Ik heb de eerste vermelding van iedere persoon aan LinkedIn gekoppeld, de sponsors aan hun LIFCP-partnerpagina’s en onderaan relevante eerdere afleveringen toegevoegd.
Voice-over: Welcome to the Leaders in Finance Compliance Podcast. We talk with experts, advisors and business leaders about navigating risk and compliance challenges within the financial sector. Because the straight and narrow path doesn’t come with GPS.
We’d like to thank our partners Deloitte, Rabobank, Cense and Osborne Clarke.
The Leaders in Finance Compliance Podcast.
Kees: Welcome, listeners, to an extra episode of the Leaders in Finance Podcast. My name is Kees de Wit, Managing Director at Leaders in Finance Events, and I’m currently at the H’ART Museum in a very warm Amsterdam, right after our Leaders in Finance Compliance Event.
Today, I’m joined by three guests who not only attended the event, but also played a key role in making it happen. I’m going to reflect with them on today’s event, especially to give those of you who did not attend an idea of what was discussed.
I will briefly introduce my three guests and then ask them to introduce themselves, because I believe they can do that much better than I can. First of all, Tom van de Laar, the new CCO of Rabobank, subject to the supervisor’s review. Leanne Joseph, moderator of today’s event. And Pieter van Doorn, partner at Deloitte. Welcome, all.
Thank you. Tom, starting with you: can you tell me a bit more about yourself and your new role? Congratulations, by the way.
Tom: Thank you. Yeah, happy to do so. Thanks for the invitation, Kees. It’s nice to be here and reflect together.
I’m now in my second week, I think, in my new role as Chief Compliance Officer for Rabobank Group, although still subject to review by the ECB and the Dutch Central Bank. I have a background in consultancy, I was a criminal defence attorney and I also worked at Mizuho Bank.
So I’ve done several different things: consultancy, being a lawyer and banking. I also teach Compliance and Integrity Management at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
My role as Chief Compliance Officer was also the topic of today: what is the future of compliance and what is the future of the compliance officer? I think these are really exciting times. One takeaway from today is that, as a compliance officer, you still need deep expertise in different areas, but you also need to combine that with AI knowledge.
That means also being the AI risk manager. I think it’s really important for the future compliance officer that you have both: that you at least functionally understand the tools you’re working with and that we reskill ourselves, both as leaders and as experts.
Kees: Amazing. Thank you, and thank you for sharing your key takeaway. I think you really hit the nail on the head there. These are exciting times. We heard that in several keynotes, and we’ll dive into it later as well.
I think you already knew many people here today, given your background. There was someone from EY as well.
Tom: I saw people from EY, CMS and Deloitte. So yes, all my former employers.
Kees: Good to hear. Thank you very much. Pieter, can you tell me a bit more about yourself and your role, and perhaps also share your key takeaway from today?
Pieter: Yeah, sure. I’ve worked at Deloitte for 15 years now and lead a risk and compliance team completely focused on banking, asset management, payments and so on. The majority of the clients we help are innovating, launching new products or entering new markets. That’s mainly what we do right now.
We also have a business in regular compliance risk management, focused on making it more effective and efficient. And then we have the response team. I think that accounted for the majority of our work over the last decade, although it is decreasing a bit now. The team comes into place when there’s a letter from the supervisor or a mass claim from customers. We help identify the root causes and the impact, and find solutions to resolve the matter.
My takeaway from today is that it is indeed an interesting time. As Tom already mentioned, a lot is happening in the market. I think it may also be a perfect storm for compliance, because this is the time when you can really show and add your value to the bank.
That requires a lot, because it means moving away from the traditional compliance officer, who was more focused on having a policy and making sure it was implemented, towards really having a role in designing the future. That includes AI adoption, crypto and stablecoins. The way we make payments will probably also change systematically in the near future. Compliance has the ability to help accelerate banks throughout this journey.
That’s really great, and I also thought it was nicely reflected throughout the day.
Kees: With the two of you talking already, I have so many questions I want to explore further. But not before Leanne has introduced herself as well, because you moderated the Leaders in Finance Compliance Event for the first time. Can you tell me a bit more about yourself and how you experienced the day?
Leanne: Yeah, for sure. Thank you, Kees. I’m Leanne Joseph. It’s been a pleasure to moderate this Leaders in Finance Compliance Event for the first time. It’s been a real joy.
