By Massimiliano Ferraris

Boards face structural instability driven by technological acceleration and geopolitical fragmentation. The primary governance vulnerability lies not in compositional diversity but in a deficit of integrative architecture. Resilient governance in non-linear environments requires redesigning decision structures to sustain coherent cross-domain integration, rather than relying on vertical specialization alone.

Rising uncertainty has not broadened the cognitive horizon of boards. In many cases, it has narrowed it.

The prevailing reaction has been defensive. Boards have strengthened their reliance on consolidated experience and increasingly favoured profiles that have already held apex roles, with linear and recognisable career paths aligned with traditional governance patterns.

Appointment dynamics often reveal a tendency toward endogenous reproduction of decision-making elites. Similar backgrounds, similar educational paths, similar professional socialisation, often the same managerial generation. In an environment perceived as unstable, experience is treated as a proxy for adaptive capacity, and familiarity becomes a mechanism to reduce uncertainty.

Cultural, cognitive, professional and international diversity frequently remain secondary. They are more visible in governance codes than in the actual mechanisms through which boards select members and operate. Even when new competences are formally introduced, they tend to be confined to specialist or advisory roles without materially influencing the overall decision architecture.

This produces a structural paradox. As the external environment becomes more heterogeneous, interdependent and non-linear, boards often become more cognitively homogeneous. Uniformity of experience and decision language reduces productive tension, compresses interpretative pluralism and reinforces forms of apparent consensus that slow the recognition of weak signals.

One of the most persistent misunderstandings in contemporary governance is the belief that diversity is primarily a matter of composition.

The limitation is not individual competence. It lies in the systemic structure through which competences interact. Decision quality depends less on who sits at the table and more on how much cognitive variety the governance system can absorb without fragmenting. Without that variety, the board risks functioning as a chamber that amplifies past patterns precisely when the future requires interpretative discontinuity.

One of the most persistent misunderstandings in contemporary governance is the belief that diversity is primarily a matter of composition.

In many organisations, diversity is treated as a static attribute, measurable in terms of gender, age, nationality or declared expertise, rather than as a dynamic property of the decision process. The outcome can be a formally heterogeneous board that remains substantively uniform at the decisional level, where individual differences do not translate into interpretative variety.

Faced with rising systemic complexity, boards have not significantly expanded their cognitive perimeter. Part of the reason is structural. The market offers very few genuinely multidisciplinary profiles. Individuals capable of integrating strategy, finance, law, technology, regulation and geopolitical analysis are rare. Dominant career trajectories remain vertical and specialised, oriented toward depth within a single domain rather than synthesis across domains.

As a result, boards may be composed of highly competent individuals who nonetheless share similar mental models, similar decision languages and similar approaches to risk.

Selection and co-optation mechanisms reinforce this pattern. Cross domain careers are often difficult to position within traditional skills matrices and may be perceived as lack of focus rather than integrative capacity. Homogeneous boards tend to select profiles that feel reassuring and recognisable, further reducing space for atypical figures. Even when diversity is invoked, it frequently remains peripheral, while the core decision nucleus continues to be shaped by similar trajectories and interpretative frameworks.

The central issue is not a deficit of talent. It is a structural deficit of integrative capacity at the apex of decision making. In non-linear environments, the weakness of boards does not lie in the quality of individual members but in the scarcity of figures able to operate as connectors across complex domains, translating heterogeneous signals into coherent choices. The main fragility of contemporary governance sits in this gap between specialisation and integration.

The emergence of artificial intelligence, and particularly autonomous agents, makes this gap more visible and more consequential.

AI accelerates decision cycles, reduces the cost of processing information and multiplies the number of available signals. At the same time, it increases interdependence among domains that were previously treated separately. Technology, strategy, finance, law, compliance, security and reputation converge within the same decision.

In this context, vertical specialisation, historically a strength of boards, can become a source of fragility. AI systems do not generate isolated technical questions. They generate hybrid trade-offs. A model may be efficient but legally non-compliant. High performing but exposed to reputational risk. Acceptable in one jurisdiction and problematic in another. Advantageous in the short term yet destabilising in the medium term.

Breaking these trade-offs into functional silos does not simplify the decision. It distorts it.

Boards are increasingly required to govern technologies that act across the organisation, yet they often lack sufficient figures capable of integrating technological understanding, regulatory implications, financial impact and strategic consequences within a single frame. Delegating this integration to committees or external advisors weakens systemic accountability and introduces latency at the very moment when AI reduces the time available to decide.

When AI agents move from supporting decisions to executing them, interacting directly with clients, suppliers, markets or digital infrastructures, the boundary between oversight and action becomes thinner. Governance can no longer rely only on ex post controls or static policies. It must anticipate scenarios, define dynamic limits and understand the systemic implications of technological choices.

AI therefore highlights a widening gap between the complexity of decisions boards are asked to make and the cognitive structure of the profiles that compose them. The risk is not simply technological error. It is progressive loss of effective control as systems gain autonomy.

The growing reliance on consolidated experience should not automatically be read as prudence. Under conditions of radical uncertainty, past experience is not always a reliable predictor of future capacity, particularly when contextual parameters change faster than institutional learning cycles.

When experience becomes the dominant selection criterion, the available cognitive variety tends to shrink. Experience that is not continuously refreshed can crystallise interpretative schemes that were effective in prior contexts but become less informative in environments shaped by technological acceleration, global interdependence and asymmetric shocks. In such circumstances, experience may function less as adaptive capital and more as inertia.

The relevant question is therefore not whether boards have enough experience, but whether they have experience capable of learning, unlearning and recombining knowledge across domains.

This is the function of what can be described as a bridge role (n what follows, I use the term “bridge manager” to describe a stable integrative role within the architecture of the board — not an additional specialist, but a function capable of translating across strategic, legal, technological, and financial domains. The bridge manager does not add vertical expertise. It enables integration across domains that would otherwise remain cognitively fragmented. Without such integration, boards slow down not because they ignore change but because they interpret it through partial lenses that fail to capture its systemic nature).

Not an additional specialist, but a connector. Someone able to render otherwise isolated competences communicative, transforming vertical expertise into integrated decision capacity. Without such integration, boards slow down not because they ignore change but because they interpret it through partial lenses that fail to capture its systemic nature.

Many boards continue to operate as confederations of specialists. Each member may be excellent within a given domain, yet the absence of a shared integrative frame makes it difficult to address issues that cut across multiple dimensions simultaneously. In linear environments, this configuration can be efficient. In complex and interdependent contexts, it produces friction. Information accumulates without translating into decision. Trade-offs remain implicit. Responsibility fragments. Decisions are postponed or diluted.

What is required is not simply more coordination, but a higher level of integration in the architecture of decision making.

By 2026, national and transnational dimensions are no longer separable layers of analysis. Technology, capital, data, markets and regulation move according to different logics yet generate simultaneous effects. Geopolitical trajectories are not background conditions. They are embedded in corporate choices.

Boards often respond by decomposing complexity into manageable domains. AI is treated as a technological issue. Digital platforms as communication tools. Markets as implicitly domestic. This fragmentation makes individual elements more tractable but weakens the ability to grasp their systemic interaction.

The problem is not lack of information. It is lack of connection.

In this environment, international and cultural diversity acquire a different meaning. They are not primarily reputational signals or compliance exercises. They are elements of decision security. Boards composed exclusively of domestically formed profiles may interpret risk symmetrically and underestimate asymmetric shocks that unfold across jurisdictions and value chains.

International perspectives introduce interpretative discontinuities that can strengthen resilience. They expand the range of cognitive frames within which decisions are situated. When such plurality is accompanied by effective integration, diversity becomes a multiplier of strategic stability rather than an accessory attribute.

Continuity remains an important governance value. It preserves institutional memory and coherence. However, continuity without cognitive renewal can turn into lock in. Even in the presence of formal turnover, new members may be absorbed into existing interpretative patterns rather than reshaping them. Governance may continue to function procedurally while progressively losing alignment with an external environment that evolves faster than its internal categories.

Another underestimated fragility lies in excessive internal bureaucratisation. Extended approval chains, proliferating committees and procedures designed primarily to dilute responsibility can generate chronic slowness. In stable environments, this complexity may appear neutral. In unstable environments, it becomes a strategic risk.

The challenge for boards is not to choose between speed and control. It is to redesign decision flows so that traceability, accountability and regulatory compliance are preserved while unnecessary latency is reduced. Contemporary technologies allow this. Digital workflows, automated audit trails and advanced tracking systems make it possible to simplify processes without weakening oversight.

Redesigning decision processes, however, is not merely an operational improvement. It is an architectural choice about how power and responsibility are structured. It requires deliberate intent at the top.

The central issue is no longer whether boards should update their skills or open themselves to new competences. It is whether they are willing to operate with decision architectures designed for stability in a context that is structurally unstable.

A board that does not incorporate a stable integrative function implicitly accepts several risks. Slower critical decisions. Defensive bureaucratisation. Loss of cognitive continuity during transitions. These are not abstract possibilities. They are observable patterns.

The decisive governance question therefore concerns not only who sits on the board, but how the board is structured to decide over time. Introducing a connective function capable of traversing competences, jurisdictions and decision cycles is not optional enrichment. It is institutional risk mitigation.

The final question is not whether a board possesses experience, diversity or excellent competences. It is whether it has consciously chosen an architecture capable of absorbing systemic instability and transforming it from a source of disorder into a lever of strategic governance.

In structurally unstable environments, governance cannot avoid architectural choice. Even inaction reshapes the architecture.

About the Author

Massimiliano Ferraris is a corporate governance and legal professional with cross-domain experience spanning law, financial strategy, and board advisory roles. He focuses on governance architecture, institutional resilience, and the integration of legal, technological, and strategic dimensions in board-level decision-making.

The post Governance in an Era of Global Disorder: Why Boards Must Redesign Architecture, Not Just Composition appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Dr. Poornima Luthra

DEI efforts are becoming increasingly performative, rather than initiating genuine cultural transformation, argues Dr Poornima Luthra. Here, she outlines the need for leaders to develop their genuine conviction in the purpose of DEI for their organisations in order to cultivate diverse and inclusive workplaces.

While organisations in Europe and the world have increased their focus on DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) in recent years, there is a growing disparity between perception and concrete action. In fact, only 7% of organisations are genuinely building a diverse and inclusive culture, according to the EY European DEI Index^[1].

Approaching DEI with quick-fix quotas and performative efforts may look good on the annual report, but only provide superficial and short-term change. To move beyond performative DEI and achieve meaningful cultural transformation in business, leaders must demonstrate true conviction when it comes to the value and purpose of diverse and inclusive workplaces.

Leading with Conviction – believing in the purpose of DEI

Leading with conviction is about wholeheartedly believing in the purpose of diversity and inclusion. It means being convinced that:

1. Inequity and inequality exist, and that they need to be addressed,
2. Being more inclusive and equitable is the right thing to do, and finally,
3. Your organisation will be better because of it.

Leaders must move beyond regarding DEI as “nice to have”, viewing DEI as a separate initiative that is an “add on” to the organisation’s strategy or considering DEI as something that can be deprioritised, defunded or delegated to HR in times of economic crisis. Leading through conviction is knowing that DEI is a necessary strategic action and priority.

This requires leaders to view the purpose of DEI through the lens of equity, with the main goal to make our workplaces more equitable and fairer for all—to level the playing field and rebalance the power and privilege away from historically advantaged individuals and groups.

From this perspective, the purpose of DEI is fourfold:

1. To mirror the demographics of society

To be equitable and to have adequate representation of the viewpoints of society, organisations need to be representative of the societies in which they operate, at all levels of the organisation. To do this, organisations need to focus on being able to both attract and retain talent, which is what organisations that focus on equity can do. For example, it has been shown that companies with higher levels of gender diversity, accompanied by supporting HR policies, have lower levels of employee turnover.^[2]

2. To ensure employee well-being

Organisations with inclusive work cultures have reduced incidents of interpersonal aggression and discrimination, with women experiencing less discrimination and fewer episodes of sexual harassment^[3], thereby improving employee well-being. A 2016 report by the European commission shows that having LGBT-supportive policies reduces incidences of discrimination, thereby improving psychological health and increasing job satisfaction, while also improving relationships between LGBT employees and their colleagues.^[4]

3. To be a customer-centric organisation

The customers of many organisations today are global and diverse. To truly understand the needs of these diverse markets and customers requires representation internally. Diversity at all levels in the organisation increases the likelihood of representing diverse perspectives and diverse experiences that match a broader and more diverse customer base.

4. To foster creativity and innovation

Innovation flourishes when there is an inclusive culture. Research by Catalyst.org shows us that companies with an inclusive culture and accompanying DEI policies are shown to have a 59.1% increase in creativity, innovation and openness^[5], with diverse and inclusive teams making better decisions 87% of the time.^[6]

Defining the purpose of DEI for your organisation

The evidence supporting the need for DEI is indisputable. Removing barriers to hiring and promoting talent equitably in a culture of inclusion is the right thing to do – understanding DEI’s purpose and believing in it are crucial.

To lead with conviction, leaders must truly understand the purpose of DEI specifically for their organisations. Leaders can start by creating a DEI purpose statement. Ask yourself the following questions:

1. What is the purpose of DEI for your organisation? List what the purpose of DEI is for your employees, team and organisation. Be as specific as possible. Speak to colleagues who have diverse perspectives and experiences across the organisation to understand what they believe the purpose of DEI is.
2. Is your list focused on removing barriers and increasing equity?
3. What about DEI being the right thing or the equitable thing to do? How would you incorporate that into your purpose statement for DEI?
4. Do you think the purpose of DEI is adequately communicated across the organisation? Identify key themes expressed.

Embedding DEI’s purpose

Although it is paramount to have conviction and believe in the purpose of DEI, it needs to translate to changed practices. DEI needs to be embedded into processes, metrics and compensation systems. Leaders need to walk the talk.

