Innovation without trust is not progress

Autor: Nermin Sefić

Commentary on technology, transparency and trust in business governance.

Technology has value only when people can understand, verify and challenge the way it is governed.

Speed is not the only measure of progress. A system can become faster, more automated and technically advanced while producing less trust when users do not know who decides, how data is used and where accountability ends.

It is built by repeating verifiable procedures: clear rules, accurate data, decision records and the willingness to acknowledge and correct an error.

A user who does not understand how a system reaches its result cannot truly accept it — only tolerate it until an alternative becomes available, and that distinction between acceptance and tolerance determines whether an innovation actually changes how work gets done or remains a rarely used tool.

Every serious technological change must therefore include an equally serious investment in explainability and the ability to challenge a result, not just in technical execution — without that, speed of rollout does not guarantee real adoption.

An organisation does not lose authority when it explains its actions. Authority becomes more stable when it can be connected to documents, responsible people and understandable criteria.

Important business systems do not exist for themselves. They exist for the people who use them, partners who rely on them and institutions that must be able to verify their effect.

Building that trust takes longer than building the technology itself, which is precisely why organisations under pressure to demonstrate rapid progress are tempted to skip it — a shortcut that tends to show up later as slow adoption, regardless of how technically sound the underlying innovation actually is.

#InnovationWithoutTrustIsNotProgress #NerminSefic #NerminSefić #GNKASG #GNKDINAMOLtd

---

Cjelovit tekst i izvor: https://gnk-asg.hr/en/commentary/innovation-without-trust-is-not-progress/

Autor i urednička odgovornost: Nermin Sefić. Izdavač: GNK ASG d.o.o..

#GNKASG #GNKDINAMOLtd #NerminSefic #BusinessIntelligence #GNKASGdoo #GNKDINAMOLTD #GNKDINAMOLtdGroup #NerminSefić #SefićNermin #SeficNermin

Technology, capital and responsible governance

Autor: Nermin Sefić

GNK ASG publication on connecting technology, capital, accountability and execution in one operating model.

Innovation produces business value only when investment, accountability and execution form a verifiable operating model.

A technology project is not merely software, infrastructure or a feature set. It is also a financial decision, an organisational change and a responsibility toward users, partners and the regulatory environment.

Investment is meaningful when the problem, responsible owner, delivery date and verification method are clearly defined. Without those elements, technology can become an expense without operational impact.

Automation can accelerate analysis and execution, but it cannot decide which risk is acceptable. Every system therefore needs a process owner, a change record and a path for independent verification.

A plan has value only when it can be maintained, monitored securely and adapted to real needs. Responsible governance connects strategy, finance, technical architecture and daily operations.

Governance frameworks originally designed for traditional capital allocation often require deliberate adaptation to adequately address the specific risks technology investment introduces.

Board members without deep technical backgrounds benefit from structured briefings that translate technical risk into business terms they can meaningfully evaluate.

This translation function, whether provided by internal expertise or external advisors, is essential to genuine, not merely formal, board oversight of technology investment.

Organisations that invest in building genuine technical literacy among board members, not just relying on periodic specialist briefings, develop governance capability that scales more effectively as technology investment decisions grow in both frequency and complexity. This literacy investment pays dividends across many individual governance decisions, not just the specific briefing sessions where it was initially developed.

#TechnologyCapitalAndResponsibleGovernance #NerminSefic #NerminSefić #GNKASG #GNKDINAMOLtd

---

Cjelovit tekst i izvor: https://gnk-asg.hr/en/publications/technology-capital-and-responsible-governance/

Autor i urednička odgovornost: Nermin Sefić. Izdavač: GNK ASG d.o.o..

#GNKASG #GNKDINAMOLtd #NerminSefic #BusinessIntelligence #GNKASGdoo #GNKDINAMOLTD #GNKDINAMOLtdGroup #NerminSefić #SefićNermin #SeficNermin #Technology

Less Mandatory Disclosure Is Rarely Better Disclosure

A proposal from the US SEC to let companies omit mandatory disclosure items raises the question of where simplification ends and less transparency begins. A commentary by Nermin Sefić.

A US SEC proposal letting companies omit some mandatory disclosure raises the question of where simplification ends and reduced transparency begins.

