Corporate Governance Trends in the United Kingdom

 

Back to Global Corporate Governance Trends for 2026

 

Implementing the new Corporate Governance Code

The most immediate development for 2026 is the introduction of Provision 29, which requires boards to report formally on the effectiveness of their internal controls starting in January of this year. The mandate marks the UK’s closest move yet toward a regime similar to Sarbanes-Oxley in the US, though adapted to the British “comply or explain” model.

Large, well-governed companies welcome the change as an extension of their existing assurance frameworks. For smaller issuers, the requirement is more demanding—adding testing, documentation, and certification—but the intent is clear: to strengthen investor confidence and board accountability without creating unnecessary bureaucracy.

As companies begin their disclosures, some recalibration is expected as boards observe how peers interpret the requirements and refine their own approaches accordingly.

 

AI governance moving to center stage

Artificial intelligence has become a standing board agenda item. With the UK preparing its own AI bill and the EU AI Act taking effect, directors are now expected to understand how data models and automation will shape business decisions. Director and executive committee training on AI is therefore a top priority, with boards tending to prioritize collective upskilling over installing AI experts as directors.

Boards are increasingly adopting a risk-based AI governance approach, defining clear accountability for its use, promoting transparency in decision-making and assessing the ethical and legal implications of automated systems.

AI is also reshaping the governance process itself. Tools that summarize board papers, automate minutes or support compliance tracking are already reducing the administrative load while introducing new oversight questions. The next phase will concern governing technology as rigorously as finance and people, embedding AI oversight into risk frameworks and into board and company culture alike.

 

Embracing cybersecurity and operational resilience as core board duties

Cyber risk has become one of a board’s most tangible tests of resilience. High-profile attacks across UK sectors have shown that no organization is immune, and investors now view cyber readiness as a measure of fiduciary responsibility.

Boards are making operational resilience part of their annual assurance cycle by mapping critical systems, rehearsing incident-response plans and reviewing insurance coverage and recovery strategies. The prevailing assumption has shifted from preventing breaches to how to manage them when they inevitably happen. Looking ahead, boards will increasingly put this critical question into their agendas.

For many directors, the challenge is knowing enough to probe effectively without becoming technologists. The leading practice combines independent external reviews with specialist board advisors who keep expertise current. Experts predict that the robustness of a company’s cyber-response plans may serve as the first real test of the UK’s new internal-control regime.

 

ESG maturing from commitments to credible reporting

ESG remains central to UK corporate governance, but 2026 marks a move from policy to performance. With the adoption of International Sustainability Standards Board disclosure standards and the consolidation of existing frameworks, the focus is shifting to quality over quantity, which means fewer metrics, greater materiality and clearer links to strategy.

Boards are prioritizing transparent, consistent reporting on climate and diversity and focusing their efforts on issues that are genuinely material to enterprise value. Because diversity targets at the board level have largely been met, the spotlight is shifting to management pipelines and organizational culture. On climate, the emphasis is on delivery against transition plans rather than setting new ambitions.

Despite global political divergence on the importance of ESG, UK companies continue to view responsible governance as a competitive advantage and differentiator. The tone is pragmatic—sustainability as good business, not as ideology. In this steadier phase, ESG discipline is less about new commitments and more about credible reporting that informs decision-making and builds trust with investors.