Legacy Thinking in the Boardroom: How Telco Directors Block Their Own Growth.

The Cost of Strategic Inertia

Telecommunications boards have weathered decades of disruption—from privatisation and liberalisation to 3G hype, OTT disintermediation, and now the dual threats of geopolitical fragmentation and post-quantum risk. Yet many boardrooms remain trapped in outdated mindsets, shaped by legacy performance indicators, obsolete competitive models, and vendor-fed strategies. The result? Strategic inertia at precisely the moment when telcos need to be their boldest.

In this article, we explore how legacy thinking manifests inside the boardroom, the unconscious biases that shape decision-making, and how directors can recalibrate to embrace future-facing growth agendas.

1. Rearview Mirror Metrics: Still Managing for Voice ARPU

Many telecom boards continue to treat ARPU, subscriber churn, and EBITDA as the primary lenses through which performance is measured. While these remain important, they’re dangerously incomplete. Modern telco value lies in infrastructure, digital services, API exposure, ecosystem partnerships, and sovereignty over data.

Yet quarterly reviews often fail to include:- Asset utilisation rates across fibre and data centres- Digital product uptake among non-SIM customers- Strategic control over critical infrastructure assets (e.g., IXPs, satellite gateways)- Internal capability scores for AI, cyber resilience, and regulatory agility

Boards that cling to legacy KPIs risk misjudging both threat and opportunity.

2. Vendor Dependency and the Disguised Absence of Strategy

One of the most pervasive blind spots is over-reliance on vendor presentations. PowerPoint decks from global equipment or service vendors often shape boardroom direction more than internal strategic dialogue. In practice, this leads to outsourced thinking, poor cost benchmarking, and projects that serve vendor roadmaps—not national infrastructure goals or long-term telco health.

Directors often don’t realise they’re being 'led'—until the bill comes due, and flexibility is gone.

Independent strategic challenge sessions, free from commercial influence, are rare but increasingly vital.

3. Geopolitical Risk? Not in the Risk Register

The 2020s have been defined by geopolitical reconfiguration—semiconductor bans, 5G security restrictions, satellite weaponisation, and fibre cable sabotage. Yet most telco risk registers are still dominated by domestic legal and compliance categories.

Few boards model:- Cross-border capacity seizure or disruption- Supply chain de-risking requirements- Regulator-driven data localisation impacts- Political shifts affecting spectrum policy

Legacy directors who came up in a liberalised telecom era struggle to recalibrate for fragmented, politically-charged markets.

4. Risk Aversion Masquerading as Prudence

Telco boards often default to risk avoidance—delaying decisions, waiting for regulator signals, or calling in another round of consultants. This culture of inaction is typically framed as prudence. But in fast-moving markets (especially Africa, MENA, Southeast Asia), speed is a strategy.

Boards that delay AI adoption, quantum-readiness planning, or private 5G investment aren’t being careful—they’re quietly ceding advantage to bolder rivals.

5. No Technology Futures Capability on the Board

Many boards remain dominated by ex-finance or legal professionals. While governance and fiduciary duty matter, telcos are technology infrastructure firms. Boards with no deep tech foresight capacity risk making decisions blind to technological trajectories.

Even worse: topics like PQC (post-quantum cryptography), GNSS jamming, AI-driven fraud, and data federation appear only at operational levels—never at strategic or risk committee level.

Boards need members who understand where the technology is going—not just where compliance lines are drawn.

6. Strategy by Benchmarking: The Myth of the Comparable Peer

Benchmarking is a useful board tool—but when misapplied, it becomes a crutch. Directors often anchor to peer telcos in adjacent markets, assuming these provide valid strategic models.

But no two telcos operate under identical:- Spectrum rights and tax regimes- Asset ownership structures- Competitive landscapes- Sovereign constraints

Benchmarking against the wrong metrics creates a dangerous illusion of safety.

Boards must learn to benchmark direction, not just position.

7. What Boards Can Do Differently

To overcome legacy thinking, telecom boards must:

1. Build a Strategic Red Team Function – Bring in external advisors (like BCL) to challenge assumptions and uncover hidden risk.

2. Adopt Future-Oriented Metrics – Include digital ecosystem strength, resilience scores, and innovation velocity.

3. Invest in Director Capability – Provide briefings on AI, PQC, cyber-physical systems, and geostrategic threats.

4. Revisit Risk Frameworks – Explicitly address geopolitical disruption and technology obsolescence.

5. Limit Vendor Influence – Separate strategy formation from solution procurement.

Boards that embrace these shifts can unlock new value and position their organisations for relevance—not just survival.

Conclusion: Strategy Requires Courage

Telcos face a turbulent decade ahead. Fibre backbones are being militarised. AI will reshape cost and service models. Post-quantum threats will test security assumptions. In this context, boards cannot afford to act slowly, think narrowly, or benchmark blindly.

Legacy thinking is not a governance virtue. It’s a drag on future resilience.

Bridge Connect offers tailored advisory services for board-level recalibration—challenging outdated assumptions, improving strategic oversight, and preparing directors for the decisions that matter most.

Ready to rethink your boardroom strategy?

Contact Bridge Connect Ltd for a confidential Strategic Red Team session—where the hard questions get asked, and new options emerge.