With a clear purpose identified, leaders must ensure that:

1. DEI is embedded into the organisation’s strategy. Empower the business to prioritise DEI alongside other business KPIs and objectives.
2. Make a shared commitment as leaders to role-model purposeful, authentic and inclusive leadership for the rest of the organisation.
3. Ensure that the organisation’s board and executive leadership team are diverse, including women, minorities and diverse points of view. Also, engage in creative efforts to diversify the talent pipeline.
4. Create an inclusive culture that fully harnesses the benefits of a diverse talent pool and encourages all employees to contribute and constructively challenge ingrained assumptions and perspectives.
5. Set the tone that DEI is important to the organisation by keeping it on the leadership agenda, asking the right questions and monitoring the relevant data.

Truly moving the DEI needle

In its simplest form, diversity is about valuing uniqueness, equity is about fairness and inclusion is about belonging. DEI is about dismantling and rebuilding systems that unfairly favour some and not others to ensure a level playing field, so that those who have the competencies have access and a chance to be considered for the role. With true conviction in the purpose of DEI, leaders can drive forward concrete action to embed diversity, equity and inclusion into the foundations of their organisations.

About the Author

Dr. Poornima Luthra is a globally recognised expert on developing inclusive workplaces. She is Principal Lecturer at Imperial Business School, a Fortune 500 consultant, keynote speaker and award-winning author of several books, including her latest Can I Say That?, which explores the fear behind today’s DEI backlash and empowers courageous workplace conversations.

References

^[1] https://www.ey.com/de_de/functional/forms/download/2024/02/ey-european-dei-index.

^[2] Maurer, C. C., & Qureshi, I. (2019). Not Just Good for Her: A Temporal Analysis of the Dynamic Relationship Between Representation of Women and Collective Employee Turnover. Organisation Studies., 42(1), 85–107.

^[3] Yu, H., & Lee, D. (2020). Gender and Public Organization: A Quasi-Experimental Examination of Inclusion on Experiencing and Reporting Wrongful Behavior in the Workplace. Public Personnel Management, 49(1), 3–28.

^[4] The Business Case for Diversity in the Workplace: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity. Report on Good Practices, European Commission: https://www.raznolikost.eu/wp-content/uploads/The-buisiness-case-for-diversity.pdf.

^[5] Women in Business and Management: The Business Case for Change. International Labour Office. – Geneva:ILO, 2019: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—dgreports/—dcomm/—publ/documents/publication/wcms_700953.pdf.

^[6] https://www.kornferry.com/insights/featured-topics/diversity-equity-inclusion/guide-to-dei-in-the-workplace.

The post How European Leaders Can Move From Performative DEI to Genuine Conviction appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Keith Schlosser

AI ambition has outpaced enterprise readiness. In this article, Keith Schlosser explains why many business-led AI pilots are faltering and what CIOs must do next. You will learn how to replace fragmented experimentation with governed platforms, stronger architecture, and a structured recovery framework that turns unstable initiatives into scalable advantage.

Forrester’s Predictions 2026: Tech Leadership report says one in four CIOs will be asked to step in and fix failed, business-led AI projects. It’s not a hypothetical; it’s already happening.

Across industries, teams launched AI pilots without the enterprise backbone to sustain them. Many organizations didn’t have robust architectures, data governance, or even security boundaries in place before spinning up a dozen experiments. Some projects included IT input, but many didn’t—and as a result, the technical work never happened or was incomplete. What looked like innovation on paper quickly became a tangle of shadow integrations, brittle prompts, and ungoverned agents.

Now those projects are landing on the CIO’s desk with a familiar mandate: make it work—and make it safe.

From Chaos to Architecture

This isn’t the first time technology spread faster than its scaffolding. In the 1990s, departments rushed to deploy their own CRM systems. Pockets of value appeared, but the enterprise became fragmented and risky until IT stepped in to standardize and scale. The same pattern is playing out with AI.

CIOs are well positioned to stabilize what others started. The job now is to replace scattered experimentation with an architecture that provides context, control, and transparency across every AI initiative.

Why Platforms Are the Turning Point

When early AI pilots launched, there simply weren’t platforms to build on. Every team had to wire together its own stack—data pipelines, connectors, governance layers—from scratch. It was the only way to experiment, but it wasn’t sustainable.

That era is over. Purpose-built agentic AI platforms now exist to handle the heavy lifting: multi-model orchestration, observability, document preparation, and security. They let IT regain control of fragmented efforts without starting from zero.

As Eric Barroca, CEO of Vertesia, recently wrote, “Wiring stacks together isn’t innovation—it’s plumbing.” Platforms like this give CIOs the foundation for the turnaround. They’re designed to wrap existing AI efforts with guardrails—central security, evaluation harnesses, and orchestration—so CIOs can skip the plumbing and focus on what matters: getting business outcomes from the systems already in motion.

This isn’t about slowing innovation. It’s about putting it on rails. The new job of IT leadership is to bring discipline to what’s already out there using the capabilities modern platforms provide:

• Governance at scale. Centralize security, authentication, and observability across every agent and model.
• Multi-model orchestration – The ability to use, compare, and switch across models (open or proprietary) as cost, speed, or performance shift.
• Document and content preparation – Structuring long-form, multimodal content into retrievable knowledge for more accurate results from LLMs.
• Context preservation. Ensure systems can retain and apply business knowledge securely, so results are grounded in enterprise reality.
• Workflow integration – Agents that span documents, APIs, and systems to complete multi-step work.

A Practical Six-Step Rescue Framework

Most rescue efforts start out messy. Inherited agents behave inconsistently, data pipelines are brittle, and no one knows what’s in production. The framework below gives CIOs a structured way to re-establish order and move from firefighting to sustained control.

While these steps can be executed manually, modern AI platforms make much of the groundwork—monitoring, orchestration, and evaluation—faster and safer to implement.

1. Triage – Benchmark every existing agent’s accuracy, cost, and reliability.
2. Govern – Eliminate shadow projects, define access controls, and enforce audit trails.
3. Re-ground – Improve retrieval pipelines and tool constraints to stabilize outputs.
4. Route – Add model rotation and A/B testing to balance speed, cost, and compliance.
5. Observe – All agent actions, outputs, and applications across all departments.
6. Scale – Template what works and promote it safely from pilot to production.

What Comes Next

The fix doesn’t require ripping and replacing every project that went sideways. It requires giving IT the tools, structure, and authority to govern what’s already been built—and the clarity to advise what should continue.

AI doesn’t fail because the models are bad; it fails because the systems around them aren’t ready—and because teams are fragmented, each working on their own siloed initiatives. Now, CIOs have both the technology and the mandate to correct that.

This is more than rescue work. It’s a strategic opening for IT to reset the enterprise AI agenda—moving from scattered, business-led pilots to a governed, outcome-driven platform model. The CIOs who seize that moment won’t just stabilize AI in their organizations—they’ll define how it’s run for the next decade.

About the Author

Keith Schlosser is a longtime technology and insurance executive who has led enterprise transformation from the inside, including serving as Group CIO at Axis Capital, EVP CIO for Chubb International, and VP – CIO International for Travelers Insurance. He has guided large teams through modernization, data strategy, and early AI adoption across complex, regulated environments, and currently serves as an advisor for innovative companies such as Dune Security and Vertesia, developer of a unified, low-code platform for building, deploying, and operating enterprise-grade generative AI applications.

The post How Business Leaders Can Rescue and Redefine AI Success appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Dr. Jamie Shapiro

Engagement scores diagnose outcomes, not causes. Leaders must model the behaviors that create engagement, not survey it. Culture starts at the top: what leaders reinforce and tolerate becomes truth. Focusing on five core drivers—connection, candid communication, clarity, collaboration, and contribution—is what creates sustained performance and engagement.

Engagement is one of the most commonly used organizational metrics for the health of a company’s culture; however, CEOs increasingly recognize that only measuring engagement falls short of creating real cultural transformation. Why is that?

Because measuring and getting results about the level of people’s engagement is not enough to improve it.

Engagement is defined as the emotional connection and commitment a person has to their job, team, and organization. It’s an outcome that all companies strive to achieve because a highly engaged team is more productive, with positive morale and high retention. Sadly, engagement has fallen flat in 2022, 2023, and 2024, remaining below pre-pandemic levels.

In the first quarter of 2024, US engagement hit an 11-year low, with a slight improvement in the second quarter of 2024, according to Gallup. The reality is that organizations can’t simply measure engagement and expect different results. I often speak with leaders who are concerned about low engagement scores but don’t have a complete understanding on why they go up or down each year. Without this knowledge, they don’t have assurance that the engagement initiatives they focus on will make a difference. The problem is that they haven’t measured the key levers that move the needle to improve engagement.

To explain this concept, my colleague and partner in the creation of the 5Cs Model, Principles CEO Zack Weider, shares the metaphor of the “swing versus the shot.” If you’re a golfer, you know that you won’t improve your game by only looking at your score at the end of each round (that is, how many good or bad shots you hit). You improve your game by focusing on the mechanics of your swing and improving your technique. The quality of each shot will vary depending on a number of factors, but the way to make all of your shots better over time is by focusing on your swing.

Organizations struggle to improve engagement because they keep measuring whether they played a good or bad round (as in their annual engagement), rather than focusing on the actual swing (as in the fundamental elements that are driving it and can lead to better outcomes).

To transform culture, companies must understand and measure the elements that create highly productive and cohesive teams and thriving cultures. Given this picture, it’s no surprise that about 70 percent of culture transformations fail, according to McKinsey.

Culture Starts at the Top

How you and your team show up daily and interact with one another and the organization as a whole set the tone. As CEO, your behavior becomes culture. What you reinforce, what you tolerate, and how you respond all signal what your team takes as truth. What constitutes organizational culture? The mission, vision, purpose, and core values are often included. These elements are the visible aspects.

There are also invisible elements—such as norms, beliefs, and practices—that are equally important but aren’t always given attention. They drive how work gets done. The culture must be experienced day-to-day to be most impactful. This includes rewarding people for demonstrating behaviors that align with it. When individuals aren’t living the culture and being rewarded for the associated behaviors, there is a disconnect.

For example, when leaders speak to their teams about the importance of taking time to recharge from work, yet frequently expect them to respond to emails during evenings and weekends, it sends a conflicting message. This can be based on a disconnect between the invisible and visible cultural elements. The leader’s message is

based on what the culture says it stands for, the visible aspects, yet the leader’s actions reveal how the culture actually operates, the invisible aspects.

Defining the core values and behaviors you want to see in your organization is not enough. You and your team must embody them every single day. The spotlight is on you. I know this is a lot to handle, but it is the reality of leading a company. It’s why you chose to be a leader: to create an impact that aligns with who you are.

Research consistently shows that the behavior of senior leadership directly impacts organizational performance and culture. Studies from McKinsey indicate that companies with cohesive leadership teams are 1.9 times more likely to outperform competitors and 1.7 times more likely to have higher levels of organizational health. Additional research from Russell Reynolds Associates supports that when CEOs and C-suite teams model desired cultural values and operate cohesively, they set a mirrored standard in the organization, leading to enhanced performance, employee engagement, and overall success.

A report by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) in 2019 found that toxic workplace cultures caused 58 percent of employees to quit their jobs. This turnover cost US employers approximately $223 billion over five years. The SHRM report also highlighted that toxic cultures adversely affect employee well-being, decreasing productivity and increasing absenteeism. Employees in such environments are more likely to experience stress and burnout, further impacting organizational performance.

Eagle Hill Consulting surveyed C-suite leaders and found that 72 percent of executives agreed that corporate culture impacts financial performance. Still, less than half (46 percent) hold themselves and their teams accountable for the culture. This research indicates a disconnect between the importance executives place on team and culture and the investments and actions they make.

I often share with leaders that it is essential to focus on controlling the controllables. The good news is that creating a high-performing, cohesive team and thriving culture is within your control. It is something you can positively impact every single day. It takes intentionality, focus, and care. When executive teams work seamlessly together, modeling effective collaboration for the organization, it creates a positive ripple effect. Ultimately, the executive teams that function at peak levels deliver superior results and have the workplaces and cultures that people want to be a part of.

That’s where The 5Cs of Team Cohesion and Thriving Organizational Culture comes into play (connection, candid communication, clarity, collaboration, and contribution). While each is critical, leaders can start by focusing on Connection.

Based on our research, the best work comes from teams and organizations that foster human connection with a foundation in trust and care. Build trust through developing strong, connected relationships. Add meaningful check-ins to the beginning of conversations. Connection is where momentum begins.

When leaders slow down just enough to truly see and hear their people, trust grows and with it, the conditions for better decisions, stronger performance, and more sustainable success.

Parts of this piece have been adapted from Connected Culture: The New Science for Thriving Teams and Cultures (IdeaPress).

About the Author

Dr. Jamie Shapiro is a CEO coach, organizational psychologist, and bestselling author of Brilliant: Be the Leader Who Shines Brightly Without Burning Out and the forthcoming, Connected Culture: The New Science for Thriving Teams and Cultures. She is the founder and CEO of Connected EC, a leadership coaching firm known for its team-based, whole-person approach to developing executives and transforming corporate culture. A Master Certified Executive Coach, professional speaker, researcher, expert facilitator, and certified nutritionist, Jamie brings a deeply integrated lens to leadership. She holds a PhD in Positive Organizational Psychology, an MBA, and a Master of Science in Information Technology, reinforcing her evidence-based, practical approach to executive performance.

The post Why Engagement Scores are Failing Leaders appeared first on The European Business Review.

Interview with Jean-Philippe Doumeng of Napo Pet Insurance

Building a company from grief demands more than emotion. In this interview, Jean-Philippe Doumeng explains how personal loss became a disciplined strategy for category leadership at Napo Pet Insurance. The conversation explores empathy as an operating advantage, the systems that turn care into scale, and how high-performance cultures are built without sacrificing humanity.  

