Crises in one part of the world now carry consequences far beyond their borders. The deepening conflict between Israel and Iran is a striking example, with ripple effects that extend well into Africa. For Nigeria, a country tightly linked to global economic and political systems, the fallout is not abstract; it is immediate, consequential, and calls for calculated strategic responses.

For directors charged with guiding businesses and institutions, the current crisis is more than an economic tremor; it is a stark reminder of corporate exposure and a rallying cry for stronger governance. A Chinese proverb wisely states, “When the winds of change blow, some build walls while others build windmills.” 

The real question is not whether this conflict touches Nigeria; it already does. The deeper concern is: Are we preparing with vision, or merely reacting in fear? While the temptation to celebrate short-term gains such as increased oil revenues may be strong, true leadership requires looking beyond the moment to build resilience and long-term value.

However, a critical examination reveals a dangerous paradox, given that the country’s weak domestic refining capacity means that we import most of the petroleum products we consume at significantly higher costs when global prices surge. For businesses reliant on energy inputs, especially in manufacturing, logistics, and aviation, the result is spiraling operational costs, reduced profit margins, and suppressed consumer demand.

The conflict also threatens major global shipping routes, leading to rising freight costs, delayed deliveries, and increased insurance premiums. For Nigeria, an import-dependent nation, this translates directly into inflation, supply shortages, and disruption of business inputs ranging from raw materials to technology.

 This raises a critical governance challenge with respect to how prepared our businesses are to withstand global disruptions. Are our supply chains sufficiently diversified to manage unforeseen shocks? Have we created strategic buffers or built-in redundancies to absorb external pressure? If over 60% of a company’s production inputs are imported, how vulnerable does that make the business to disruptions beyond its control?

While these concerns persist, boards must take decisive action to promote local sourcing, strengthen regional supply partnerships, and adopt flexible procurement strategies. These steps are crucial for enhancing resilience and supporting long-term sustainability.

Amid growing global uncertainty, supplier diversification has become both a strategic necessity and an ethical responsibility. Moreover, as geopolitical risks continue to escalate, capital is increasingly fleeing emerging markets, thereby exerting significant pressure on currencies such as the naira.

Consequently, for companies operating in Nigeria, the implications are becoming more evident. Import costs are rising, the challenge of servicing foreign-denominated loans is intensifying, and access to foreign exchange is becoming more constrained. Furthermore, these risks are amplified when financial plans do not adequately account for exchange rate volatility.

Building on this, it is essential that directors go beyond reflection and take concrete action. This includes ensuring that risk management systems are not only designed but also actively monitored and stress-tested against real-world scenarios. Additionally, fostering a culture of financial foresight within management teams is vital. By embedding currency risk awareness into strategic planning and operational decisions, businesses can better navigate volatility.

The goal is not merely to survive external shocks but to build resilient institutions that can adapt, thrive, and sustain value in the face of global uncertainty. In addition, financial governance cannot afford to be reactive. Therefore, audit and risk committees must ensure that clear policies are in place for managing currency exposure, while stress-testing should be fully integrated into enterprise risk management systems.

Moreover, periods of global conflict often prompt investors to withdraw from environments perceived as high-risk. As a result, Nigeria’s longstanding issues, such as regulatory inconsistency, policy instability, and insecurity, further deepen these concerns.   

However, this presents both a challenge and an opportunity for corporate boards. It is therefore imperative and pertinent to ask: Do our governance frameworks truly reflect resilience, transparency, and accountability? Furthermore, are we doing enough to inspire confidence in prospective investors and strategic partners? As a Dutch proverb reminds us, “Trust arrives on foot but leaves on horseback.”

This highlights the need to treat governance codes not as static compliance tools but as active instruments for building long-term investor confidence. Hence, strong board structures, timely disclosures, and genuine ESG commitments must be regarded as fundamental requirements rather than aspirations.

Equally important, the Israel-Iran conflict reinforces the urgent need for economic diversification. Nigeria’s continued overdependence on oil revenues and imported goods has left the economy highly exposed to external shocks. Similarly, many businesses remain at risk due to their failure to diversify income sources, product lines, or markets.

This raises a critical question: What percentage of your organization’s income depends on global commodity prices, foreign exchange availability, or imported inputs? For this reason, directors must take deliberate steps to champion diversification, not only in policy but also in execution.

This includes fostering innovation, expanding into new markets, strengthening local production, and developing flexible business models capable of weathering both stability and crisis. More so, diversification must be embedded into the core of corporate strategy and monitored regularly at the board level.

Finally, the Israel-Iran conflict stands as a powerful test of boardroom foresight. Its effects on oil markets, currency strength, supply chains, and investor sentiment are already evident in Nigeria. Yet beyond the immediate challenges lies a more profound question: What kind of governance culture are we building in response? As the saying goes, “Corporate governance is not just about rules; it is about character.”

 In light of these challenges, this is not the time for directors to adopt a posture of passive oversight. Rather, it is a time that demands bold leadership, clear strategic vision, and transformative decision-making. Therefore, the following questions need to be looked at critically: Are we truly building resilience, or are we merely reacting under pressure?

Are we positioning our businesses to attract global capital, or are we isolating them through weak governance practices? Are our boardrooms content with mere compliance, or are they equipped to navigate today’s complex and uncertain global landscape with competence?

To better assess where Nigerian boardrooms stand, the matrix below contrasts reactive governance practices with proactive strategies that align with global standards of resilience and long-term value creation:

Research & Advocacy Department,