a Finnish technology and innovation leader with extensive experience across research, growth companies, and listed companies. He currently serves on the boards of Stora Enso, Detection Technology, Bioretec, Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation, QMill Oy, and SemiQon Technologies Oy. Vasara was CEO of VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland from 2015 to 2025, leading the country’s largest research and innovation institution of its kind through a decade of transformation. Prior to that, he held senior executive roles at Tieto and Nokia, and served as CEO of SmartTrust. Earlier in his career, he worked as a management consultant at McKinsey & Company.

All Listeds newsletters (bundle)

One sign-up, the full picture.

Get every Listeds newsletter: the daily signal drumbeat, the weekly Pulse briefing, the monthly Best of the Month, the CEO letter, and the Weekend read.

By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy

All Listeds newsletters (bundle)

One sign-up, the full picture.

Get every Listeds newsletter: the daily signal drumbeat, the weekly Pulse briefing, the monthly Best of the Month, the CEO letter, and the Weekend read.

By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy

Latest signalsLive feed
Moves trackerLive feed

Investor Event

Listeds Investor Event · Defence

Nordic defence is in a once-in-a-generation growth cycle. Eight listed and pre-IPO companies pitch to 100+ invited investors at Valkoinen Sali, Helsinki

21 September 2026

Latest on Listeds

Monthly Leadership Moves

August's biggest seats were filled without a search

Sep 17, 2026

Two new listed chief executives, and neither was chosen by the board that will supervise them. Four finance seats moved, and not one went to a first-time CFO.

On 3 August, Aspo named the chief executive of a company that will not trade until January. On 31 August, UPM's shareholders elected the board of one that will not trade until November, six weeks after its chief executive had already been named. Both appointments were internal. Neither went through a search.

According to Listeds Executive Intelligence, Nordic listed companies recorded 57 board and management changes in August: 51 in management teams and 6 at board level. Boards accounted for roughly one change in ten for a second consecutive month — and most of the board activity that did happen was produced by corporate structure rather than by nomination committees. Every one of the month's larger moves was at a Helsinki issuer or at a Helsinki issuer's Nordic subsidiary.

The demergers set the month's bookends

Aspo's board approved the demerger plan separating ESL Shipping into a new listed company on 3 August and appointed Matti-Mikael Koskinen as chief executive of ESL Shipping Group Plc the same day. Koskinen has run ESL Shipping Ltd since 2013. The demerger completes on 31 December, trading is expected to start on or about 4 January 2027, and the company's own board will not be elected until an extraordinary general meeting on 7 December, four months after its chief executive was named. Rolf Jansson, Aspo's chief executive, is intended to be elected chair.

At the other end of the month, UPM's extraordinary general meeting on 31 August approved the plywood demerger and elected WISA Group Plc's board: Tapio Korpeinen as chair, Mats Nordlander as deputy chair, and Sakari Ahdekivi, Frank Herrmann, Nina Kiviranta and Emmanuelle Picard as members. Tuija Suur-Hamari had been named WISA's President and CEO six weeks earlier, on 16 July. The demerger is expected to complete on or about 31 October, with trading from 2 November, nine weeks after the board was seated.

Under the Finnish Corporate Governance Code, appointing the chief executive is the board's own duty. A demerger inverts that sequence, and there is no other way to staff a company that does not yet exist. The consequence, on this author's reading rather than anything either company has said, is that both new boards take office with their most consequential appointment already made, and their first exercise of that duty will be a review rather than a choice.

One thing the WISA sequence does change: Suur-Hamari will be one of a small number of women running a Helsinki-listed company. Listeds’ CEO Index — Finland | Q2 2026 shows women holding 8.1 per cent of the 186 sitting chief executive roles at 30 June, and one of the 25 first-half starts. Women held 8.1 per cent of the 186 sitting chief executive roles at 30 June, and one of the 25 first-half starts. August added a second name to that pipeline — Elli Siltala, appointed chief executive of Raisio plc on 7 August.

The finance seat moved sideways, or not at all

The month's finance moves were the mirror image of a market hiring new talent into the role.

Digia filled its chief financial officer seat on 5 August by taking Vincit's sitting CFO, Kärkkäinen — the second time since 2017 that Digia has filled the role with a sitting CFO from another Nasdaq Helsinki company. Bioretec named Panu Mikkonen chief financial officer from 6 October, the fourth person named to that seat since September 2025, two of them interim. Kempower appointed Juha Jaatinen interim chief financial officer on 13 August. 

No Helsinki company promoted a first-time chief financial officer into the role in August. 

Eight executives named in two days

Three companies named eight executives across 18 and 19 August.

Nordea's 19 August release did two things at once. It merged Group Risk and Group Compliance into a single function under Mark Kandborg, who continues on the Group Leadership Team, with Nahale Ståhl Hallengren as Chief Compliance Officer from the same date, outside the Group Leadership Team. And it filled leadership in the bank's two largest customer units: Per Långsved, who joined Nordea in 2019 as Head of Personal Banking Sweden and Country Senior Executive, becomes Head of Personal Banking and joins the Group Leadership Team; Randi Marjamaa, at Nordea since 2006, takes a newly created Business Banking leadership post and also joins the Group Leadership Team. Sara Mella steps back from operational roles.

Nightingale Health removed its operating chief's role on 19 August and put two commercial chiefs in its place, at the point where its Americas business needs to produce revenue. Janna Ranta, chief operating officer since May 2025, became Chief Commercial Officer, Research and Healthcare. Hugh Watson, who has spent 25 years in United States laboratory diagnostics, joined from outside as Chief Commercial Officer, Americas.