Can you share the moment or experience of personal grief that inspired you to found Napo Pet Insurance, and how it reshaped your vision for the company?

Napo started with my dog, Napoleon (“Napo”). Toward the end of his life he could not walk much, so we moved him around in a wheelbarrow. He actually loved it. When he passed away, my family and I were heartbroken, and it forced me to confront how stressful and fragmented pet care becomes when emotion is already high. 

That experience crystallised what pet insurance should be: fast, fair, and human – designed to provide clarity when people need it most. But clarity alone is not enough. We are building to win: protect pets, support their people, and help millions give their pets longer, healthier, happier lives. 

The vision is deliberate: best-in-class insurance as the foundation, then selective expansion into services that support pets through critical moments. Insurance earns trust. Trust creates the platform for what comes next. We are not interested in being a good insurance company. We are building the category leader. 

Many entrepreneurs experience setbacks or losses, but turning grief into a business mission is unique. How did you channel that personal experience into a concrete strategy for growth?  

The personal story gave direction, but strategy had to be practical. We translated grief into a clear operating goal: build the kind of insurance we would want for our own pets, fast decisions, fair pricing, and human support. Then we executed relentlessly to make it repeatable.  

We translated grief into a clear operating goal: build the kind of insurance we would want for our own pets, fast decisions, fair pricing, and human support.

We invested early and heavily in claims workflows, quality control, and data so decisions are consistent, not dependent on individual heroics. We use automation where it improves speed and fairness, and we keep humans at the centre where judgement and empathy matter. This is operational discipline, not sentiment. 

Growth then becomes a by-product of trust. When customers feel supported at the hardest moment, retention improves, referrals follow, and economics strengthen. That creates durable growth rather than growth at any cost. But make no mistake: we are scaling aggressively. The market is ours to take. Partnerships are strategic, not opportunistic. If you want to deliver ongoing value across a pet’s life, you need to collaborate with best-in-class players across pet care rather than trying to build everything yourself. We partner to move faster and capture more value, not out of necessity. 

How did that moment of personal loss change the way you approach leadership today, especially in motivating and guiding your team? 

That moment of loss made the work feel deeply real, but it also widened my perspective beyond my own experience. Everyone goes through difficult periods at different points in their lives: grief, health issues, family challenges, or simply moments where things feel heavy. Work does not exist in isolation from that reality. 

But understanding that reality does not mean lowering the bar. I wanted to build an environment where people do not have to pretend everything is fine all the time, and where there is room for honesty without compromising standards. At Napo, we aim for radical transparency: being open about challenges, supporting one another through difficult moments, and holding ourselves to uncompromising expectations.

That balance is non-negotiable. Empathy without structure becomes inconsistency. Structure without empathy becomes brittle. High-performing teams need both, but performance comes first. When people feel trusted and supported, they take ownership, make better decisions, and show up fully for customers. And when they do not perform, we address it directly.

Empathy is often seen as a ‘soft skill’ in business. How have you transformed empathy into a measurable competitive advantage at Napo Pet Insurance? 

Empathy is not soft. It is strategic. In any business that serves people at vulnerable moments, genuinely understanding someone else’s position means you can solve their problem better, faster, and more profitably than competitors. When you take that seriously, it stops being abstract and starts shaping how you build and operate a company to win. 

At Napo, empathy is designed into the operating system and measured ruthlessly: speed of resolution, clarity of communication, customer satisfaction, retention, and complaint rates. We structure claims journeys so routine cases are handled quickly and consistently, while complex cases get time, judgement, and human support. This creates competitive moats through retention and lifetime value.

It also shows up in how we build the team. We screen hard for empathy during hiring because culture compounds and mediocre culture kills velocity. We look for people who can combine judgement with care, and who understand there is no such thing as a “small” job when you are dealing with someone’s pet. Early on, my co-founder was on the phone at midnight helping an early customer through a difficult situation. That was not kindness for its own sake. It was setting the standard.

Empathy also means going the extra mile in small, deliberate ways. When a pet passes away, we send flowers. We mark puppy birthdays and adoption anniversaries. These are not marketing gestures – they are cultural reinforcement and competitive differentiation. They signal to the team and the customer that we see the pet as a family member, not a policy number. That consistency between internal culture and external experience is what creates trust at scale. And trust converts. 

As a leader, how do you model and embed empathy in your organization’s culture in a way that drives both team engagement and high performance?  

For me, it starts with a simple premise: we are all human. Startups are intense. People bring their own triggers, insecurities, and life events into work, whether they talk about them or not. If leaders pretend they are immune to that, the culture becomes performative and people stop being honest. 

Teams that feel supported make better decisions under pressure, recover faster from setbacks, and take more ownership. That is how you build a team that wins.

So I try to lead with transparency. I have been open with the team about challenges I have faced personally, including the mental strain that can come with building a company. Not for sympathy, but to normalise the reality that high performance and vulnerability can coexist. The first step in a strong culture is psychological safety: people feeling they can speak up early, ask for help, and be truthful when something is not going well.

But psychological safety is not permission for low standards. We try to build a culture where people know they have each other’s back, especially on bad days. That shows up in how we run teams, how we respond when someone struggles, and how we handle mistakes: with accountability, but without blame. Accountability is sacred. Blame is wasteful.

Empathy, in that sense, is not softness. It is resilience. And resilience drives execution. Teams that feel supported make better decisions under pressure, recover faster from setbacks, and take more ownership. That is how you build a team that wins.

When personal experiences drive business decisions, it can be both inspiring and risky. How do you balance the emotional motivations with objective business strategy? 

Emotion is the compass. Strategy is the weapon. Emotion defines what you will not compromise on: fairness, transparency, and long-term trust. Strategy is what makes it sustainable: pricing discipline, strong unit economics, and operational control. And discipline is what allows you to scale without breaking.

There are constant temptations to take shortcuts, especially in competitive markets. But shortcuts often create hidden costs later: complaints, churn, adverse selection, and reputational damage. We refuse to compete on price alone. We compete on value, and we win on execution. The balance is not emotion versus logic. It is values setting boundaries, and strategy finding the most aggressive path within them.

That is also how we think about the next phase. Expanding into services beyond insurance is not about doing everything. It is about selective moves, grounded in economics, and partnering with best-in-class operators so we can deliver more value without losing focus on the core. We move fast, but we move with intent. And when we move, we move to dominate.

What advice would you give to other leaders who are seeking to turn personal challenges into purposeful, high-impact ventures, while maintaining empathy at the core of their approach? 

Start with the real problem your experience revealed, then build systems that solve it at scale. Personal stories create conviction, but conviction does not create repeatability. Operating models do. And operating models executed relentlessly create category leaders. 

Treat empathy as an execution capability. Define how it shows up in decisions, communication, and metrics. Pair it with standards, because the most trusted organisations are both human and rigorous. Rigour without humanity is brittle. Humanity without rigour is amateur. 

Finally, resist the instinct to build everything yourself. The biggest opportunities often sit between sectors. Leaders who build partnerships well, share value fairly, and connect complementary strengths create more durable impact than those who try to control the whole stack. But be clear: you are building partnerships to accelerate, not to compensate for weakness. Partner from strength, not need. 

Executive Profile 

Jean-Philippe Doumeng is Co-Founder and CEO of Napo Pet Insurance. He founded Napo after losing his dachshund, Napoleon, determined to build a better kind of pet insurance. Driven by personal experience, Jean-Philippe focuses on fairness, care, and long-term support for pets and the people who love them. 

The post How Empathy and Discipline Are Building a New Pet Insurance Category appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Raj Sisodia, PhD and Nilima Bhat

Europe’s leadership challenge today is not a lack of intelligence, ethics, or ambition—it is a lack of inner coherence. As complexity accelerates, unhealed identity quietly drives reactivity, burnout, and fragmentation in organizations. This article explores healing as a leadership discipline: healing one’s story, integrating identity, and becoming a “self-cleaning oven” who transforms experience into wisdom rather than passing unresolved residue into systems.

Across Europe, leadership is being tested in new and uncomfortable ways. Economic volatility, cultural polarization, climate anxiety, and rapid technological change have exposed a deeper crisis beneath performance metrics: a crisis of inner coherence. Many leaders are competent, ethical, and valuesdriven—yet increasingly exhausted, reactive, or stuck. What is being asked of leaders today is not only strategic intelligence, but psychological and inner maturity.

At the heart of this challenge lies the relationship between healing and identity. Who we believe ourselves to be—our story of self—quietly shapes how we lead, decide, relate, and respond under pressure. When identity remains unexamined, leadership becomes a projection of unresolved wounds. When identity is healed and integrated, leadership becomes a force for coherence and renewal.

Identity, the Small Self, and the Larger Self

In Healing Leaders, we distinguish between the small self and the larger Self. The small self is the personality shaped by biography, culture, family systems, and unprocessed experience. It carries our roles, achievements, failures, and survival strategies. The larger Self is already whole—our deeper essence that is connected, spacious, and grounded beyond roles and labels.

European business culture has traditionally privileged rationality, control, and performance. These strengths have delivered remarkable progress. Yet when the small self dominates—seeking validation, control, or safety—leaders become brittle. Feedback feels threatening. Uncertainty becomes intolerable. Complexity invites defensiveness rather than curiosity.

Healing is the process through which the small self is gradually integrated into the larger Self. This integration does not weaken leadership; it stabilizes it. Leaders rooted in the larger Self are less reactive, more resilient, and better able to hold paradox—an increasingly essential capacity in European organizations operating across cultures, regulations, and values systems.

Healing Your Story: From Victimhood to Choice

Every leader carries a story about themselves and the world. These stories are rarely conscious. They are shaped early, often in response to moments of pain, exclusion, or failure, and later reinforced by professional success or organizational culture.

Some stories empower: I can learn. I adapt. I contribute. Others quietly constrain: I must prove myself. I cannot fail. I am only as good as my performance. When these narratives remain unexamined, leaders unconsciously organize their companies around them—creating cultures of overwork, fear of failure, or emotional withdrawal.

Healing your story does not mean denying hardship or rewriting history. It means shifting from being a victim of your past to becoming a conscious chooser of your present. In our work, we call this step Choose Your Self: the ability to say, “I would not wish my suffering on anyone, yet I can honor how it shaped me and no longer allow it to define me.”

For European leaders facing intergenerational trauma, postpandemic fatigue, or rapid social change, this inner choice is foundational. Without it, even the most wellintentioned sustainability or wellbeing initiatives remain superficial.

The SelfCleaning Oven: A Metaphor for Mature Leadership

A powerful metaphor for healed leadership is that of the selfcleaning oven. A selfcleaning oven does not allow residue to accumulate; it processes it through heat and awareness. Human beings are not born this way. We become so through conscious inner work.

A selfcleaning leader does not suppress emotion, bypass pain, or offload unresolved material onto colleagues, teams, or systems. Instead, they work on healing. They notice when they are triggered, defensive, or depleted, and take responsibility for what arises within them.

Unhealed leaders leak. Their unresolved stress shows up as micromanagement, emotional volatility, burnout cultures, or disengagement. Healed leaders, by contrast, metabolize experience. Their presence becomes regulating rather than destabilizing—a critical leadership capacity in hybrid, multicultural, and highpressure European workplaces.

Research increasingly supports this inner dimension of leadership. Studies on emotional regulation, psychological safety, and mindful leadership demonstrate that leaders who are selfaware and emotionally integrated foster greater trust, resilience, and longterm performance. The growing body of work emerging from organizational psychology and neuroscience—including research highlighted by institutions such as the European Commission on workplace wellbeing—points to the same conclusion: inner health and systemic health are inseparable.

(See, for example, the European Commission’s work on mental health in the workplace: https://health.ec.europa.eu/mental-health/workplace_en; and the World Health Organization’s guidance on mental health at work: https://www.who.int/teams/mental-health-and-substance-use/promotion-prevention/mental-health-at-work)

Healing Before Leading

Traditional leadership development focuses on skills, competencies, and frameworks. These are necessary, but insufficient. Many leaders reach an invisible ceiling not because they lack intelligence or experience, but because unresolved inner material governs their reactions.

In Healing Leaders, we call this need therapeutic maturity—not as pathology, but as maturity. Without therapeutic healing, spiritual or purposedriven leadership risks becoming a form of bypassing: aspiring to higher values without tending to the wounded child, the defended ego, or the inherited trauma beneath.

Across Europe, where leaders are navigating legacy systems alongside futurefacing demands—digitalization, ESG accountability, demographic shifts—this inner work is no longer optional. Healed leaders are better equipped to lead through ambiguity without collapsing into control or withdrawal.

Becoming Whole: Completion and Integration

Healing is ultimately about completion: integrating the masculine and feminine, the elder and the child, the rational and the intuitive. Many leaders operate as partial selves—overidentified with performance, intellect, or authority—while disowning vulnerability, rest, or emotional truth.

Completion allows leaders to act from wholeness rather than compensation. Authority becomes grounded, not performative. Compassion becomes discerning, not indulgent. This integration supports what European organizations increasingly require: leaders who can balance economic responsibility with human and ecological care.

An Ongoing Practice

Becoming a self-cleaning oven is not a one-time achievement; it is a lifelong discipline. Life will continue to generate heat—loss, uncertainty, conflict, and change. The real question is not whether leaders will face these pressures, but whether they have the inner capacity to process them consciously.

When leaders do not heal, organizations inherit their unfinished business. When leaders do heal, something different becomes possible: cultures that are resilient without being brittle, humane without being naïve, and purposeful without being performative.

Healing identity and healing one’s story is therefore not personal work done alongside leadership. It is the invisible infrastructure of leadership itself. In a Europe searching for renewal—economically, socially, and morally—the leaders who matter most may be those willing to do the quiet, demanding work of becoming whole, and leading from that wholeness.

