KNOWLEDGE CONNECT 2026: DRIVING INNOVATION AND RESILIENCE IN COMPETITION LAW - NAVIGATING CHANGE TOGETHER

Introduction

We are living through a period of profound transformation. Technology is accelerating, artificial intelligence is reshaping how information is created, managed, and accessed, expectations are rising, while geopolitical uncertainty and an increasingly complex regulatory landscape continue to challenge organisations across industries. In such environment, resilience has become a defining characteristic of successful knowledge functions and legal teams. Success today is no longer measured solely by individual excellence, but increasingly by the ability to adapt, connect, collaborate, create value together and transform knowledge into practical solutions.

These themes were at the heart of the second Knowledge Connect roundtable, held in Istanbul on 11 May 2026. Bringing together competition law knowledge professionals, practitioners, regulators, legal technologists, and consultants from across multiple jurisdictions, the event provided a forum for discussing the future of knowledge management in competition law and the evolving challenges facing the profession. Participants joined both in person and virtually, demonstrating once again that knowledge communities transcend geographical boundaries.

The roundtable featured contributions from Sarah Wilks (Mayer Brown), Jason Freeman (Competition and Markets Authority), Annabel Borg (Eversheds Sutherland), Simon Dodd, Yevgen Khodakovskyy (AquiLabs), Berna Yıldız (Synthia Advisory), Nazeera Mia (Bowmans), Warsha Kalé (Thomson Reuters), Gregory Dowell (Macfarlanes), Aitor Ortiz (Antitrust Intelligence), Cecelia Kye (Jones Day), Anna Biganzoli (Bredin Prat), Maria Tsoukala (Arnold & Porter), Carlos Alberto Ruiz García (Cuatrecasas), Inês Delgado Martins (PLMJ), Elizabeth Malik, Oleksii Pustovit (Asters), Sera Erzene Yildiz, Mehmet Salan, Celal Duruhan Aydinli, Ayberk Kurt and Dr. M. Fevzi Toksoy.

Discussions focused on the opportunities and challenges presented by AI, the development of resilient knowledge strategies, innovation in legal practice, international cooperation, and recent substantive developments in competition law. Throughout the day, participants exchanged practical experiences, challenged conventional approaches, and reflected on how knowledge professionals can continue to create value in an increasingly dynamic environment.

The following sections highlight some of the key themes and insights that emerged from the discussions.

1.     From Individual Excellence to Collective Impact

At the heart of the discussions is a powerful idea: true impact today comes from enabling others to succeed.

The traditional focus on personal performance is giving way to a broader perspective - one that values collaboration, shared knowledge, and collective outcomes. Individual excellence remains important, but it is no longer sufficient on its own, as stressed by Berna Yildiz (Synthia Advisory). Increasingly, success depends on the ability to enable others, to create shared understanding, and to contribute to outcomes that extend beyond individual effort.

This shift requires a reorientation of mindset. Drawing on parallels from high-performance environments, such as professional sports, the emphasis moves toward discipline, resilience, and perspective - not only as personal attributes, but as qualities that shape how individuals contribute to teams. Constraints and challenges are no longer viewed as limitations, but as drivers of strategic thinking and innovation. The focus moves from achieving results individually to creating conditions in which others can also succeed. In other words, the strongest professionals - and organizations - are those that combine personal mastery with the ability to elevate others.

2.     AI and the Redefinition of Work

Artificial intelligence is no longer a future concept - it is already reshaping how knowledge work is performed. Tasks that were once time-intensive - document review, summarisation, and large-scale data processing - are increasingly performed by AI systems. 

This shift, however, does not eliminate the role of professionals; rather, it redefines it. What is changing is not just how we work, but what we consider valuable work. Human contribution is moving away from execution toward interpretation, judgment, and strategic decision-making. Professionals are no longer only producers of work, but also supervisors of processes, validators of outputs, and interpreters of results. In that sense, AI is more likely to redistribute professional effort than replace professional contribution. It may absorb parts of repetitive or language-heavy work, but the remaining value lies in judgment, prioritisation, interpretation and the ability to connect output with legal and commercial consequence.

Being effective now means knowing how to work with AI, question it, and apply it responsibly.

At the same time, the limits of current AI systems are well understood. These systems operate on probabilistic models rather than genuine comprehension. They are capable of producing highly convincing outputs, yet they may also generate inaccuracies/hallucinations or fail in contexts requiring deep reasoning. This reinforces a central point: human judgment remains indispensable, particularly in fields such as law, where context, responsibility, and consequence are critical.

3.     Understanding AI: Capabilities and Limits

A deeper look at AI reveals both its power and its constraints. Modern AI systems, particularly large language models, are exceptionally powerful tools for processing language, identifying patterns, and supporting knowledge-intensive tasks at scale. Yet they do not “think” or “understand” in the way humans do. They do not possess reasoning in the way professionals do, nor do they inherently distinguish between accurate and inaccurate conclusions. 

This distinction is particularly important in legal and regulatory contexts. While AI can enhance efficiency and support analysis, it cannot replace the nuanced interpretation, contextual awareness, and accountability that define professional judgment. Its most effective use lies in informed and careful integration into workflows, where its strengths are leveraged while its limitations are actively managed.

4.     Building Resilient Knowledge Functions

In a world defined by uncertainty, technological and structural change, resilience has emerged as a defining characteristic of effective knowledge functions. A resilient knowledge function is not one that predicts the future perfectly - but one that continues to operate effectively under pressure and change.

