Karim Tadjer

Karim Tadjer, thank you very much for taking the time to speak with Leaders in Finance ahead of the AML event on 2 October, where you will be joining one of the panels. To begin, could you briefly introduce yourself?

Yes, I’m happy to be here. My name is Karim Tadjer, and I’m responsible for financial crime and fraud prevention at ING.

And you also have a background working with several banks – could you mention a few of them?

Before joining ING, I spent many years at Citibank, where I held leadership roles in both the first and second line. I was fortunate to work in New York in my most recent role, but also spent significant time in London and in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

During your time in the Netherlands, what would you say has been the single biggest shift you’ve observed in the financial ecosystem?

You asked for one, but I’ll give you two. First, I’ve seen a real shift away from focusing solely on meeting legal requirements at any cost, toward a more risk-based approach: really focusing on the actual risks and on what truly matters.

Second, there’s been a significant move toward public–private partnerships: collaborating with multiple stakeholders to identify emerging typologies and work together to prevent financial crime.

You oversee a very large team, how many people fall under your responsibility?

Globally, my team consists of around 6,000 people, based all around the world. They cover areas such as KYC, transaction monitoring, screening, tax operations, and fraud.

That’s a massive responsibility, leading such a large team. How do you ensure that everyone stays focused and operates within the boundaries you’ve set?

Our purpose is clear: to prevent financial crime and fraud. In doing so, we’re not only protecting our clients and the banking system, but also society at large. We achieve this through a large network of passionate professionals, supported by the right tools and a strong operating structure. I’m fortunate to be surrounded by very talented people, and that makes all the difference. I’d describe our approach as best practice. I wouldn’t yet call it best in class – there’s still work to do in some areas – but the quality and dedication of our people set us apart. Ultimately, we are genuinely driven by our purpose.

When you look at the skill set of an analyst – and you have thousands of them – what should they do to stay at the top of their game in the coming years? With so much change ahead, if you were in their shoes, what advice would you give yourself, or what guidance would you offer them on how to develop?

I can be very specific about this, because at ING we have a program called Future Smart. As the name suggests, it’s about preparing our workforce for the future. There are several areas where we want to make sure that people in my team – and more broadly across the organisation – are ready for what comes next.

One key area is data fluency. Another is machine learning, where we run continuous programs focused on emerging risks and new monitoring challenges. We’ve also built a strong partnership with ACAMS, which both certifies our staff and provides ongoing training. ACAMS is integrated into our COO and KYC Academy, which really helps prepare people for the future.

Importantly, my analysts don’t spend all their time working on cases. Around 15-20% of their time is dedicated to training and development. That keeps them sharp, helps them stay at the top of their game, and equips them with the skills – like data fluency – that will be critical going forward.

My philosophy is to prepare people not only for their current roles at ING, but also for the future, wherever their careers may take them. When I worked at Citi, we created a similar program – not with ACAMS, but with the International Compliance Association, and in close collaboration with universities. The goal was the same: to ensure that people had the right qualifications and knowledge

I’m sure a lot of people, both inside and outside the bank, ask you about AI and its use. I’d like to take a different approach and ask you about AI in relation to yourself. Do you use it in some form? Do you practice with it personally?

Yes, I do use it. On a day-to-day basis, I rely quite a lot on Microsoft Copilot, mainly because it helps me summarize and think through how to shorten things.

But my involvement goes well beyond that, since we’re also developing specific use cases. I think my background helps here – I’m also an engineer, which means I can understand the technical aspects very well, perhaps more than most. And I’m genuinely passionate about digging into how these technologies work. But if you ask me what I personally use most, it’s Copilot.

And the use case you’re working on, is that more on transaction monitoring or more on KYC?

Both, actually – it’s transaction monitoring and KYC. They’re very specific use cases. For KYC, it’s about improving the risk engine. For transaction monitoring, it’s about getting better at finding the needle in the haystack – building models that can detect typologies faster. I prefer to focus on these concrete applications rather than speaking about AI in broad, abstract terms. For example, I don’t believe that agentic AI is going to change the world for us tomorrow but we still need to stay on top it as we have still a long way from that.

As you mentioned earlier, you’ve worked across multiple financial institutions and in many different countries. From that perspective, what would you say are the one or two key things the Dutch ecosystem could learn from abroad? And conversely, what’s the main thing others could learn from us?

What can we learn from abroad? I believe it comes down to what we produce for the FIU: unusual versus suspicious. If we move more toward reporting suspicious transactions, it could make a huge difference by allowing us to focus on the more substantial cases. The U.S. is a good example – they’re stronger in this regard and make better use of the insights by sharing them with multiple law enforcement agencies. And while I mention the U.S., of course there are many other examples as well.

And what can others learn from the Netherlands? I think we’re making real progress here, especially in public–private partnerships. We’ve become very strong in this area, particularly through some of the work we did at ING. One example is the cash compensation model, where we examined how money flows through genuine businesses, voluntarily or involuntarily. We worked on this with a number of organizations, and in my view it was truly best in class – something other countries could learn from. And that’s not the only example. This is what makes me very passionate about the work.

You know all the key players in the AML space, both here and abroad. We’re delighted that you’ll be joining the Leaders in Finance AML 5th Edition on 2 October. At events like these, do you still find yourself learning new things? In other words, what’s your reason for attending, beyond the fact that you’ll be speaking?

I always take something away. These events are great for level setting: you may know something, but you’re not always sure how much you know. By sharing with others, you realize your understanding is where it should be – and often you gain new insights or perspectives you hadn’t considered before. For example, I recently attended an event in Paris and learned a government’s viewpoint that was completely new to me. That’s why I always encourage people to attend. At the very least, you’ll confirm that your knowledge is at the right level. What I really don’t like hearing is, “I didn’t learn anything.” Because you always learn something – even if it’s simply that you’re on the right track.

Thank you. Karim Tadjer, Global Head of Financial Crime and Fraud Prevention at ING. Thank you so much for taking the time, and we’re very much looking forward to having you at the Leaders in Finance AML event on the 2nd of October this year.

My pleasure, thank you.