Discover Your Readiness For The Future 5.0 Of Your Nation - Your Strategic Leadership Assessment

Caribbean Future 5.0 Readiness Assessment

This assessment is designed for senior policymakers, economists, technocrats, and institutional leaders across Caribbean governments.

Discover how prepared your institution is to embrace sovereign investment logic, build long-term resilience, and lead your nation into a future-proof governance model aligned with the Caribbean Vision Investment Program (CVIP).

Perfect for: Ministers, Permanent Secretaries, Central Bank Officials, Planning Directors, and Senior Government Advisors.

What You will Discover in This 3-Minute Assessment:

Reveal Your Strategic Readiness For Your Country

Get a clear picture of how prepared your institution is to handle future shocks, global volatility, and long-term development challenges. The assessment uncovers blind spots and strengths across five critical dimensions.

Understand Your Leadership Profile

Discover which type of policymaker you are: Vision Architect, Strategic Stabilizer, Opportunity Builder, System Guardian, or Reactive Manager. This identity helps you understand your strategic instincts—and where you can grow.

Identify Your National Investment Potential

Find out how well your current policies, structures, and institutional capabilities align with sovereign investment logic. This benefit highlights where your country could create long-term wealth through investment engines.

Benchmark Against Future 5.0 Competencies

See how your readiness compares to the capabilities needed for a resilient, digitally-enabled, investment-oriented Caribbean future. The results give you a roadmap aligned with global best practices.

Receive Tailored Next Steps for Your Role

Based on your score, you will get personalized recommendations on strategic priorities, capability gaps, investment readiness, governance strengths, and next steps to advance the resilience of your institution.

Visual Spider Chart Results

See your assessment results visualized on a spider/radar chart across all five dimensions—making it easy to identify your strongest capabilities and areas requiring strategic focus.

Question 1 of 15

Your Caribbean nation faces a major hurricane that will cost 15% of GDP. How does your government currently prepare for such shocks?

We rely entirely on emergency borrowing and international aid after the event We have some contingency reserves but they're insufficient and often raided for other purposes We maintain basic fiscal buffers and disaster funds, though not systematically managed We have structured resilience funds with clear rules, but coverage is still limited We operate comprehensive shock absorption mechanisms with dedicated stability pockets and rapid response protocols

How does your institution view fiscal buffers and reserves?

Unnecessary constraints—we spend every dollar available to meet immediate needs Nice to have but unrealistic given our budget pressures Important in theory, but we struggle to maintain them consistently Essential—we actively build buffers even when it means short-term trade-offs Strategic cornerstone—we have multi-year accumulation targets and ring-fenced stability architecture

Tourism revenue drops 40% due to a global recession. Your government's response is:

Panic mode—immediate austerity cuts across all sectors and emergency IMF negotiations Reactive crisis management with ad-hoc spending cuts and desperate searches for new revenue Deploy contingency plans we've discussed but never fully tested or funded Activate pre-planned resilience measures including fiscal buffers and counter-cyclical spending protocols Execute sophisticated shock absorption strategy: deploy stability pocket, maintain development spending, activate diversification accelerators

How does your ministry/institution currently think about allocating public funds?

Annual budgeting focused entirely on recurrent expenditure and immediate needs Mostly spending-focused with occasional capital projects when funds are available We distinguish between capital and recurrent spending but lack systematic investment logic We think strategically about capital allocation and long-term returns, though implementation is inconsistent We operate with full sovereign investment architecture: stability pocket, yield pocket, domestic engine—each with clear ROI frameworks

When evaluating a new development project, your institution primarily asks:

Can we afford this in this year's budget? Will this create jobs quickly and generate political goodwill? Does this align with our national development plan priorities? What is the long-term economic return and strategic value of this investment? How does this fit our investment portfolio architecture? What pocket does it serve? What's the IRR and strategic fit?

Your country receives a $50M windfall (remittance surge, CBI revenue spike, etc.). The institutional response is:

Spend it immediately on backlogged recurrent needs and popular projects Split between immediate spending and some ad-hoc capital projects Debate for months about competing priorities with no clear investment framework Apply policy guidelines to allocate between reserves, infrastructure, and social programs Execute pocket allocation protocol: X% to stability, Y% to yield-generating assets, Z% to domestic engine investments with clear performance targets

Beyond tourism, how clear is your institution's vision for building new economic sectors?