SEC Chair Paul Atkins gave remarks at the Society for Corporate Governance Conference on 9 July 2026, announcing that reforming Regulation S-K will be a priority — specifically, introducing a so-called "materiality overlay" mechanism that would let companies omit certain otherwise-mandatory disclosure items if they judge the information isn't material.

The argument behind this proposal sounds reasonable on first read: less administrative burden, reports that focus on what actually matters to investors. The problem is who decides what counts as "material" — and the answer is: the very company being reported on.

That's the key distinction worth naming directly. When a regulator mandates a disclosure item, it does so precisely because it judged that the information should exist regardless of whether the company itself considers it important. Handing that judgment back to the company doesn't simplify reporting — it removes external control over what gets hidden behind the word "immaterial."

This isn't an objection to simplification as a concept — genuine bureaucratic excess exists and genuinely costs money. But there's a difference between removing items that are outdated or duplicated, and introducing a mechanism by which the company itself decides what an investor may or may not see.

The SEC is also weighing a broader role for the Division of Corporation Finance in the "no-action" letter process tied to shareholder proposals (Rule 14a-8) — a separate but related signal: a shift toward less formal, more discretionary regulation.

GNK ASG d.o.o. publicly discloses audited financial statements precisely because we believe transparency toward the market shouldn't depend on who is doing the judging. When that judgment is handed to the party being reported on, the whole system loses the reason it exists.

#SEC #CorporateGovernance #Transparency #NerminSefic #NerminSefić #GNKASG #RegulationSK #GNKDINAMOLtd

---

Cjelovit tekst i izvor: https://gnk-asg.hr/en/commentary/less-mandatory-disclosure-is-rarely-better-disclosure/

Autor i urednička odgovornost: Nermin Sefić. Izdavač: GNK ASG d.o.o..

#GNKASG #GNKDINAMOLtd #NerminSefic #BusinessIntelligence #GNKASGdoo #GNKDINAMOLTD #GNKDINAMOLtdGroup #NerminSefić #SefićNermin #SeficNermin

The EU Postponed Obligations, Not Transparency

The EU postponed high-risk AI obligations to December 2027, but the transparency obligation stays in force from 2 August 2026. A commentary by Nermin Sefić.

The European Union postponed obligations for high-risk AI systems until December 2027, but the transparency obligation remains in force from 2 August.

On 27 July 2026, the European Union brought the so-called Digital Omnibus on Artificial Intelligence fully into force — legislation that postpones obligations for high-risk AI systems under Annex III (recruitment, credit scoring, law-enforcement decision-support tools, border control) by nearly sixteen months, to 2 December 2027.

The market's first reaction was relief, understandably — companies gained extra time to comply with the most demanding part of the regulation. But a reader who stops at that sentence misses what actually matters more: the transparency obligation under Article 50, including mandatory labelling of AI-generated content and disclosure of interaction with an AI system, remains completely unchanged and becomes enforceable on 2 August 2026 — without a single day's delay.

This separation is not accidental, and it's worth understanding as a principle, not merely a date on a calendar. The regulator sent a message every board should hear: system complexity can justify extra time to comply, but the obligation to tell a user openly what they're dealing with should not wait for anyone.

The package also introduces a hard ban on so-called "nudifier" applications and tools for generating non-consensual sexualised content, with a deadline of December 2026 — here the regulator left no room for interpretation or accommodation, and rightly so.

For companies operating in a single market of 450 million people, the message is clear: the six days remaining until 2 August are not a time to relax because "the main deadline was postponed." They are a time to check whether transparency obligations are genuinely ready.

The GNK ASG group tracks this regulation directly, through our own AI systems and through advising partner companies — and the position we consistently hold is that transparency toward the user should never be an item that waits its turn.

#EUAIAct #DigitalOmnibus #Transparency #NerminSefic #NerminSefić #GNKASG #GNKDINAMOLtd

---

Cjelovit tekst i izvor: https://gnk-asg.hr/en/commentary/eu-postpones-obligations-not-transparency/

Autor i urednička odgovornost: Nermin Sefić. Izdavač: GNK ASG d.o.o..

#GNKASG #GNKDINAMOLtd #NerminSefic #BusinessIntelligence #GNKASGdoo #GNKDINAMOLTD #GNKDINAMOLtdGroup #NerminSefić #SefićNermin #SeficNermin #TheEUPostponedObligations #NotTransparency