I’ve met so many different leaders working in regulation, risk, trust, accountability and many other areas of finance that are really important. In terms of my background, I’ve been a moderator for around nine years, specialising in tech, AI, business and finance events. So it’s been a pleasure to join your pool of very talented moderators as well.
My key takeaway from today is seeing how neobanks and crypto are, of course, no longer fringe technologies. They’re really moving into the centre, and regulation is catching up with these industries. New regulation also creates new opportunities—not just challenges, but great opportunities for this new technology. So it’s exciting.
Kees: Thank you very much. Briefly, my own key takeaway from the day is the call for a united approach. We had different people on stage, of course. We had non-executives, supervisors and fintechs, and we all see the same struggles.
Pieter, you hosted a panel on compliance in a fast-changing technological world. Of course, technology such as AI has a huge impact on compliance. Can you tell me a bit more about what was discussed during the panel?
Pieter: Yeah, we tried to discuss the topic in three layers. The first layer was the role compliance can play in this transition. It’s a large transition, and I think that was also reflected in the key takeaways.
Compliance has an important role in making this transition smooth and trustworthy, but also in accelerating it. Compliance is often perceived as red tape, but I think it can also be the key to acceleration. So that was one topic.
The second topic was what compliance itself can do to innovate. What kinds of new technology are available to make your work more effective? We also had a somewhat bold statement: could the compliance officer be replaced by an agent, for example? I think there was broad consensus that this will not be the case. But, of course, there are possibilities to create more value for the compliance officer as well.
The final topic concerned the risks related to innovation. I think the different perspectives all led to the same conclusion: the risks are not so different, but they require a different approach from compliance. Traditionally, the approach was tailored to individual risk types, with every compliance officer having their own policy and risk type. Now, a more holistic view of risk is required.
It also requires some background in technology. You cannot fulfil your role properly if you have no feeling for or knowledge of it. I think that’s a big shift from what we traditionally did in compliance.
Kees: So, from your perspective—because you were on the panel together with Jens Pöhland from Mizuho, Bert Verdoodt from Danske Bank and Michèle Provinciael from ABN AMRO—zooming in on the statement, “An agent will replace the compliance department”: it is indeed a bold statement, but we wanted to shake up the room a bit.
What was your opinion on this statement?
Tom: Yeah, maybe I can add a few other things. I think Pieter already mentioned some really interesting angles. But on this particular statement: no, I don’t think so. I think the agent is there to augment decision-making.
In the end, we have responsibility and accountability, and that’s not something you can delegate. Especially in grey areas, the question is: who ultimately makes the decision? So I really see it as a tool. It augments decision-making.
Of course, if you look at compliance services and products, there are many opportunities for AI in detection, prevention and decision-making. A lot of the preparatory work can probably be done by AI. But when it comes to the judgement part, I think that’s still something for compliance professionals to do. The compliance officer is still within the loop. In 30 years, we may end up in a situation where there is no compliance officer. So that’s one point.
I also really liked your remark that there is an opportunity for compliance, especially now with the involvement of AI. If you look at real-time monitoring and move into areas such as fraud, sanctions or digital assets, the skill set of the future compliance officer becomes especially important. It’s not just about deep expertise, but also about how you can embed controls in the product design—right at the front.
I think it’s far more interesting to see compliance not only as a control function, but also as a design function. That’s perhaps another key takeaway from the panel discussion, or even from what we discussed throughout the day. I think that’s really exciting. Compliance then becomes sexier than its image sometimes suggests, and I think that’s really great.
So there is a combination of deep compliance expertise and technological knowledge. There is one other angle as well: compliance is uniquely positioned. On the one hand, we need our customers to trust it, and we need our regulators to accept it. For AI to really work, we need to scale it.
If you look at those three angles, compliance is positioned right in the middle, where it can really connect all three.
Kees: With this, in your words, sexy development, I think it’s very fitting that you’re the new—
Tom: Pitching for it.
Kees: The perfect man for the job. Thank you very much.
I would also like to refer to the keynote by Duco van Lanschot, the founder of Duna. He said that when we look at technological shifts and the way we use AI, for example, we’re not heading towards a situation in which supervision is taken over by AI. But the checklist part of the work—a large part of the work is, of course, checking boxes—can be done by AI. The supervision, decision-making and judgement can then be handled by a human. That’s the human in the loop, of course.