No clear vision—we're almost entirely tourism-dependent and have no serious diversification strategy We talk about diversification but have no concrete sector targets or development roadmaps We've identified potential sectors (digital services, renewable energy, etc.) but lack execution plans We have defined sector priorities with some policy support and investment, though progress is slow We have sophisticated sector development architecture with investment engines, policy frameworks, and measurable milestones for each target sector

How does your government approach the digital economy and AI-driven opportunities?

Not on our radar—we're focused on traditional sectors We've heard about it but have no strategy or policy framework We recognize the opportunity and are studying what other countries are doing We have digital transformation initiatives and some early-stage policies in place We're building strategic digital economy infrastructure: digital services sector policy, AI adoption frameworks, tech investment vehicles

Climate change threatens your coastal tourism infrastructure and agriculture. Your sector diversification response is:

We haven't connected climate risk to economic diversification at all We focus only on adaptation in existing sectors, not building new climate-resilient industries We discuss climate-smart sectors but lack investment or execution mechanisms We're developing renewable energy and climate-resilient industries with targeted policies We have integrated climate-resilience with sector strategy: green energy export, climate tech, resilient agriculture as strategic investment engines

When political administrations change in your country, what happens to long-term development strategies?

Everything gets scrapped and restarted from scratch with each new government Major disruption—most long-term projects are abandoned or radically altered Some continuity in rhetoric, but significant delays and re-prioritization in practice Reasonable continuity—institutional frameworks provide some protection for strategic initiatives Strong continuity—we have depoliticized governance mechanisms that ensure multi-decade strategies survive political cycles

How would you describe the rule-setting and oversight frameworks for public investment in your institution?

Virtually non-existent—decisions are ad-hoc and politically driven with minimal accountability Basic procurement rules exist but are routinely bypassed or weakly enforced We have formal frameworks but implementation is inconsistent and oversight is weak Strong frameworks with reasonable transparency and accountability, though gaps remain World-class governance architecture: transparent investment criteria, independent oversight, public performance reporting, depoliticized allocation mechanisms

Your country wants to establish a sovereign wealth fund or investment authority. The institutional capacity to manage this is:

Non-existent—we lack the expertise, governance frameworks, and political will entirely Very weak—we'd need to build everything from scratch and likely face political interference Limited—we have some technical capacity but weak governance safeguards and institutional continuity Moderate—we have technical expertise and governance frameworks, but need refinement and political insulation Strong—we have the institutional architecture, technical capacity, governance safeguards, and political consensus to operate sovereign investment vehicles effectively

How does your ministry/department currently use data and digital tools for policy decisions?

We don't—decisions are based on anecdotes, political pressure, and historical precedent We occasionally request Excel reports but don't use systematic data analysis We have basic data systems but they're siloed, outdated, and underutilized for decision-making We use data dashboards and analytics regularly, though integration and real-time capability are limited We operate sophisticated data-driven governance: real-time dashboards, predictive analytics, AI-assisted policy modeling, integrated cross-ministry data systems

Your government is considering AI adoption for public service delivery and policy analysis. Your institution's response is:

What is AI? We have no awareness or interest We've heard of AI but see it as irrelevant to Caribbean governance We recognize AI's potential but have no strategy, budget, or technical capacity to pursue it We're exploring AI pilots in specific areas and building technical understanding We have active AI integration strategy: pilot projects running, technical teams trained, policy frameworks under development

How would you rate your institution's digital infrastructure and technological readiness for modern governance?

Severely outdated—we still rely heavily on paper, manual processes, and legacy systems from decades ago Basic digital tools exist but are poorly integrated, unreliable, and not used strategically Moderate digital capability but significant gaps in integration, security, and advanced functionality Good digital infrastructure with cloud systems, data integration, and modern productivity tools in most areas Advanced digital ecosystem: cloud-native architecture, AI-ready data infrastructure, cross-government integration, cybersecurity frameworks, digital-first culture

You're Almost Done!

Enter your name and email to receive your personalized Caribbean Future 5.0 Readiness Assessment results and spider chart visualization.

We respect your privacy. Your results will also be sent to your email.

Your Caribbean Future 5.0 Leadership Profile

Based on your responses, here is your readiness assessment across five critical dimensions of Future 5.0 governance. Your spider chart below shows your scores across these strategic capabilities.

What happens next? Check your email for your complete results and personalized insights on advancing the readiness of your institution.

Check your email - we've sent your complete results including this spider chart!