About the Authors

Raj Sisodia, PhD, is a global thought leader on conscious leadership and business as a force for good. He is co-founder of the Conscious Capitalism movement and a Faculty of Excellence at Tecnologico de Monterrey.

Nilima Bhat is an integral leadership coach, healer, and author whose work bridges Eastern wisdom and Western psychology to support conscious, whole human leadership. She is founder of the Shakti Leadership Mission.

The post Healing, Identity, and the SelfCleaning Leader appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Tina Nunno

Boards increasingly see artificial intelligence as central to future shareholder value. Yet a growing gap is emerging between board ambition and operational reality. This article examines how AI is reshaping board governance, why traditional reporting falls short, and how executives can structure AI discussions around value, risk and strategic impact.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has moved decisively into the boardroom. For many directors, it now represents the most important investment theme shaping future competitiveness, resilience and shareholder value. According to Gartner’s 2026 Board of Directors Survey, 57% of board members rank AI as a top-three investment priority for the next two years, ahead of M&A, workforce investment and cybersecurity.

Yet despite this enthusiasm, conversations about AI are becoming more strained rather than more effective. Executives are pressed for faster progress, clearer returns and bolder ambition, often before organisations have resolved foundational challenges around data, skills, governance and risk. The result is a growing disconnect: AI features prominently on board agendas but remains far less mature than the expectations being placed upon it.

This disconnect increasingly reflects governance and oversight challenges, rather than limitations of the technology alone.

Why AI is now a governance issue, not a technology one

Historically, boards treated technology oversight as a delegated responsibility, primarily owned by the Chief information officer (CIO) or Chief technology officer (CTO), and oversight delegated to the audit, risk or technology committee. AI has fundamentally altered that model. Its implications cut across strategy, capital allocation, workforce design, risk management and corporate reputation, placing it squarely within the board’s fiduciary remit.

Directors increasingly view technological disruption, innovation failure, cybersecurity exposure, and data risk as among the most significant external threats to shareholder value. At the same time, one in four directors see inadequate technology as a major internal risk, limiting an organisation’s ability to scale, innovate and manage volatility.

In this context, AI is no longer “just another IT initiative.” It has become a cornerstone of modern board governance, forcing directors to engage directly with questions of feasibility, prioritisation and return on investment. This governance challenge is compounded by the fact that boards themselves are rarely aligned on what AI should deliver, or how quickly.

The AI divide inside the boardroom

One of the most overlooked challenges in AI governance is that boards are not aligned internally on what AI should deliver, or how fast.

Gartner identifies three broad categories of non-executive directors (NEDs) based on their AI posture:

• Pioneers actively push for AI-led growth, differentiation and competitive advantage.
• Pacers take a pragmatic stance, seeking proof of value while managing financial and cyber risk.
• Protectors are skeptical, prioritising stability, cost control and risk minimisation over experimentation.

These differences matter. They shape how progress is interpreted, which questions are asked and how trade-offs are evaluated. When executives fail to recognise and navigate this divide, AI discussions can quickly become circular, defensive or overly technical, satisfying neither directors nor management.

Why traditional IT reporting no longer works for AI

Board dissatisfaction with AI reporting is increasingly visible. Directors consistently call for more meaningful discussion, yet are often presented with longer prereads, denser updates and presentations that emphasise activity over insight. Preparation demands on executives are routinely underestimated, while the pace of AI development continues to outstrip traditional reporting cycles.

AI’s inherent uncertainty compounds the issue. Dashboards and static metrics struggle to capture experimentation, learning curves and shifting risk profiles. When expectations evolve faster than reporting frameworks, frustration replaces confidence – particularly for boards already divided on AI’s value.

Reframing AI as a comprehensive investment portfolio

One of the most effective ways to reset board-level conversations is to treat AI as a comprehensive investment portfolio rather than a single programme or capability. Not all AI initiatives serve the same purpose, operate on the same timelines or carry the same risk, nor should they be evaluated through the same lens.

By positioning themselves as stewards of an AI portfolio, executives can better balance competing priorities across revenue growth, cost optimisation and risk management. This framing helps boards view AI initiatives with different timelines, risks and expected outcomes, supporting informed discussions about progress.

Making AI value legible to the board

Across boardrooms, the message from directors is remarkably consistent: connect AI to financial outcomes. Boards do not expect complete certainty, but they do expect transparency. Effective AI discussions move beyond technical capability to articulate how initiatives affect revenue growth, cost structures, resilience and risk exposure.

Whether AI is positioned as a source of innovation, competitive advantage, efficiency or protection, the underlying question remains the same: how does this investment affect the income statement, balance sheet or cash flow, and over what timeframe? Which line items will be impacted and when? Clear articulation of trade-offs, timing and uncertainty is often more valuable to boards than confident projections that overstate near-term returns.

The BOARD test for AI conversations

To sharpen AI discussions, executives benefit from a simple but disciplined BOARD communication approach: being brief, open, accurate, relevant and diplomatic. Applied consistently, this mindset helps shift board conversations away from hype and toward governance maturity. It also reflects a growing reality: some directors are already using AI to challenge assumptions and inform decisions, while others are still building confidence. Meeting directors where they are is no longer optional.

From AI hype to AI stewardship

The next phase of AI adoption will not be defined by who experiments fastest, but by who governs best. Boards are right to focus on AI’s strategic importance, but ambition must be matched with realism, structure and shared understanding of both risks and opportunities.

The organisations most likely to succeed will be those that reframe AI not as a promise, but as a managed portfolio of bets, governed with the same discipline applied to capital, risk and talent. AI governance maturity is increasingly becoming a signal of overall leadership quality and strategic discipline.

For boards, that shift begins not with new dashboards or tools, but with better, more holistic conversations regarding potential portfolios of AI value.

About the Author

Tina Nunno is a Managing Vice President and Gartner Fellow in Gartner’s Artificial Intelligence Practice. A recognised thought leader on AI business value, board engagement and executive leadership, she advises senior leaders globally, is a frequent keynote speaker, and coaches executives on AI governance, strategic communication and shareholder value creation.

The post Gartner: Boardroom Strategies for Dominating AI Investments, Risks, and Value appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Dr. Deborah Bayntun-Lees

Leaders often struggle to balance compassion with accountability, fearing that one undermines the other. The Compassion-Accountability Matrix offers a practical framework to navigate this tension, helping leaders recognise when care drifts into enabling, when accountability becomes punitive, and how to restore dynamic balance in real time.

In leadership discourse, compassion and accountability are often presented as complementary virtues. In practice, however, they can feel like opposing forces. Lean too far towards compassion and you risk enabling underperformance or avoiding hard decisions. Lean too far towards accountability and you risk eroding trust, psychological safety, and morale. This is the Compassion-Accountability Paradox, and it is one of the most persistent challenges facing leaders today.

The Origins of the Matrix

The Compassion-Accountability Matrix emerged from my research with leaders working in complex, emotionally charged environments, including trauma-informed organisations, healthcare settings, and purpose-driven businesses. In these contexts, leaders navigate high-stakes decisions daily: supporting struggling team members while maintaining standards; holding space for personal difficulties while ensuring collective performance; demonstrating care without inadvertently rescuing people from the consequences of their choices.

What became clear through this research is that the most effective leaders do not choose between compassion and accountability. Instead, they achieve dynamic balance, holding care and rigour together, making context-sensitive judgements that protect relationships while safeguarding the mission.

This is not simply about being a ‘kind but firm’ leader. It requires deliberate, moment-by-moment calibration. To support this, I developed the Compassion-Accountability Matrix: a practical tool that helps leaders diagnose where they, and their organisations, currently sit, and make intentional adjustments.

The Four Quadrants

The matrix plots compassion on one axis and accountability on the other, creating four distinct leadership zones:

1. Neglect (Low Compassion, Low Accountability)

When both compassion and accountability are absent, neglect takes hold. Leaders in this quadrant may be disengaged, overwhelmed, or simply unaware of their impact. Team members feel unseen and unsupported, while standards drift without consequence. This is leadership by absence, and it erodes both trust and performance over time.

2. Fear-Driven Leadership (Low Compassion, High Accountability)

Here, accountability dominates without the humanising influence of compassion. Expectations are clear and consequences are enforced, but people feel like cogs in a machine. Mistakes are punished rather than learned from. Psychological safety erodes, innovation stalls, and talented people leave. This quadrant often emerges under pressure, when leaders default to control as a coping mechanism.

3. Indulgence or Rescue Leadership (High Compassion, Low Accountability)

This is the quadrant where well-meaning leaders often find themselves stuck. Compassion is abundant, flexibility is offered, allowances are made, and empathy flows freely. But without accountability, care can drift into enabling. Underperformance is tolerated. Difficult conversations are avoided. The leader may unconsciously ‘rescue’ team members from challenges they need to face. Over time, this damages both the individual (who doesn’t grow) and the team (who carries the burden).

4. Regenerative Leadership (High Compassion, High Accountability)

The upper-right quadrant represents the integration of both forces. Here, leaders demonstrate genuine care for their people while maintaining clear expectations and honest feedback. Boundaries are understood not as the opposite of compassion but as one of its deepest expressions. Support is offered alongside challenge. This is regenerative leadership, it renews energy and capacity rather than depleting it, creating cultures that are both humane and high-performing.

Using the Matrix in Practice

The matrix is most powerful when used as a reflective and diagnostic tool. Leaders can apply it in three ways:

1. Self-Assessment

Where do I typically sit on this matrix? Am I naturally inclined towards compassion, sometimes at the expense of accountability? Or do I default to rigour and risk becoming fear-driven under pressure? Honest self-reflection, ideally supported by feedback from trusted colleagues, helps leaders identify their habitual patterns.

2. Situation Analysis

Different situations may require different positions on the matrix. A team member facing a personal crisis may need more compassion in the short term. A persistent performance issue may require a deliberate shift towards accountability. The key is intentionality: knowing where you are and choosing where you need to be.

3. Real-Time Calibration

In the moment, leaders can use simple reflective questions to calibrate their response:

• Am I being genuinely supportive, or am I rescuing this person from a necessary challenge?
• Am I holding them accountable, or am I being punitive?
• What does this person need right now to grow, and what does the team need to thrive?
• Where is my own discomfort influencing my response?

These questions help leaders avoid unconscious drift and make deliberate choices that restore dynamic balance.

Boundaries as Acts of Care

One of the most important insights from the research is that boundaries are not the opposite of compassion, they are its partner. In my work with trauma-informed organisations, I observed leaders who cared deeply for their teams, often sharing lived experiences that created profound connection. But without boundaries, that closeness sometimes blurred the line between support and over-responsibility.

The most effective leaders learned to set boundaries as acts of care: protecting their own capacity to serve, safeguarding team wellbeing, and ensuring that compassion did not become an excuse for avoiding difficult decisions. When accountability was finally applied, sometimes after months of support, it was experienced not as punishment but as clarity.

A Discipline to Be Mastered

Ultimately, the Compassion-Accountability Paradox is not a leadership flaw to be resolved. It is a discipline to be mastered. Leaders who can achieve dynamic balance, who can hold care and rigour in creative tension, cultivate workplaces that are both humane and high-performing.

In an era when employee wellbeing, psychological safety, and performance are all under scrutiny, this integration matters more than ever. The Compassion-Accountability Matrix offers a compass for navigating the complexity, helping leaders make wiser choices under pressure and build cultures where people, and organisations, can genuinely thrive.

About the Author

Dr. Deborah Bayntun-Lees is a leadership scholar, practitioner, and educator at Hult International Business School. Her research focuses on feminist, trauma-informed, and regenerative approaches to leadership. She works with organisations to develop leaders who can hold complexity with courage, care, and accountability.

The post Mastering the Compassion-Accountability Paradox: A Practical Framework for Leaders appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Dr. Poornima Luthra

Why recognizing and overcoming fear is essential for creating truly inclusive organizations

There is evidence of a growing resistance to DEI in organizations, and the reason, argues Poornima Luthra, is fear. Here, drawing on extensive research, she identifies core fears hindering progress and outlines five leadership qualities – openness, curiosity, vulnerability, courage, and resilience – to transform perceived threats into opportunities.

Despite compelling evidence that workplaces remain inequitable and non-inclusive, Europe and the world are seeing a rising backlash against DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion). Between 2020 and 2023, the number of companies without DEI programmes grew, and leader support dropped by 18 per cent.¹ Deloitte’s 2024 Global Human Capital Trends report finds that while 76 per cent of companies acknowledge the importance of DEI, only 10 per cent are taking concrete action.²

Why aren’t we making more progress?

The Root Cause: Fear

Through research including analysis of 200+ news articles, surveys of 460 respondents, and interviews with 28 global experts, one conclusion became clear: fear is at the heart of DEI resistance. Fear is powerful, often unspoken, and deeply tied to perceived threat. It is also an emotion that elicits discomfort.

DEI initiatives trigger various forms of threat – status, merit, moral, group identity, symbolic, realistic, and more.³ These trigger fear responses. In my data, 52 per cent of respondents feel fear when engaging with DEI, and 56 per cent feel it sometimes or often. The data also shows that we are fearful of fear itself.

Common fears include:

• Not knowing the right words
• Saying or doing the wrong thing
• Conflict when addressing inequity
• Being seen as the “DEI / woke police”
• Career impact when addressing bias

From my research, five primary fears emerged:

1. Fear of Change – fear of losing power, space, familiarity, or business performance.
2. Fear of Getting It Wrong – fear of mistakes, being cancelled, or not knowing enough.
3. Fear of Discomfort – fear of difficult conversations or confronting one’s biases.
4. Fear of Taking Action and Its Consequences – fear of conflict, career risk, or burnout.
5. Fear of Lack of Positive Impact – fear that efforts won’t matter or will backfire.