Finnair named its digital and legal chiefs on 18 August. With those two, four of the nine Executive Board functions — people, digital, legal and finance — have a new holder named in 2026. The chief executive, operating, revenue, customer and communications seats have not moved. The rebuild is running from the strongest quarter Finnair has reported, and from a general meeting that rejected the company's remuneration report with 90 per cent of the votes represented against it.

Helsinki issuers hired for their Swedish operations

Two of the month's chief executive appointments were at Swedish subsidiaries, and both went to local candidates rather than to executives moved out from Finland.

Kreate Group appointed Per Anders Quist chief executive of Kreate Sverige AB on 24 August. Quist joins from Trafikverket, the Swedish Transport Administration, where he was responsible for major infrastructure projects, and has NCC Norway experience behind him. Kreate's own framing is that Sweden has run ahead of its strategy target and is now being handed to an executive expected to sustain that pace and to test a permanent Norwegian footprint. Luotea named Rikard Nyhrén, who joins from Intea and Newsec, chief executive of Luotea Sweden, starting by February 2027.

Talent moved the other way too. Siili Solutions' Chief People Officer, Taru Salo, left on 4 August for Attendo, with Timo Miiluniemi stepping in on an interim basis.

What August actually says

Three things follow for boards and nomination committees.

A demerger is a leadership decision long before it is a market event. The chief executives of two companies that will not trade until November and January were settled in July and early August, and shareholders approved them inside a structural vote.

Board changes remain an AGM-season phenomenon. Six board changes against 51 in management teams, with the largest single block produced by one extraordinary general meeting, says that off-cycle board activity in Helsinki is driven by corporate structure rather than by committee work.

And the finance function is where succession planning is thinnest — but the evidence for that is a lateral market and an interim bench, not a hiring pattern break. August's finance seats were filled by people who already held the title, or left open. Whether September's first-time appointments turn into a pattern or revert to the lateral hire is the question the next two months answer.

Market Signals

Six of the nine biggest ownership moves in Helsinki in August required no notification

Sep 16, 2026

Three did. Two of those were the same bond amortisation at one company, and the third — a take-private crossing 90% — filed in September, after the month it belonged to.

August looked quiet on Nasdaq Helsinki flagging notifications. The shareholder registers moved more than the disclosure feed did. Finland's thresholds start at 5%, and most of the month's largest register moves never touched the ladder.

Here is what moved, what was notified, and what the gap between those two sets says about reading Nordic ownership.

Citycon: the take-private the register sees last

G City Ltd's directly registered stake in Citycon grew from 39.50% to 42.55% during August, a gain of 5.6 million shares. 

In the same window the Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken Helsinki Branch nominee account, which had been holding a large Citycon block in custody, shrank by 4.8 million shares. Citibank Europe's custodial line edged down as well.

That is not buying. It is the shares crossing out of nominee registration into G City's own name as the tender offer settles. G City's flagging notification of 2 September puts its total holding at 91.05%, against a directly registered position of 42.55% at the end of August. Both are correct: the rest still sits in custodial accounts, re-registering in tranches. Read alone, the register would tell you G City owns less than half of Citycon.

G City crossed 90% on 1 September, commenced compulsory redemption of the minority shares and will apply to delist. Our Citycon piece this week has the offer periods, the divestment and the parking dispute.

Faron: a new largest register holder, and no new money

Heights Capital Management, through CVI Investments, crossed a threshold in Faron Pharmaceuticals on 4 August and filed the next day: shares up from 7.99% to 9.41%. The same notification shows its holding through financial instruments falling from 12.53% to 11.30%, and combined exposure barely moving, 20.52% to 20.72%. This is a convertible bond converting under the up-to-€35m arrangement Faron entered with a Heights-managed entity in April 2025 — not a purchase. Faron's own treasury holding fell from 10.97% to 9.37% in the same event, through dilution rather than a sale.

Also on the move

Register moves during August. None of these required a notification.

Lemonsoft — Rite Ventures grew from 58.7% to 61.1%, continuing to mop up minority shares after its mandatory tender offer earlier in 2026. 

Bittium — the SEB Helsinki Branch nominee line rose from 7.2% to 9.7%, the largest custodial swing of the month. 

Siili Solutions — Jtel Oy grew from 2.8% to 4.4%. 

Solwers — Terrasolid Ltd grew from 5.5% to 6.7%. 

Tokmanni — the SEB Helsinki Branch nominee stake fell from 13.3% to 12.0%. 

Revenio Group — BlackRock fell from 1.6% to 0.4%.

What the ladder catches

Finnish thresholds run at 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50, two-thirds and 90% of shares or votes. Set the nine moves against that ladder:

Move

Notified

Why

Faron — Heights 7.99% → 9.41%

Yes, 5 Aug

Crossed a threshold on the share line

Faron — treasury 10.97% → 9.37%

Yes, 4 Aug

Crossed a threshold on the share line

Citycon — G City 86.51% → 91.05%

Yes, 2 Sept

Crossed 90% on 1 Sept, after the month closed

Lemonsoft — Rite Ventures 58.7% → 61.1%

No

No threshold between 50% and two-thirds

Solwers — Terrasolid 5.5% → 6.7%

No

No threshold between 5% and 10%

Siili — Jtel 2.8% → 4.4%

No

Entirely below 5%

Revenio — BlackRock 1.6% → 0.4%

No

Entirely below 5%

Bittium — SEB nominee 7.2% → 9.7%

No

Custodial nominee line

Tokmanni — SEB nominee 13.3% → 12.0%

No

Custodial nominee line

Both of the August notifications here came from one issuer, and they describe two halves of a single bond amortisation. The largest ownership event of the Helsinki summer filed in September. Read one instrument without the other and you get a month that looks like this one: quiet on the feed, busy on the register.

Join our Pulse, Best-of-the-Week, and Weekend newsletters

Join our Pulse, Best-of-the-Week, and Weekend newsletters