Terry DavidDame Alison Rose’s leadership of NatWest Group placed her at the centre of some of the most complex conversations in modern banking. In an era where public trust in large institutions has been repeatedly tested, she has argued that transparency and integrity are not optional extras for corporate governance—they are the foundations that enable a business to endure.
Her perspective was shaped over more than three decades at the bank, rising through senior roles before becoming chief executive in 2019. The financial sector she entered early in her career looked very different from the one she led. Regulatory expectations had expanded, public scrutiny had intensified, and the speed of information flow meant that governance failures could damage reputations within hours. Rose came to see transparency not just as a compliance measure, but as a competitive advantage in a world where credibility can determine market position.
Under her stewardship, NatWest made moves to make its operations more open, publishing detailed disclosures on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance. She believed that transparency works best when it is proactive rather than reactive. Waiting until an issue surfaces and then responding defensively, she argued, is the opposite of modern governance. Instead, she pushed for disclosures that provided clarity to shareholders, regulators, employees, and customers before questions were asked.
Integrity, for Rose, meant that these disclosures had to reflect reality, not aspiration. She was vocal about the risks of making commitments without the operational plans to deliver them. Whether the issue was climate-related targets, diversity initiatives, or lending practices, she pressed for strategies that could be measured and verified. In her view, governance systems must be built around truthfulness, even when the truth is uncomfortable.
Dame Alison Rose also highlighted the role of governance in decision-making culture. Strong structures and oversight, she noted, are only effective if paired with leaders who are willing to challenge assumptions and surface problems early. This required boards and executive teams to foster an environment where difficult conversations were possible without fear of retaliation. In her mind, governance was not a set of rules—it was a culture of accountability.
Modern governance, as she saw it, must also keep pace with a rapidly changing world. Digital transformation, new regulatory frameworks, and shifting societal expectations all require boards to adapt their oversight. As highlighted in this article on Law Gazette, Rose encouraged directors and executives to think beyond the immediate quarter and prepare for challenges emerging on the horizon. This included examining cybersecurity risks, the ethics of AI, and the resilience of supply chains in an unstable geopolitical climate.
She was also an advocate for aligning governance with purpose. Rose argued that financial institutions, because of their influence over capital allocation, hold a responsibility to contribute positively to society. This did not mean abandoning profitability; rather, it meant ensuring that profit was achieved in a way that strengthened, rather than weakened, the social and environmental systems in which the bank operated. For her, integrity was not at odds with commercial success—it was the condition for sustaining it.
Dame Alison Rose’s approach underscores the idea that governance is dynamic. Transparency must evolve with the expectations of stakeholders, and integrity must be maintained even under pressure. In her view, the institutions that will thrive in the decades ahead will be those that treat governance as a living practice rather than a static compliance exercise. They will invest in systems that make them open by design and ensure that decision-making is consistently anchored in truth.
For Dame Alison Rose, transparency and integrity are not abstract values. They are operational disciplines that protect stability, enable trust, and define the reputation of a modern institution. In the complex world of 21st-century banking, she has argued that these qualities are not just good governance—they are the only governance that can endure.
Check out this article on FN London for more information.