Understanding the Backlash

Backlash tends to fall into three categories:

• Denial: “DEI isn’t needed; everyone is treated equally,” or “I don’t see colour.”
• Passive resistance: This is the most difficult to detect. People may attend training but avoid meaningful action, delay change, or subtly withhold support.
• Active resistance: Openly blocking DEI efforts through criticism, accusations, intimidation, or fear-mongering (“DEI will rock the boat”).

Backlash can emerge from any group, including senior leaders and DEI practitioners themselves.

Backlash can emerge from any group, including senior leaders and DEI practitioners themselves. A 2024 Institute for Corporate Productivity report shows that managers (37 per cent) and frontline workers (34 per cent) are significant internal blockers.⁴ Even DEI advocates and practitioners sometimes succumb to avoidance because of the emotional toll that is reflected in the average tenure of DEI professionals being just three years.⁵

From Threat to Opportunity: Five Qualities to Overcome Fear

The question becomes: how do we move from seeing DEI initiatives as a threat to viewing them as an opportunity? To effectively overcome our fear, I share five key qualities: openness, curiosity, vulnerability, courage, and resilience in my book Can I Say That?: Your Go-To Guide to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion.⁶

1. Openness: Overcoming the Fear of Change

Addressing fear of change starts with openness to new experiences, ideas, ways of thinking, and, crucially, to people different from us. Openness helps shift DEI initiatives from being perceived as a threat to being seen as an opportunity.

Recognize your privilege. Many leaders struggle with the idea of privilege, associating it with guilt or shame. In reality, privilege is simply a system of unearned advantages available to dominant groups. It is fluid, relative, contextual, and intersectional.

Being open to DEI initiatives requires acknowledging privilege. Awareness of systemic inequities and the advantages we enjoy allows us to become more open to levelling the playing field. Leaders should reflect on privilege across gender, age, ability, appearance, education, race, ethnicity, marital status, and wealth, and consider how it shapes workplace dynamics – from who drives strategy to whose voice is heard.

Debunk the myths. Challenge the myth of meritocracy. While merit matters, bias and privilege play a large role. For example, research shows that 40 per cent of Black women feel they must repeatedly prove their competence, compared to 28 per cent of White women and 14 per cent of men.⁷ Believing that success is solely merit-based can fuel resentment toward DEI initiatives.

Another common myth: DEI doesn’t benefit me. There is plenty of evidence that shows that inclusive workplaces improve overall employee well-being, satisfaction, retention, productivity, engagement, decision-making, and innovation.

Move from a scarcity to an abundance mindset. Viewing DEI as a zero-sum game fosters a scarcity mindset and “power over” models of competition. Melanie Joy’s How to End Injustice Everywhere encourages a shift to a “power with” model, using power in service of the greater good.⁸

DEI isn’t a pie where one person’s slice leaves less for everyone else. The “curb cut effect” illustrates how accessibility benefits everyone; curb cuts for disabled people also help cyclists, parents with strollers, and travellers with luggage. Diverse, inclusive teams solve problems faster, make better decisions, and increase creativity. A 10 per cent rise in perceptions of inclusion reduces absenteeism by nearly a day per employee;⁹  inclusive cultures show a 59 per cent boost in innovation and openness.¹⁰

Decentre yourself. When spaces cater to us, we occupy disproportionate time and opportunities. Imagine favouring one child with all the weekly biscuits; redistributing fairly may feel unfair to the favoured child, though it corrects an imbalance. DEI isn’t about denying anyone opportunities but about addressing systemic inequities.

Leaders can decentre themselves through micro-affirmations: invite unheard perspectives, offer seats on panels to colleagues, advocate for diverse speakers, recommend competent colleagues from marginalized groups, and actively sponsor them, amplifying voices in spaces they might otherwise lack access to.

2. Curiosity: Overcoming the Fear of Getting it Wrong

Addressing the fear of getting it wrong requires curiosity – curiosity to unlearn, learn, and make mistakes. Through curiosity, we expand our understanding of bias and discrimination, enabling us to see DEI not as a threat, but as an opportunity for growth and self-development.

Unlearn and learn. Organizations often reward knowing rather than learning. Many evaluation criteria focus on what we already know, not on how we adapt or challenge assumptions. Understanding bias usually begins with unlearning lifelong assumptions. We need to make the familiar strange, questioning what we’ve taken for granted as “just how it is”.

Language evolves, and DEI terms vary across cultural contexts. In the US, DEI often focuses on racial inequity; in Japan, on gender and age; in India, on caste, gender, and religious inequities. A “glocal” (global-local) approach ensures that language and initiatives are both inclusive and relevant to the context.¹¹

Educate yourself. Experiences of discrimination are not universal. It’s our responsibility to unlearn stereotypes and biases, rather than rely on marginalized individuals to educate us. Many business best practices come from Global North or colonial perspectives. Applying them without context risks ignoring local practices that may be better suited to the environment. Educating ourselves cross-culturally and incorporating local and indigenous knowledge is essential. Decolonizing what we know widens understanding and effectiveness.

Be inclusive in communication. Exclusionary communication may appear minor but accumulates over time, harming psychological and physical health, and reducing productivity and problem-solving. Examples include competency-related comments (“You’re fortunate to be a woman; there are opportunities”), interrupting or speaking over someone, taking credit for others’ ideas, and identity-based assumptions (“Where are you actually from?”).

Leaders can check their language, question phrases reflecting societal stereotypes, and disrupt patterns: say “hers and his” instead of “his and hers,” greet Black or Brown colleagues first in meetings, or challenge assumptions about roles (don’t default to assuming that a builder, lawyer, or doctor is male). Engage inclusively: avoid jargon, ask yourself “flip” questions to check possible bias (would you ask this to a man or White woman?), redirect stolen credit, and challenge interruptions.

Engage in intelligent failures. Mistakes are inevitable, especially in new DEI efforts. Professor Amy Edmondson distinguishes basic failures (human error) from intelligent failures – small, informed mistakes in new territory that provide learning opportunities.¹² While there are some actions that should be avoided at all cost given the harm they cause, approaching DEI work as an experiment helps us to accept mistakes, extract insights, and refine actions. Focus on progress, not perfection.

Ask: What can I learn here? How can my language be more inclusive? What do I need to explore further? Every misstep is a chance to grow personally and advance organizational DEI.

3. Vulnerability: Overcoming the Fear of Discomfort

No one wants to be in a conversation where they feel uncomfortable, guilty, shameful, or as if they are “bad”. Even the possibility of discomfort often keeps people from engaging in DEI initiatives. Yet, to acknowledge the biases within ourselves requires vulnerability.

Get comfortable with discomfort. Everyone is biased. We all rely on mental shortcuts to help us make sense of the information our brain receives. Our biases – consciously or unconsciously – influence our words, actions, and decisions. Many of us feel ashamed of being biased, because we want to be seen as fair and rational, even though few of us are entirely so.

Because bias is associated with being “bad”, realizing that we hold biases or having them pointed out triggers discomfort. But discomfort is necessary; it’s the only way we can recognize and block bias. In DEI work, discomfort is inevitable. The journey toward equity and inclusion will include many uncomfortable moments, yet these moments are natural, expected, and a sign of commitment. They also provide the richest opportunities for self-reflection and growth.

Reframing discomfort can help. Discomfort is where trust is formed, and trust is fundamental to human interactions. By embracing discomfort and having difficult conversations about bias and discrimination, we add positive value; discomfort becomes a tool for building trust and fostering inclusion. Most people instinctively avoid discomfort. Comfort zones aren’t wrong, but staying in them too long dulls our sensitivities. New experiences create new neural pathways that are essential for developing new and inclusive behaviours.

An effective way to mitigate the influence of bias is to challenge your gut. Question instinctive decisions. Ask why and how repeatedly until you are confident you’ve made every effort to block bias from your decision-making process.

Centre the discomfort of others. If DEI initiatives feel uncomfortable, consider how underestimated and historically marginalized groups feel when facing discrimination daily. You may have only recently thought about your race, skin colour, or sexual orientation but, for others, these factors are a constant consideration.

Respond constructively when bias is pointed out. One of the most uncomfortable situations is having our own bias highlighted. Common reactions include defensiveness, avoidance, or walking away. Leaders should instead:

• Listen attentively and limit interruptions
• Avoid defensiveness or dismissing concerns
• Acknowledge the negative impact of words or actions
• Apologize sincerely, without justifying or over-apologizing
• Ask questions to deepen understanding
• Reflect and take feedback seriously

Educate themselves to unlearn what was previously considered acceptable and learn to be more inclusive

Reject binary thinking. We live in a polarized world where we are conditioned toward dichotomous thinking: being pro-DEI is often misinterpreted as being anti-White, anti-men, or anti-cisgender. This false dichotomy shuts down nuanced conversation. Being pro-DEI means critiquing systems, not people. Critiquing patriarchy does not mean hating men; examining racism does not mean hating White people.

To create space for multiple realities to coexist, move from debate to discussion and dialogue. In debates, each party defends a position, leaving one winner and fostering defensiveness. Discussions and dialogues, on the other hand, allow multiple perspectives to coexist. They open space for learning, self-reflection, and examining assumptions while understanding others’ realities.

4. Courage: Overcoming the Fear of Taking Action and Its Personal Consequences

Those engaged in DEI initiatives often fear personal consequences – being labelled the “DEI police”, lacking support, jeopardizing careers, or risking safety. Moving forward requires courage.

Develop your DEI purpose statement. Know your “why”. Why are you involved in DEI work? Why does it matter? In difficult moments, your personal “why” serves as an anchor. Leading with conviction means believing that: (1) inequity exists and must be addressed, (2) inclusion and equity are the right thing to do, and (3) your organization benefits from it.

Identify core values such as fairness, justice, or respect, reflect on what you hope DEI efforts will achieve, and craft a personal DEI purpose statement to guide your actions.

Know what to expect. Negative thoughts about what could go wrong are natural, but avoid catastrophizing. Visualize the consequences of engaging versus not engaging in DEI initiatives. Ask yourself: How likely is the worst-case scenario? What conditions would make it happen? Reflect on past experiences, what might happen if bias goes unaddressed, and how to engage differently to mitigate risks.

Plan your move. Addressing bias and discrimination often requires courageous conversations. Options include addressing bias in the moment, later, or not at all if it’s unsafe. Most biases should and can be addressed.

Use questions and comments in a non-confrontational tone to prompt reflection, e.g., “Can you tell me more about where you are coming from?” or “What was your intention in saying that?” Approach conversations with empathy. Today it’s someone else’s bias, tomorrow it could be your own.

Prioritize self-care. DEI work can be emotionally taxing. Mary-Frances Winters describes the toll as “the extra effort it takes daily to manage microaggressions, discrimination, inequities, or the stories of others, along with the fear, frustration, and anger that result.”¹³  Leaders should watch for diversity fatigue, burnout, isolation, and emotional triggers, noting that the average tenure in DEI roles is just three years.¹⁴

To manage these challenges, build support systems and allies; process feelings by asking, “What am I feeling?” and “Why?”; set boundaries around emotionally draining work; and give yourself grace by keeping realistic short-term expectations while pursuing long-term goals.

5. Resilience: Overcoming the Fear of Lack of Positive Impact

Those engaged in DEI initiatives may sometimes feel helpless, as if, no matter what they do or say, change won’t happen. This fear comes from underestimating how long it takes to nurture truly diverse, equitable, and inclusive organizations. Overcoming it requires resilience.

We need to be in this for the long haul. Systemic and cultural bias have been built over centuries and will take time to dismantle and replace.

Be patient. In our fast-paced world, we expect actions to yield results quickly. When it comes to DEI initiatives, we need to rethink that approach. The lack of diverse representation, inequitable systems, and non-inclusive cultures stems from systemic and institutional bias with deep roots in colonization, slavery, and capitalism. Dismantling these systems of oppression will take time.

There is no easy fix. We need to be in this for the long haul. Systemic and cultural bias have been built over centuries and will take time to dismantle and replace. Patience does not mean we shouldn’t act, but we must have realistic expectations of the speed at which we’ll see impact.

Start small and build. Change happens through consistent, everyday actions. Occasional grand gestures are useful, but frequent, small actions by many people create the foundation for lasting cultural change. Examples include acknowledging presence through eye contact and listening, validating identities by respecting names and pronouns, appreciating contributions, and actively sponsoring competent individuals from underrepresented groups.

Focus on progress, not perfection. Mistakes are opportunities to unlearn, learn, and grow. Concentrate on inclusive actions rather than immediate outcomes. Results will come, often in unexpected ways. Small actions create ripple effects that drive broader change.

Make systemic and cultural change happen. Avoid performative DEI actions. Ask: Does this activity block bias and dismantle inequity in organizational systems, structures, processes, or culture? Effective initiatives may include inclusive hiring and talent development, pay equity exercises, accessible facilities, flexible working options, and involving diverse stakeholders in product or service design.

Trust the purpose of DEI initiatives. At their core, DEI efforts aim to level the playing field and create inclusive, representative workplaces. Having trust that DEI is the right thing to do sustains hope when progress seems slow. Resilience grows from this trust. When shared values, collective action, and trust are present, setbacks become opportunities to learn and persevere rather than reasons to give up.

The Way Forward

Change is not straightforward or easy, but change is what is needed to create more diverse, equitable, and inclusive workplaces. DEI will not be “solved” by 2025 or 2050. There is no end date; we are in it for the long haul. Learning to recognize our fears and how to overcome them is the first step on a journey towards a more inclusive world.

The question for business leaders today is clear: Are you ready to lead through fear?

About the Author

Dr. Poornima Luthra is a globally recognized author, keynote speaker, and DEI expert. She has written four acclaimed books, including Can I Say That? (2025). Ranked among Thinkers50’s top 30 emerging management thinkers, her works have twice been named among the year’s 10 best management books.