Tom: If I may chip in, I think that also requires compliance professionals to have at least a functional understanding of how things work. In addition to the judgement part, they will also need to orchestrate more from a governance perspective. That’s part of the product approval process, and it isn’t limited to one moment in time. You will probably also have to consider the model lifecycle and continue monitoring it.
With that, the compliance function also becomes more of an orchestrator, with a focus on judgement.
Kees: Yeah, totally agreed. I think Petra van Hoeken, who delivered the final keynote, also fully agreed. She really said that we need to have a seat at the table to make the company and the business aware of this.
Leanne, you spoke to all the speakers before the event and eventually saw them onstage today. Can you tell me a bit more about your experience of getting to know the people who were onstage and what they discussed today? Was there a common thread?
Leanne: Yeah. What I really noticed, not just among the speakers but also among the people attending the event, was their passion for building and maintaining trust in the system we currently have.
That’s really exciting because we can see how AI is magnifying both the opportunities and the challenges in the financial sector, as well as the opportunities for compliance and regulation. We can also see the effects it can have on society and the benefits it can bring.
It was really reassuring to see that the people behind compliance, but also those behind the technology being introduced into compliance, are still really passionate about and confident in the integrity that is needed within this industry. It was great to see that reflected in the conversations I had with them, then onstage, and then mirrored back to us by the audience as well.
Kees: I find it interesting that you used the word “mirrored”, because there was a lot of mirroring in the sense that so many different people took to the stage.
We started with Sheila Gemin, for example, who spoke about the future of banking, followed by tech, AI and capital markets. So we moved from tech to AI and, later, even to crypto.
Was there a specific insight from the keynotes that you found to be an eye-opener?
Tom: Something I was definitely able to relate to was a point Sheila made: does the risk itself really change, or is it the behaviour that changes? That really resonated with me.
I don’t think the risk itself is that different, but what is different is the mindset that’s needed. If you look at the actual behaviour, we need faster decision-making in the current context. That also means we have to organise ourselves around it.
Several speakers said that a siloed approach doesn’t work. If you look at the challenges we’re confronted with, whether through a geopolitical lens or an AI or technology lens, you really have to look at things in a more integrated way and work across teams. I think that’s also a key insight and something I was really able to relate to.
Kees: How was that for you, Pieter?
Pieter: Yeah, I had a similar reflection. I also liked the presentations on crypto, including the business perspective. Mauro Halve explained how regulations are formed, the struggles involved in entering this market and how the market is evolving.
Afterwards, we heard the supervisor’s perspective on how they organised themselves in a very short time to create a common regulatory framework that applies directly across Europe. We also heard how that works and about the challenges it creates for countries that need much longer implementation periods.
In the Netherlands, we already have a few licences, and the map also showed how dynamic this process is. It also came up during our panel discussion: do we need more regulations or standards, yes or no?
Sometimes regulation can make things smoother and make it easier for parties to evolve within a market. But when regulation is unclear or still being implemented across Europe, it becomes difficult and creates new challenges for the market.
I still remember the speed of the AFM’s implementation from the presentation. It was also good that the AFM reflected on that. I think the question is really how to operate in that grey area. I saw that reflected in almost all the presentations: how do you deal with the grey area? I liked that.
Tom: Maybe to add to that, there are two angles to the discussion about regulation: is there too much regulation, or is regulation blocking innovation?
One of the key takeaways was that regulation should be risk-based, so you can really differentiate your approach. You could have a fast track for parties with a mature model risk-management framework. I think that was an important takeaway.
What I also really liked—and what was happening today—was the dialogue between public and private parties. You referred to MiCAR and the implementation period. The AFM also faced very short implementation timelines. It was great to hear that there was very intensive, almost daily dialogue between public and private parties. I think that’s really valuable, and we should continue that public-private dialogue on many topics.
Kees: Yeah, I think that conversation really stood out in every keynote and panel. Internal conversations are needed, but we also have to understand the world around us. In that light, there is fortunately plenty to do within the compliance field—and, I think, beyond compliance as well.
Leanne, today’s event in one word?
Leanne: Hopeful, for sure. It’s amazing to see so many people working to ensure that we have a safe banking system—a system that many people don’t even think about, but which simply runs in the background.
I feel extremely hopeful that technology is going to help us protect people better, maintain trust and ensure that we have a great system. Yeah, hopeful.