In practice, this means that knowledge must be shared rather than concentrated, structured rather than fragmented, and continuously validated rather than assumed to be correct. Systems must be designed to adapt, incorporating new inputs without requiring complete reconstruction. Equally important is the ability to operate under disruption - whether driven by regulatory change, technological advancement, or external shocks. In practical terms, this means looking beyond formal legal developments. Resilient knowledge teams need trusted sources, awareness of political and policy shifts, and visibility over enforcement priorities.   

This implies a broader shift in approach. Instead of relying on fixed plans, organizations must build adaptive capabilities. Rather than seeking certainty, they must learn to identify early signals of change and respond flexibly. Resilience, in this sense, is closely linked to agility, continuous learning, and the capacity to evolve under pressure.

5.     A Changing Regulatory Landscape

Competition law is evolving in parallel with broader global developments. We are seeing two trends at the same time: while there is a degree of convergence in fundamental principles across jurisdictions, fragmentation is increasingly evident in how those principles are applied. 

Divergences are driven by varying policy priorities, political considerations, and regional approaches to enforcement. At the same time, legislative activity is intensifying, with new merger regimes, regulatory reforms, and digital frameworks emerging across multiple jurisdictions. This creates a more complex and less predictable landscape.

In this context, the role of knowledge professionals is expanding. It is no longer sufficient to track legal developments in isolation. There is a growing need to interpret policy signals, anticipate enforcement trends, and integrate legal analysis with broader economic and geopolitical understanding. Knowledge is evolving from a descriptive tool into a strategic resource.

6.     National Picks: Recent Developments in Dawn Raid Enforcement

The Knowledge Connect roundtable also explored substantive competition law developments through a session dedicated to recent enforcement trends across different jurisdictions. This year's discussion focused on national developments in dawn raid practices, highlighting how competition authorities are adapting their investigative powers to the realities of an increasingly digital economy. While dawn raids remain one of the most important enforcement mechanisms in antitrust investigations, their focus is gradually shifting from the physical inspection of premises towards the collection and analysis of digital evidence. As mentioned by Annabel Borg (Eversheds Sutherland), reach is based on data access, not location, as authorities are asserting the ability to inspect any data a business can access, regardless of where it is physically stored, including outside the jurisdiction.

A key theme was the shift from what is on the premises to what is accessible from the premises. In a digital working environment, dawn raid readiness must extend beyond reception protocols and physical files to cloud storage, remotely accessible documents, personal-device risks, auto-deletion settings and document preservation duties.

7.     The Strategic Role of Knowledge Management

Perhaps one of the most significant insights from the discussions - strongly reinforced in the session with Sarah Wilks of Mayer Brown and Jason Freeman of the UK Competition and Markets Authority - is that knowledge management has become a core strategic capability rather than a supporting function.

As regulatory frameworks expand and become more interconnected, knowledge can no longer be organized in isolated silos. Instead, it must be cross-cutting, allowing insights from different areas - such as antitrust, merger control, consumer protection, and digital regulation - to inform one another. This integration is essential for both efficiency and quality of decision-making. 

Freeman’s reflections highlighted the growing importance of institutional memory. When knowledge is not captured, structured, and made accessible, organizations face tangible risks: duplication of work, inconsistencies in reasoning, weakened decisions, and increased vulnerability to challenge. Conversely, well-managed knowledge enables pattern recognition across cases, supports consistency in approach, and reinforces institutional credibility.

Another key insight is the increasingly dynamic nature of knowledge itself. In an environment where legal frameworks and regulatory priorities evolve rapidly, static guidance quickly becomes outdated. Knowledge must therefore be actively curated, continuously updated, and contextualised. This requires dedicated effort and a shift in mindset - from documenting the past to actively maintaining relevance in the present. Still, as emphasised by Nazeera Mia (Bowmans) “competition law knowledge often has a long shelf life. Many insights remain useful across matters, sectors and years, which makes the discipline of capturing, structuring and refreshing knowledge especially valuable.”

At the same time, the human dimension remains central. Even as artificial intelligence tools become more capable, they do not replace the need for professionals who understand how to collect, interpret, and structure knowledge. Their role becomes more - not less - important, as they guide the use of technology, validate its outputs, and translate information into actionable insight. This also requires proper recognition and resourcing. If knowledge teams are expected to deliver pace, consistency, institutional memory and strategic insight, they need the time and headspace to do that work well.

Ultimately, the future of knowledge management lies in the combination of deep expertise, technological fluency, and the ability to communicate complex information clearly. Organizations that recognise and invest in this capability position themselves not only to operate more efficiently, but to respond more effectively to change.

8.     From Ideas to Action

A final and consistent message emerging from the discussions is the importance of implementation. The value of knowledge lies not simply in its accumulation, but in its application. Impact comes not from discussion alone, but from implementation.

Even relatively modest initiatives - structured knowledge sharing, improved tools, more effective communication formats - can have a meaningful impact on how knowledge is used within organizations. The challenge is not to identify what could be done in theory, but to translate insight into concrete steps in practice.

Conclusion

Taken together, the discussions at Knowledge Connect 2026 point to a fundamental transformation. Artificial intelligence is reshaping the nature of work. Regulatory complexity is increasing. Knowledge itself is becoming a strategic asset.

Yet the most significant shift is not technological, but conceptual. Success is no longer defined by individual excellence alone. It is defined by the ability to build systems, teams, and environments in which knowledge is shared, decisions are improved, and others are enabled to succeed.

The true impact of these conversations will not be measured by what was discussed, but by what is carried forward. The challenge is therefore a practical one: to take a single insight, translate it into action, and embed it into daily work.

In a world defined by constant change, those who create the greatest impact will not be those who simply accumulate knowledge, but those who maintain, apply and share it effectively - and do so together.