References 

1. DDI (Development Dimensions International) “Global Leadership Forecast 2023”,

2. Deloitte 2024 Global Human Capital Trends

3. Shuman, Eric & Van Zomeren, Martijn & Saguy, Tamar & Knowles, Eric. (2022). “Defend, Deny, Distance, and Dismantle: A Measure of How Advantaged Group Members Manage Their Identity”. 10.31234/osf.io/6d4qc.; https://hbr.org/2023/03/to-overcome-resistance-to-dei-understand-whats-driving-it; Plaut, Victoria & Romano, Celina & Hurd, Kyneshawau & Goldstein, Emily. (2020). “Diversity Resistance Redux in Diversity Resistance in Organizations”, 10.4324/9781003026907-6.

4. https://www.i4cp.com/article/whos-challenging-workplace-de-i-efforts-managers

5. Weeks, K. P., Taylor, N., Hall, A. V., et al. (2024). “They say they support diversity initiatives, but they don’t demonstrate it”: The impact of DEI paradigms on the emotional labor of HR & DEI professionals. Journal of Business and Psychology, 39(2), 411–33.

6. Luthra, P. (2025). Can I Say That?: Your go to guide for diversity, equity and inclusion (2nd ed.). Publishing Rebel.

7. LeanIn.Org and McKinsey & Company, “Women in the Workplace 2019”.

8. Joy, M. 2023. How to End Injustice Everywhere: Understanding the Common Denominator Driving All Injustices, to Create a Better World for Humans, Animals, and the Planet. Lantern Publishing & Media

9. Juliet Bourke and Andrea Espedido, Why Inclusive Leaders Are Good for Organisations, and How to Become One, Harvard Business Review, March 29, 2019.

10. Juliet Bourke and Andrea Espedido, Why Inclusive Leaders Are Good for Organisations, and How to Become One, Harvard Business Review, March 29, 2019.

11. Luthra, P. (2022, March 21). “Do your global teams see DEI as an American issue?”, Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2022/03/do-your-global-teams-see-dei-as-an-american-issue

12. Edmondson, A. C. (2023). The right kind of wrong: The science of failing well. Atria Books.

13. Winters, M. (2020). Black fatigue: How racism erodes the mind, body, and spirit. Berrett Koehler Publishers.

14. Weeks, K. P., Taylor, N., Hall, A. V., et al. (2024). “They say they support diversity initiatives, but they don’t demonstrate it”: The impact of DEI paradigms on the emotional labor of HR & DEI professionals. Journal of Business and Psychology, 39(2), 411–33.

The post Leading Through the Fear of DEI: A Guide for European Business Leaders appeared first on The European Business Review.

As AI tools make it possible to generate polished music in seconds, UJAM COO Wolfram Knelangen argues that the act of learning and making music still holds irreplaceable value. In this Q&A, he reflects on creativity, technology, and why human skill and practice remain essential in an increasingly automated musical landscape.  

What early influences or moments in your life sparked your interest in helping people make music more creatively and intuitively?

I’ve lived through a fascinating period of change in music creation: in the 1980s and 90s, it still took quite deep pockets or connections to make a halfway-decent record. Tape machines and big mixing consoles were still the norm. Access to studios was guarded by inhibitive fees, which meant A&Rs and label executives ultimately decided what was worthy of being produced. Nowadays – and for a while now – entire albums are made “in the box” on computers using software. Even more so, we see the first entirely AI-created songs charting. For me personally, in the late nineties, I found myself confronted and frustrated with this reality as an amateur guitar player. A friend handed me one of those unprinted CD-ROMs of unknown provenance and told me that it contained music-making software. I was sceptical but desperate enough to try it. What a revelation! I could now make music on my Pentium computer. It was all still very rudimentary and quirky, but a proof of concept. Back then, there were no YouTube videos or Reddit or Chat GPT – the learning curve was long and steep. It took me probably two years of desperate trial and error to figure it out. So, I fell down a rabbit hole of wondering how to make music software easier and more accessible, and never really climbed back out.

Throughout your career, what experiences have most shaped your leadership approach in a space where artistry and technology often intersect?

One key experience shaping my view was seeing how poor leadership and management by spreadsheet drives competent people away and leads to deteriorating products. When our small German startup was acquired by Digidesign in 2005, I joined their San Francisco-based Pro Tools team. Pro Tools is the industry standard used in professional audio production, and I was immediately fascinated by how people there were so deeply driven by a true passion for music and audio technology. Even the GM had been playing live keyboards for David Bowie and other rock stars. I was stunned! People truly cared, and it created an atmosphere of happy productivity.

We believe that people with autonomy, mastery, and purpose build strong businesses and are more invested and more fun to work with.

After a management change at the parent company, there was more focus on optimizing for profits than generating value for customers. The attempted assimilation into the structures and culture of the mothership and the reduction of creative freedom led to an exodus of market knowledge, competency, and passion. The right people count everywhere, but especially in our field, as it’s a very niche market with a complex product. At UJAM, we make people a priority, emphasizing trust and constructive conflict. For example, we offer training for giving and receiving critical feedback. We have facilitators who run meetings, making sure there’s a psychologically safe space to speak up for everyone. We assign decision-making authority by competency rather than hierarchical seniority and with high levels of autonomy, as long as decisions and actions serve the company’s purpose. We believe that people with autonomy, mastery, and purpose build strong businesses and are more invested and more fun to work with.

How has your work with musicians and creators informed your understanding of what people truly need when engaging with modern music-making tools?

Our customers are people who make music, and they belong to a distinct psychological cohort. Nature magazine recently published research that predisposition for musical sensitivity is predicted by three personality traits: openness, agreeableness, and neuroticism. Openness reflecting curiosity and creativity; agreeableness showing compassion and cooperation; and neuroticism indicating a tendency towards self-doubt and emotional sensitivity. Caring for our customers means that we need to take this into account. Making music is a joyful exploration of new ideas, sounds, and patterns. It is also a deeply collaborative process, and people play off one another’s ideas like in improvisation. Finally, it can be a powerful way to process and express difficult emotions, as we know from works like Mozart’s Requiem to Céline Dion’s My Heart Will Go On. Recognizing this helps us understand how our customers experience the world.

AI can now generate music instantly, yet many still values learning an instrument or developing musical skills. Why do you believe that human learning and practice remain essential in this new landscape?  

It’s the big question in our industry these days: whether human learning and practice will remain essential. Our answer is a clear yes. Why? Because it’s the same question as “Why still learn French when my AirPods can now simultaneously translate?” Or even “Why bother to dice vegetables if you can buy stock cubes?” As a small preliminary MIT Media Lab study earlier this year reported, reliance on AI may contribute to cognitive atrophy and shrinking of critical thinking abilities – the same is likely true for our creative faculties.

Learning a language or an instrument develops new neural pathways and may even influence long-term health. Research published in the International Journal of Geriatric Psychology suggests that learning music may delay cognitive decline and improve executive function. Learning music has been linked to better memory, enhanced pattern recognition, and increased empathy.

The value is in the process of learning and joyful experimentation. It’s like with a physical muscle: use it or lose it. And like a gym session that can be enjoyable, I think that many people are enjoying the creative struggle. “Musicing” as some younger students call it now, according to Derek von Krogh, head of the German Pop Academy.

As AI-assisted and AI-generated music expands, what misunderstandings or assumptions do you often encounter about its role in creativity and musicianship?

AI music generators ingest vast libraries of recorded music, convert it to training data, then recombine elements based on user prompts akin to an LLM like Chat GPT which is basically predicting the most likely next word. This isn’t as much a creative process, as it is an elaborately stitched-together quilt from the fabric collection of a century of recorded music. No original musical idea emerges from this process.

It suggests that as AI-generated music floods the market, genuinely original ideas—born from human creativity—will become increasingly valuable.

The results sound impressive and realistic and these tools are potentially a new gateway for people entering music creation or are handicapped in some form. However, if we’re brutally honest, it’s clear that generative AI tools are built on the appropriation of artists’ intellectual property. Not paying them equals theft. Pending lawsuits from the record industry may confirm this from a legal perspective, but the technical reality is that without the preexisting fruits of creative struggle by human artists, the generative AI systems would have nothing to recombine. This isn’t moral judgment but mechanical fact. And it suggests that as AI-generated music floods the market, genuinely original ideas—born from human creativity—will become increasingly valuable. As Rick Rubin, the producer of artists like Run DMC or Johnny Cash, observes: “What makes an artist a great artist is that their point of view does something to me. I’m not sure that AI has a point of view.”

With real-time AI music tools emerging, what do you see as the biggest challenges for the industry in keeping human expression at the centre of music Creation?

I don’t think that the industry will keep human expression at the center, I think that humans will. We need to build the tools that augment and support their creative process, taking them seriously and celebrating their results. At UJAM, for example, we are employing machine learning-based tools to help our users find the right sound. This is AI working quietly in the background, it leaves creative control in the hands of the artist, making sure they can find and express their vision with joy.

Executive Profile

Wolfram Knelangen is COO at German music software company UJAM, where he leads product strategy and development. With over 20 years in music technology, he has guided global teams at major audio companies. He focuses on building tools that make music creation more accessible while preserving the value of human musicianship. 

The post How Creativity and Technology Intersect in Contemporary Music Making appeared first on The European Business Review.

As generative AI shifts from a productivity tool to a dialogue partner, leadership faces a fundamental redefinition. Drawing on Eastern and Western wisdom traditions, this article explores how AI–human dialogue reshapes judgment, responsibility, and relational intelligence—inviting leaders to move beyond efficiency toward meaning, ethical orientation, and leadership in an age of hybrid intelligence.

Introduction

From Tool to Partner: Why AI Forces Leaders to Rethink Judgment and Responsibility

Generative AI is rapidly moving beyond its original role as a productivity tool. Increasingly, leaders are using AI not only to analyze data or draft documents, but to reflect, sense-check decisions, and explore meaning in moments of uncertainty. What began as an efficiency aid is quietly becoming part of how leaders think.

This shift signals something deeper: AI is becoming a dialogue partner rather than a mere instrument. When this happens, leadership questions change. The issue is no longer how efficiently AI can support human work, but how human agency, judgment, and responsibility evolve in relationship with non-human intelligence.

To navigate this transition, leaders need more than technical expertise. They need conceptual resources that help them orient judgment and responsibility—many of which already exist in long-standing wisdom traditions that have grappled with the limits of human control for centuries.

Section 1

Beyond Productivity: Why Instrumental AI Is Not Enough for Leadership

Most corporate conversations about AI remain framed by efficiency, optimization, and performance. These are important—but insufficient. Productivity gains alone do not answer deeper leadership questions about purpose, responsibility, and long-term consequences.

When AI is treated purely as a tool, leaders risk outsourcing not only tasks, but reflection itself. Decision-making becomes faster, yet thinner. Judgment improves in precision, but may lose depth, context, and ethical sensitivity. Over time, this can erode leadership capacity rather than strengthen it.

Wisdom traditions—both Eastern and Western—have long warned against confusing capability with understanding. Whether in Buddhist contemplative practice or Aristotelian ethics, action is inseparable from reflection on purpose, limits, and consequences. Skill without wisdom has always been recognized as dangerous.

AI now confronts leaders with a similar challenge:

How do we preserve depth of judgment when intelligence is no longer exclusively human?

Section 2

AI–Human Dialogue: How Leaders Are Already Using AI as a Reflective Partner

One of the most significant, yet under-examined, developments in AI adoption is conversational use. Leaders increasingly “think with” AI—testing assumptions, rehearsing decisions, or clarifying values through dialogue rather than calculation alone.

This resembles older reflective practices such as journaling, mentoring, or coaching. The difference is scale and immediacy. AI offers a responsive, non-judgmental conversational space, available at any moment, without organizational hierarchy or social pressure.

Crucially, this does not replace human relationships. Instead, it creates a new relational layer—a space where insights emerge that neither human reflection nor machine computation could generate alone. Used well, it can deepen, rather than diminish, human self-awareness.

Leadership, in this sense, becomes less about command and more about navigation: holding meaning, direction, and ethical orientation amid accelerating intelligence and constant decision pressure.

This shift is not merely theoretical. Recent empirical observations suggest that many people are already engaging with AI in deeply human ways. Research shared by BetterUp indicates that a growing number of professionals use generative AI not only for task completion, but for reflection, sense-making, and emotional processing—functions traditionally associated with coaching or mentoring conversations.

A similar pattern was highlighted in a recent Harvard Business Review article by Marc Zao-Sanders, which identified therapy, life organization, and purpose-finding among the most common real-world uses of generative AI. Rather than treating AI as a neutral instrument, users increasingly approach it as a conversational partner—one that helps them think through uncertainty, identity, and direction.

What is striking is not whether AI truly “understands” these human concerns, but the psychological and organizational effects such dialogue produces. Leaders report greater clarity, reduced cognitive overload, and a renewed capacity for reflection. These outcomes suggest that AI–human dialogue is already functioning as a new reflective practice—reshaping how leaders relate to themselves, their decisions, and their responsibilities within complex systems.

Section 3

Relational Intelligence: Leading When Intelligence Is No Longer Human-Only

Modern leadership models often assume human superiority over systems, nature, and technology. Yet AI challenges this assumption by demonstrating forms of intelligence that rival or exceed human capacities in many domains.

Wisdom traditions offer an alternative framing: intelligence is not a possession, but a relationship. Meaning emerges not from dominance, but from interaction and mutual influence.

From this perspective, leadership evolves from control to relational intelligence—the capacity to engage responsibly with other forms of agency, including AI. This does not diminish human distinctiveness. On the contrary, it highlights uniquely human capacities: ethical judgment, humility, and the ability to live with uncertainty rather than eliminate it.

In a world of hybrid intelligence, leadership is defined less by authority and more by the quality of relationships we cultivate—with people, technologies, and the systems that connect them.

Section 4

The New Role of Leaders and Coaches in an Age of Hybrid Intelligence

As AI increasingly supports reflection, analysis, and even emotional simulation, the role of the human coach and leader shifts.