Tom: I’m still processing the programme, but I can definitely relate to “hopeful” as well. If you look at the knowledge in the room, with people coming from different perspectives but really wanting to invest in the future of compliance, regardless of their position in the ecosystem, it’s just really great. With all those smart minds, I feel very energised.
Pieter: Hopeful? I thought you might mention the S-word. I won’t repeat it.
I also felt energised, and I thought it was amazing to hear everyone speak. I think a new direction is really needed. We need to leave the old world behind us because we have new things to do.
Nobody knows exactly where we’ll be in five or ten years, but it will be completely different from today—that’s for sure. I think there is a hopeful future for us: for the banks in the first place, but also for all the participants in the financial sector and, of course, for our compliance officers.
Kees: So, in one word?
Pieter: Hopeful? Was that already taken? That was your word, so I’d be copying it. Excited.
Kees: Excited, good to hear.
Pieter: What about you, Kees?
Kees: I would say happy. Happy may be an easy choice, but after all the preparation in the run-up to this event, I’m very happy to see that everything fell into place.
We used the word “map”. I really felt today that we saw a map of the state of compliance in the financial sector, or at least part of it. That makes me feel hopeful and energised as well, because I saw so much recognition among the different parties: “Okay, maybe we should start talking about this.”
I really hope today was a conversation starter and that people will continue connecting after the event.
Tom: Those are all very positive words, and we can stay positive, but I would also add “urgency” to balance it a little.
We also discussed that, if you look at developments in AI—not only the opportunities, but also the threats—and combine them with geopolitics and the volatility in the world, urgency becomes really important. We’re still catching up, so how can we arrive at faster decision-making?
Everything is changing. What we have needs to change, the way we operate needs to change and the way we conduct our business needs to change. I really felt that sense of urgency in the room as well.
Pieter: Yeah, and we also highlighted some very real risks we currently face. That started with the first presentation, which addressed our reliance on certain cloud providers or infrastructure, for example.
Innovation is needed. If you don’t innovate, that may be the deadliest risk you can face at this moment.
We also saw that there is regulation for crypto, but there is still a lot of work to do. MiCAR 2 also needs to be introduced because there are still many imperfections in the system. If they materialise and the gap continues to grow, that will also become a threat to our economy.
In the final presentation, Petra also highlighted that we often focus only on KYC, while many other risk types require attention and may not be receiving it now.
To end on a happy note, I think that was also reflected throughout the day. I’m excited, but there is still a lot of work to do.
Kees: Yeah. We hope that when we sit here again next year, everybody will have acted with enough urgency to make it work and get to work.
Perhaps one final question for you, Tom. Hopefully, we’ll be sitting here again next year. What do you think—or, perhaps better, what do you hope—will have changed by then?
Tom: To mention two things: first, I think we should definitely focus on our workforce. We need to train ourselves to become more AI-literate. Regardless of your role within the bank, that’s really important. So training everyone will definitely be a focus in the coming period.
Second, what does the future compliance organisation look like? What are the key processes and compliance products? What is the impact of AI on detection, prevention and decision-making? And what does our future organisation look like?
By then, we will probably have articulated a clearer view and already be making progress in that area.
Kees: Let’s hope so. Thank you very much. Leanne, Tom and Pieter, thank you very much for joining me on this podcast. And thank you, of course, to our listeners for joining us from the Compliance Event.
Next year, this event will take place on 13 May 2027, and all the information will be available on our website soon. Thank you to our speakers and participants, and we hope to see you next time.
Leanne: See you soon.
Voice-over: You’ve been listening to the Leaders in Finance Compliance Podcast. We’d like to thank our partners Deloitte, Rabobank, Cense and Osborne Clarke.
Would you like to know more or leave us a comment? You can do so on our LinkedIn page. If you follow us there, we’ll keep you up to date with our new episodes.
We’d be grateful if you could leave a review and tell others about this podcast. Also, don’t forget to check out the other podcasts on our channel. There’s bound to be something for you.
Related episodes
- Tom van de Laar – Financial Crime en Compliance
- Arjan Groen & Tom van de Laar – Financiering, digitalisering en proportionaliteit in het MKB
- Pieter van Doorn en Olaf Smit – De rol van risk en compliance binnen innovatie
- Mauro Halve
- Mauro Halve – Compliance in de cryptowereld
- Duco van Lanschot
- Duco van Lanschot (Duna) on a $30M Series A
- Live from the Compliance Event 2025