For much of the last decade, “going global” was almost a rite of passage for startups. The formula seemed straightforward: build a product that solves a real problem, raise capital, expand into new markets, and let globalisation create the scale. Technology was increasingly borderless, capital flowed relatively freely, and businesses assumed that the world would become progressively more interconnected.
Over the past two years, however, that assumption has quietly changed. Trade tensions, semiconductor restrictions, sovereign AI strategies, and shifting investment priorities have begun reshaping the environment in which businesses operate. These developments often make headlines as geopolitical events, but for founders, they translate into very practical questions about where to build, who to partner with, and how to grow. I have not had to abandon international ambitions, but I have had to redefine what “going global” actually means.
The most significant business decision I made in the past year was not entering a new market. Instead, it was deciding to invest more deeply in building intelligence into my product before pursuing expansion. I founded a platform that tracks corporate events and strategic actions across listed companies, helping investors and business professionals understand developments that may influence investment decisions. Initially, the objective was relatively simple: make corporate information more searchable and easier to access. However, as I continued analysing thousands of announcements, I began noticing that many corporate decisions were no longer driven solely by commercial considerations.
Increasingly, companies were relocating manufacturing facilities because supply chains had become politically sensitive rather than simply cost inefficient. Strategic partnerships were being formed to satisfy local ownership requirements. Investments in semiconductor manufacturing, artificial intelligence infrastructure, renewable energy, and critical minerals were often influenced as much by national industrial policies as by market demand. Even financing decisions reflected changing global capital flows, with companies seeking investors whose strategic priorities aligned with shifting geopolitical realities.
This changed the direction of my own product. Rather than becoming another searchable database of announcements, it became increasingly important to explain why each corporate event mattered. Every announcement now carries additional context through impact assessments and strategic analysis, helping users understand not only what happened, but also what broader forces may have influenced the decision. As geopolitical fragmentation accelerates, I believe context has become significantly more valuable than information alone. Data is increasingly abundant; interpretation is becoming the real differentiator.
Also Read: The new map of growth: Where Southeast Asia fits in a fragmented world
These changes also made me rethink international expansion. In the past, founders often assumed that once a product worked well domestically, it could simply be replicated across multiple countries. Today, that assumption is becoming increasingly difficult to sustain. Different jurisdictions are introducing their own approaches to data residency, AI governance, cloud infrastructure, and digital sovereignty. Products that appear technically identical may require entirely different operating models depending on where they are deployed.
For businesses building AI-powered products, these considerations are no longer technical details left for engineers to solve after expansion. Decisions about where customer data is stored, which AI models can be deployed, which cloud providers are used, and how information is processed increasingly become strategic business decisions. Governments across Asia are investing heavily in sovereign AI capabilities and placing greater emphasis on domestic digital infrastructure. As founders, we therefore need to think about regulatory compatibility from the beginning rather than treating localisation as a problem to solve after entering a new market.
At the same time, I do not believe geopolitical fragmentation is purely a constraint. It also presents opportunities, particularly for Southeast Asia. For decades, the region has benefited from maintaining economic relationships with both East and West. While major economies are increasingly competing for technological leadership, Southeast Asia continues to occupy an important middle ground. Businesses here have developed experience operating across multiple legal systems, languages, cultures, and regulatory environments. That adaptability has become an advantage in itself.
Rather than attempting to replicate Silicon Valley or compete directly with larger technology ecosystems, Southeast Asian companies have an opportunity to specialise in navigating complexity. The region’s strength lies in its ability to connect different markets, understand diverse customer needs, and operate within varying regulatory frameworks. Those capabilities are becoming increasingly valuable as the global economy becomes more fragmented.
The shift is equally visible in capital markets. Investors today appear less focused on how quickly a company can expand geographically and more interested in how resilient the business will remain if external conditions change. Questions about supply chain dependence, regulatory exposure, customer concentration, and operational flexibility are becoming more prominent during funding discussions. Growth remains important, but sustainable growth supported by resilient business models is attracting greater attention than expansion at any cost.
Also Read: The alliance economy: How founders and investors should position in a fragmented world
This has influenced how I think about building my own business. Rather than optimising solely for rapid market expansion, I am more interested in building a platform that continues creating value regardless of changing political or economic conditions. If the rules of international business continue evolving, then products capable of helping businesses interpret those changes become even more relevant. In many ways, geopolitical fragmentation has strengthened the long-term rationale behind what I am building.
As a result, my definition of “going global” has changed. It no longer means trying to establish a presence in as many countries as possible. Instead, it means building something that remains valuable across different markets despite their differences. It means understanding local regulations before entering a market, designing products that accommodate varying policy environments, and recognising that expansion strategies will increasingly differ from one jurisdiction to another.
If I were advising founders beginning their journey today, I would encourage them to study policy, industrial strategy, and capital flows with the same attention they devote to competitors and customer acquisition. Markets are no longer shaped purely by consumer demand or technological innovation. Government priorities, geopolitical relationships, and regulatory developments are becoming equally influential in determining where opportunities emerge and where risks accumulate.
Globalisation has not disappeared, nor do I believe it will. What has changed is the assumption that one strategy fits every market. The future belongs to founders who understand that technology may be global, but regulation, capital, and strategic priorities are becoming increasingly local. Success will belong not only to those who build the best products, but also to those who best understand the environment in which those products operate.
In a fragmented world, information remains valuable, but context has become indispensable. That realisation has shaped the most important business decision I have made over the past year, and I believe it will continue shaping how many founders approach growth in the years ahead.
—
Editor’s note: e27 aims to foster thought leadership by publishing views from the community. You can also share your perspective by submitting an article, video, podcast, or infographic.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of e27.
Join us on WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook, X, and LinkedIn to stay connected.
The post Building through borders: A founder’s perspective on a fragmented world appeared first on e27.