Rather than providing answers or frameworks, leaders and coaches become companions and sense-makers—supporting others in navigating identity, responsibility, and meaning in relation to intelligent systems. Their value lies not in knowing more, but in helping others orient themselves wisely.

This role cannot be automated. It rests on the human ability to hold ambiguity, acknowledge limits, and foster ethical orientation rather than optimization alone.

Organizations that recognize this shift will invest not only in AI capability, but in wisdom-informed leadership development—preparing leaders to work with, not over, intelligent systems.

Conclusion

After Human Exceptionalism: What Leadership Means in a World of Hybrid Intelligence

AI marks the end of an era in which intelligence could be assumed to be exclusively human. What comes next is not human obsolescence, but a redefinition of leadership.

By drawing on wisdom traditions and embracing AI–human dialogue as a new reflective practice, leaders can move beyond productivity toward relational intelligence—where agency, responsibility, and meaning are shared rather than centralized.

The future of leadership lies not in competing with AI, but in learning how to lead within a world of hybrid intelligence.

About the Author

Akihiko Morita, PhD, PCC, is a thought leader and professional coach whose work bridges Eastern and Western wisdom traditions, AI, and leadership. With over 3,000 global coaching sessions and a background in social thought, he explores how coaching, leadership, and humanity transform in an era of hybrid intelligence.

The post Beyond the Human Coach: AI, Wisdom Traditions, and the Future of Leadership appeared first on The European Business Review.

After an early career that, in addition to math and science, included bioinformatics, Kamil Salikhov entered the world of high-speed, high-frequency trading, a field that is, as he puts it, at the intersection of finance, technology, and science. We managed to catch up with him to hear more about it. 

It’s great to have you with us, Mr. Salikhov! Your academic and career journey is impressive. With multiple publications in bioinformatics and algorithms, you have nevertheless found yourself on the business side. Can you walk us through your path and key milestones which led you to the high-frequency trading field?

My journey to HFT was not linear, and it is rooted in my strong background as a mathematician. I studied mathematics and computer science in the late 2000s and early 2010s. It was a time of rapid growth of tech companies, and it was very natural for people with my background to pursue a career there (which I almost started as well, but that’s a completely different story). I didn’t know anything about HFT and even algorithmic trading in general. It was a coincidence that I joined a small startup doing high-frequency trading. As it turned out, my love for math was a perfect fit; HFT is one of the most mathematically intensive fields in finance, built on complex models and sophisticated algorithms.

HFT is one of the most mathematically intensive fields in finance, built on complex models and sophisticated algorithms.

Around the same time, I was offered an opportunity to go to Paris for a short internship at Paris-Est Marne-la-Vallée to work on problems in bioinformatics. It was another field that represented an appealing combination of mathematics, science, and technology. I joined the program and spent several years as a researcher, pursuing a PhD in a joint program between Moscow State University and Paris-Est Marne-la-Vallée, working at the intersection of technology and computational biology. It was a productive period for me as an academic. I authored and co-authored several papers and even developed a paper that (to some extent) improved the state-of-the-art solution to the problem of genome assembly.

Both HFT and bioinformatics were very interesting to me at the time, so for four years I worked on my PhD while also growing within an HFT startup. It was a challenging but rewarding period. In parallel with my doctoral studies, I was exploring the new and rapidly emerging field of HFT. Eventually, I decided to focus more and more on my career in the algorithmic trading industry. Now, after more than 10 years in this field, I am the co-owner and Head of Research at Pinely. However, a part of me will always belong to academia.

How has your academic background shaped your approach to algorithmic trading today?

I see algorithmic trading as a very special field, one that lies at the intersection of finance, technology, and science. HFT began to truly take off in the early 2000s, and data and technology have since become absolutely central to it. On the practical side, working in HFT means constantly exploring new ideas, especially with the boom in machine learning and data-driven methods, which form the core of our algorithms.

HFT research, in many ways, mirrors academic research. Behind every system and model lies deep exploration, experimentation, and innovation. At Pinely I also hold the position of Head of Research, a role that is not typical in most tech or finance firms. However, for companies like Pinely, it represents the very essence of our philosophy, combining scientific rigor with entrepreneurial agility.

In the end, the work of a researcher shares common ground across disciplines. You tackle complex problems from multiple angles, experiment with different approaches, and (hopefully) achieve great results—sometimes even ones that no one has reached before.

My strong academic background has shaped my mindset, to view challenges not only as business problems but also as opportunities for discovery and innovation. From this perspective, my work in algorithmic trading, my PhD studies, and my master’s degree are all deeply and organically connected.

To thrive, you must constantly develop new ideas, test them, and refine them faster than anyone else.

Pinely is known for its “technology-first” mindset. How does this philosophy influence your approach to research, experimentation, and product development?

HFT is not a trading strategy, it is a technology and an approach. Understanding this nature of the field, we at Pinely have incorporated a technology-first mindset into every part of our work. Technology became the cornerstone of every process we deal with, whether it is analyzing large volumes of data or developing and optimizing our trading infrastructure for this purpose. We are much closer to tech companies than to traditional trading firms.

This technology‑first philosophy ensures that our research doesn’t just ask, “What strategy can we deploy?” but also “What infrastructure, what algorithms, and what design will enable a strategy to execute reliably and at unrivaled speed?”

Our aim is always to stay ahead of the market, developing not just innovative trading models but modular, adaptive systems that can respond intelligently to dynamic and complex market conditions.

The HFT field is pretty mystifying compared to other tech subsectors. Could you tell us more about it? For example, what qualities, in your opinion, differentiate HFT professionals from developers in big tech?

Many of my colleagues have a background in big tech, so the fields are not that far apart. One noticeable difference is that our researchers and developers usually see the results of their work much faster than in big tech—sometimes in hours or days. It’s also important to note that HFT involves different parts of technology. One part is more data-driven, where the key skills are understanding advanced mathematical models. Another part is the infrastructure, where ultra-low-latency technology is critical. This means building systems that can process huge amounts of market data and react instantly.

From my experience, two qualities truly distinguish HFT professionals: a research-oriented mindset and a relentless drive for innovation. The industry is intensely competitive, and competition breeds creativity. To thrive, you must constantly develop new ideas, test them, and refine them faster than anyone else.

The company is also highly engaged in the tech community, supporting programming competitions like ICPC and educational conferences. Why is community involvement such an important part of Pinely’s culture?

I and many of my colleagues come from backgrounds in competitive mathematics and programming, so supporting younger generations of talented and motivated people feels very natural to us. From my own experience, I know how much of a difference it can make when someone’s talent is recognized at the right time. I’ve seen people whose lives and careers were completely shaped by being noticed and encouraged early on, and that’s something I want to help create for others.

I also deeply believe that innovation doesn’t start at the corporate level; it starts early, with curiosity, inspiration, and the drive to explore new ideas. By engaging with students through competitions like ICPC and educational conferences, we can spark that curiosity, encourage experimentation, and perhaps even help someone discover a passion that shapes their future.

Another factor is the Pinely team. We have a tremendous amount of expertise across research, technology, and problem-solving, and it feels only natural to share this expertise with the next generation—to mentor, inspire, and challenge their minds. This is not just giving back, it’s investing in the future of technology and innovation. Supporting the community has become a part of our culture.

As the co-owner of Pinely, how do you personally define success, both for yourself and for the company?

Throughout my career, I have grown with the company, and now it’s almost impossible to separate the company’s success from my own. I don’t see success as a single final point but rather as a journey, working on challenging problems with some of the smartest people in the world and building something that has never been done before is the best way I can describe it.

Finally, as an experienced tech leader with a solid scholarly background, what are the most important trends in technology that leaders should be aware of and understand? What should they understand about them?

Everyone is talking about AI nowadays, and I really think it’s changing the world, including our industry. At the same time, I think we should value the people we are working with and human interaction.

Executive Profile

Kamil Salikhov is Co-Owner and Head of Research at Pinely – a company specializing in high-frequency trading and algorithmic solutions. Kamil’s academic and professional journey reflects a strong commitment to integrating cutting-edge technology with financial markets to optimize trading strategies. Kamil actively contributes to innovation in the fintech space and is open to professional dialogue on high-frequency trading, algorithmic solutions, and advanced financial technologies.

The post Speeding Through the Intersection: Algorithmic Trading appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Christopher O.H. Williams

This article explores the intersection of personal purpose and professional leadership. It argues that blending individual aspirations with organizational goals builds resilience and courage and encourages leaders and managers to support this convergence not only for themselves but for all employees.

In 2005, the company I was working for hosted an annual retreat for the top 100 USA region leaders in Kauai, Hawaii. I remember the opening night vividly. The theme was “Transformational Moments,” and the goal was for all of us to reflect on the most transformational event of our lives.

A small handful of people took the stage to share their stories. Each was a powerful disclosure: a personal struggle of overcoming adversity or an epiphany that brought inspiration. These stories had shaped not only who we were, but also who we wanted to become – each a crucible that fueled a deep sense of mission and commitment to our personal potential. That exercise set in motion one of the most memorable leadership motivation sessions I have ever experienced.

We all have aspirations about who we want to become. It does not hurt to have strong incentives that push us toward those goals, especially when headwinds threaten to erode our will to persevere. I discovered early in my career that a deep sense of purpose is more than just a powerful motivator; it is a protector when circumstances or others try to diminish our aspirations or act as a drag on our enthusiasm. Sometimes, we even have to protect our dreams from ourselves, from the self-doubt that is ever willing to creep in and halt us in our tracks.

Returning to the Kauai retreat, that sharing of purpose shifted the mood of the meeting in the days that followed. The leadership group grew closer as we came to understand each other’s personal journeys and appreciate the human dimensions that were not always visible in the office. When we eventually moved into three-year strategic planning, the team worked better than ever – visioning, planning, and ultimately delivering another run of massive growth for the brand.

It was as if we saw our personal growth stories and the pursuit of our individual potential as fuel for the larger possibilities of the business. We had granted ourselves permission to pursue personal purpose alongside – rather than separate from – the business’s goals. It was personal and professional alignment like none other I had witnessed.

I recalled this experience when researching the role of purpose in building courage. The courage to persevere against challenge and stress is bolstered by a deep sense of purpose. Courage needs something to work for, including our own potential and the aspirations we set for ourselves.

Helpful evidence comes from the American Psychiatric Association (APA), which highlights research suggesting that purpose in life helps build resilience, reduce stress, and improve the integration of working and personal lives. The same APA piece points to a Harvard Graduate School of Education report, On Edge, underlining how strongly “meaning or purpose” is associated with this life integration. In light of these findings, the role of purpose in resilience is further affirmed. It confirms something I experienced two decades ago and have validated while working with scores of leaders since: blending personal and professional purpose is a powerful way for leaders to stay connected with their ideals – especially when pressure, ambiguity, and self-doubt test our resolve.

At the same time, the context in which leaders operate is getting harder. Edelman’s 2025 Trust Barometer describes a “crisis of grievance,” with 61% of respondents globally reporting a moderate to high sense of grievance, relating to a widening “mass-class trust divide,” where low-income respondents trust institutions 13 points less than high-income respondents (48% vs. 61%) – based of their view of their future economic outlook. Edelman further notes that five of the world’s ten largest economies – Japan, Germany, the UK, the US, and France – are among the least trusting nations on its Trust Index.

Just as leaders thrive when their personal and professional purposes converge, the same is true for their teams. Employees must be encouraged – and enabled – to find personal purpose in their work. Enabling this, even incrementally, should be a primary goal for leaders who want committed teams and sustainably high-performing organizations.

As we go into 2026, there are a few suggestions for managers to adopt to reverse these trends. Managers should strive to be more relatable by not presenting themselves as all-knowing or perfect; instead, they should descend from the “ivory tower” and practice transparency so teams can know them as fellow colleagues. While there is an instinct to avoid societal issues at work, creating room for employees to express their concerns builds inclusion and a sense of being fully recognized. Furthermore, addressing individual team concerns as distinct from larger organizational goals can earn managers credibility as caring leaders. Ultimately, top-down communication will be less effective in this landscape than regular, authentic peer-to-peer dialogue.

By bridging the gap between who we are and what we do, we unlock a level of resilience that strategy alone cannot provide. When we lead with converged purpose, we encourage, empower, and enable the pursuit of full potential. And this is true for all employees – both managers and their teams.

About the Author

Christopher O.H. Williams is a former Fortune 500 executive who serves as a business consultant, executive mentor, board director, and public speaker on strategy and transformation. His career has spanned four continents, with senior corporate and management roles at Nike, Adidas, Goldman Sachs, Gap, VF Corporation, and Lehman Brothers. He is also the author of C.O.U.R.A.G.E., an empowering guide that combines real-life stories, personal experiences, important concepts, and practical steps and tools to take action, reach potential, and lead an authentic life free from regret.

The post How Leaders Can Own Their Potential — And Stop Holding Back appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Chris Spratling

For many entrepreneurs, selling their business is the culmination of years of hard work, ambition, and resilience. Yet, despite the significance of the transaction, the majority of business owners remain unprepared for their exit. In this article Chris Spratling, founder of Chalkhill Blue, explores how a lack of planning not only jeopardises the final sale value, but often leads to regret.

Most business owners believe they’ll sell one day.

Very few actually do.

That may sound blunt, but the data is unambiguous. Brokers and corporate finance houses estimate that only around 20% of businesses that go to market sell within a year, while as many as 65% never sell at all ^[1]. Even among those who do complete a transaction, the outcome is often disappointing: more than half of sellers are unhappy with the result, and around three-quarters regret the sale altogether, largely because of the price achieved ^[5].

This is not a marginal problem. It is a systemic one.

So why does this happen? Why do so many capable entrepreneurs – people who have built profitable, often impressive companies – fail to turn their life’s work into a successful exit?

After three decades working as a buyer, seller, and adviser, I’ve come to a simple conclusion: most businesses don’t sell because they were never built to be sold.

1. The myth of “I’ll sort the exit later”

One of the most damaging assumptions in entrepreneurship is the belief that an exit is something you think about at the end. In reality, selling a business successfully is the result of years of deliberate preparation. Yet research shows that fewer than half of business owners who expect to sell have any form of exit plan in place ^[3]. Gallup research similarly indicates that a significant proportion of owners have no exit plan at all or are uncertain about their future intentions ^[2].

This lack of planning has consequences. Selling a business is not a transaction you can improvise. It requires structure, evidence, governance, and a narrative that makes sense to a buyer who does not share your emotional attachment.

Owners who delay planning often end up doing one of three things: accepting a poor offer, pulling out of a deal mid-process, or discovering, too late, that their business simply isn’t attractive to buyers.

2. Overconfidence is not a strategy

Another common reason businesses fail to sell is unrealistic valuation expectations.

Forbes has repeatedly reported that more than half of small and medium-sized business owners have never formally valued their business ^[4]. Instead, owners rely on hearsay, competitor rumours, or crude valuation multiples lifted from online articles. The result is predictable: a yawning gap between what the owner wants and what the market is prepared to pay.

Buyers do not value effort, longevity, or sacrifice. They value future, transferable cash flows and manageable risk.

In practice, most sellers have no clear idea what post-tax income they actually need after a sale, nor how that figure relates to the real value of their business ^[7]. That disconnect alone derails countless exits.

3. Founder dependence kills deals

Many entrepreneurs are the beating heart of their business – and that’s precisely the problem.

A company that relies heavily on its founder for sales, relationships, decision-making, or technical delivery is not an asset; it is a job with overheads. Buyers know this, and they price accordingly.

Across multiple transactions, the same issues appear again and again: excessive reliance on the owner, dependence on a small number of customers, and weak second-tier management ^[7]. When a buyer asks, “What happens if you leave on day one?” and the honest answer is “It falls apart,” the deal is already dead.

4. Growth without scalability is not attractive

Many owners assume that steady growth is enough to attract buyers. It isn’t.

Buyers are not paying for your past performance; they are paying for credible, scalable future growth. Businesses that appear healthy on the surface often fail to attract interest once buyers discover that growth has plateaued or is entirely owner-driven ^[7].

Growing at 10% may feel impressive – until a buyer discovers that competitors are growing at 20%.

Without documented processes, repeatable sales engines, recurring revenues, and protected intellectual property, growth becomes fragile. Fragile growth does not command premium valuations.

5. The market doesn’t care about your timing

Owners also underestimate how much external conditions influence outcomes. Market cycles, sector sentiment, regulatory shifts, and technological disruption all shape buyer appetite. During the Covid-19 pandemic, for example, hospitality businesses struggled to sell, while IT and remote-services companies surged in value ^[8].

Too many owners decide to sell based on personal fatigue rather than market readiness. Unfortunately, the market does not adjust itself to your burnout.

6. Selling is a process, not an event

Perhaps the hardest truth is this: selling well takes time.

A well-planned exit often takes two to three years from decision to completion ^[7]. That time is spent improving governance, strengthening management, de-risking revenues, cleaning up financials, and aligning the business with buyer expectations.

Those who rush rarely win. Those who prepare almost always do better.

The uncomfortable conclusion

Most businesses don’t fail to sell because of bad luck. They fail because owners confuse optimism with strategy, leave planning too late, mistake emotional value for market value, and build businesses around people rather than systems.

The harsh truth is that a successful exit is engineered, not hoped for.

For owners prepared to confront that reality early enough, the odds change dramatically. For everyone else, the statistics speak for themselves.

About the Author

Chris Spratling is the Managing Director and Founder of Chalkhill Blue Limited and the author of The Exit Roadmap: The Insider’s Guide to Selling Your Business Profitably. He advises UK business owners on scaling, exit planning, and leadership transformation.

References

1. BizBuySell. BizBuySell Insight Report. BizBuySell, various editions.

2. Gallup. U.S. Small Business Owner Survey. Gallup, latest available edition.

3. Wilson, T. (2018). 48% of Business Owners Who Want to Sell Have No Exit Strategy. Brooks Holdings.

4. Forbes.

• • De Pau, L. (2024). When Should You Decide to Sell Your Business?

  • Hannon, K. (2018). How Entrepreneurs Should Prepare to Sell a Business.

5. Prince, R.A. & Bowen Jr., J.J. (2017). The Enrichment Report. Gold Family Wealth.

6. SCORE Association. (2018). Infographic: The Family Business – Successes and Obstacles.

7. Spratling, C. (2025). The Exit Roadmap: The Insider’s Guide to Selling Your Business Profitably. Rethink Press.

8. Financial Times; BBC Business; Management Today.

Selected coverage on M&A activity, sector valuation trends and buyer sentiment during economic disruption.

The post The Harsh Truth is That Most Businesses Don’t Sell – Here’s Why appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Cassie Davison 

In this article, award-winning hospitality industry veteran, Cassie Davison, explores what founders and business owners can learn from hospitality about building sustainable businesses. Longevity comes from leadership clarity, protected standards, strong identity and belonging, not constant optimisation. By prioritising human experience, storytelling and consistent behaviour, organisations create trust, resilience and loyalty across industries over time and at scale.

Across industries, sustainability has become a dominant ambition. It appears in strategy documents, investment criteria and leadership discourse, often framed in terms of growth models, technology and resilience. Yet many businesses that achieve longevity do so not because they perfect their systems, but because they design organisations that people want to stay connected to.

Hospitality offers a compelling perspective on this challenge. It is a sector defined by human interaction, emotional labour and constant pressure. Margins are thin, expectations are high, and performance is judged daily by those experiencing the business in real time. Survival depends not on theory, but on behaviour.

When hospitality businesses succeed over the long term, they reveal something fundamental about sustainability: it is built through clarity, care and consistency. These lessons extend far beyond the sector itself and speak directly to founders and business owners navigating complexity in any field.

Sustainability begins with leadership energy

One of the most overlooked elements of sustainability is leadership endurance. Many businesses fail not because their market disappears, but because their leaders are depleted.

Hospitality exposes this reality early. Leaders who attempt to control everything burn out quickly. Those who last understand that their role is not to be everywhere, but to be clear. They protect their energy by protecting the principles that matter most.

This requires a shift in mindset. Sustainable leadership is not about heroic effort or constant optimisation. It is about creating conditions where good decisions are repeatable, even when the leader is not present.

At the centre of this is standards.

Standards create trust at scale

In hospitality, standards are not abstract. They are experienced immediately. Guests feel them in the atmosphere, the service and the details. Teams feel them in what is accepted and what is quietly corrected.

Crucially, effective standards are not about perfection. They are about pride. Pride in the experience being offered and in the way people are treated. When standards are clear and upheld consistently, they reduce friction. Teams know what is expected. Customers know what they can rely on.

For founders and CEOs, this has wide application. Without protected standards, organisations drift. Decision-making becomes reactive. Culture becomes inconsistent. Leaders compensate by intervening more frequently, accelerating exhaustion.

Standards, when held with care, create freedom. They allow trust to form and enable the organisation to function without constant oversight.

Clarity of identity is a strategic advantage

Hospitality businesses learn quickly that attempting to serve everyone leads to serving no one well. The venues that endure are those with a clear sense of identity. They know who they are for, and equally, who they are not for.

This clarity allows leaders to make better decisions. It becomes easier to evaluate opportunities, to hire aligned people, and to resist pressure to dilute the experience in pursuit of short-term gains.

In broader business contexts, this principle is often underestimated. Many organisations struggle not because they lack ambition, but because they lack definition. When identity is unclear, strategy becomes scattered and teams lose confidence.

Purpose-driven organisations operate differently. Purpose is not a mission statement; it is a filter. It guides decisions about customers, partnerships and priorities. It allows leaders to say no without apology, and to build businesses that attract the right stakeholders naturally.

Belonging as an organisational outcome

Hospitality, at its best, creates places where people feel they belong. This is not sentimentality; it is design.

Regular customers return because they feel recognised. Teams commit because they feel part of something that values them. These outcomes are created through consistent behaviour, shared values and emotional awareness.

Across industries, leaders are grappling with declining loyalty, disengagement and rising turnover. Incentives and policies have limited impact when people do not feel understood.

Belonging is not about comfort; it is about connection. When people understand what a business stands for and feel respected within it, they invest emotionally. This investment translates into trust, advocacy and resilience.

Sustainable organisations intentionally design for this. They consider how people experience the business at every level, not just what is delivered, but how it feels to be part of it.

Storytelling as organisational coherence

Every organisation tells a story. The question is whether that story is intentional or fragmented.

In hospitality, storytelling is rarely verbalised, but always felt. It shows up in how issues are handled, how feedback is received, and how consistency is maintained over time. These actions communicate far more than formal messaging.

For leaders, storytelling is a critical capability. It provides coherence in complex systems. It helps teams understand not just what is changing, but why. It creates continuity during periods of uncertainty.

Importantly, storytelling is not confined to marketing. It is embedded in leadership behaviour. When leaders act in alignment with stated values, they reinforce the story. When they do not, credibility erodes.

Sustainable businesses recognise that culture is not declared; it is demonstrated.

Why hospitality offers such a useful lens

Hospitality exists to bring people together. Its success depends on human connection, not just operational efficiency. When it works well, it becomes a place where people feel at ease, understood and willing to return.

Many sectors have distanced themselves from this human focus in pursuit of scale. Yet the challenges now facing organisations — disengagement, mistrust and burnout — suggest that efficiency alone is insufficient.

Hospitality reminds us that sustainability is relational. Businesses that endure are those that respect the human experience, both internally and externally.

In an increasingly automated and competitive world, loyalty is not earned through novelty or volume, but through consistency, care and clarity.

Sustainable businesses are not built by doing more. They are built by doing what matters, repeatedly and with intention. Hospitality, quietly and convincingly, continues to demonstrate how this can be achieved.

About the Author

Cassie Davison is an award-winning hospitality industry veteran, author of Stand Out Hospitality and business coach. With over thirty years in the industry, Cassie has built, grown, and led award-winning pubs, cafés, fine-dining restaurants, and even festivals from the ground up.

The post What Founders and Business Owners Can Learn From the Hospitality Sector to Create a Sustainable Business appeared first on The European Business Review.

We spend so much time thinking about what we’re going to say in meetings – the perfect opening, the smartest retort, the most strategic message – that we forget something crucial: Before you’ve even opened your mouth, your body has told the room a story.

Princeton psychologists Janine Willis and Alexander Todorov found that people form first impressions in just 100 milliseconds from looking at a face – judging traits like trustworthiness, competence, and likability. Those snap judgments come entirely from non-verbal cues.  So if there’s contrast between what you say and how you say it, people will believe your body, not your words. I learnt this the hard way at Facebook’s headquarters.

I had flown from Melbourne to Silicon Valley on a comedic mission: find Mark Zuckerberg and try to make him laugh with my five best minutes of Facebook jokes. To stand out, I showed up in a giant Like button costume. Spoiler alert: I didn’t find Mark. But after standing outside the iconic sign waving at everyone who drove in, I came close to getting a tour of their HQ. I signed in at reception, and security handed me a pass. Then the communications guy looked me straight in the eye and asked: “Were you outside Mark’s house last night?” My heart slammed against my ribs. Adrenaline flooded my system. My neck burned red-hot. My voice shot up three octaves as I stammered, “No… I have no idea where he lives.” I was telling the truth. But I was still escorted off the property. Why? Because every part of my body was screaming “I’m guilty” – even though I wasn’t.

The silent story your body tells

Your body speaks louder than words: how you enter a room, how you carry yourself, your posture, eye contact, facial expressions, shoulder position… When any of these contradict your message, your message won’t land. At Facebook’s HQ, my words said “innocent” but my body said “guilty”. And my body was louder. Here are five ways your body might be undermining your credibility without you realising it.

1. The contradiction of saying one thing but showing another

Saying “I’m open to feedback” while your arms are firmly crossed. Pitching an uplifting proposal while your shoulders hunch inwards. Claiming you’re fully engaged while your feet point towards the door. When your body contradicts your words, people instantly feel the disconnect.

2. Fidgeting – the giveaway in plain sight

Picking at your nails. Fiddling with your watch. Tapping your pen. Twisting your rings. If your hands are restless, attention shifts to the fidgeting. These small movements scream insecurity and detract from your message.

3. Avoiding eye contact

Looking down at your notes… Scanning the room with a vacant gaze… Glancing past the people you need to connect with. Eye contact is the foundation of trust. Without it, even the strongest message feels distant.

4. The monotone trap

Your voice is one of your most powerful tools. When you vary your tone, pitch, and pacing, it changes how your message is heard. When you speak with warmth or passion, people feel it. But when your vocal expression doesn’t match your message, the disconnect is instant. If you say “I’m really excited about this idea” with the enthusiasm of reading a shopping list, nobody believes you.

5. Zero physical expression

We have more than 40 muscles in our face and endless ways to bring our words to life through expressions and gestures. When you share something positive while your face and body stay completely still, your lack of energy creates a lack of interest. That kills credibility fast.

The power of alignment

At Facebook, I wasn’t grounded. I was telling the truth, but my body was telling another story entirely. In high-stakes moments, that disconnect reads as discomfort at best … and deception at worst. The answer is complete congruence. When your words, body, facial expressions, tone, energy and intention all align, people can feel it. And they believe it.

Own your presence

• Centre yourself before a meeting. Take a moment to ground yourself so you can be fully present.
• Use your hands. Gestures bring ideas to life.
• Make meaningful eye contact. Don’t scan the room; truly connect.
• Don’t just stare at your slides. Always talk to people, not the screen.
• Match your energy to your message. Monotone excitement… isn’t excitement.
• Slow down. It helps you manage your nerves and gives your words more weight and power.

I’ll never know whether I could have met Mark Zuckerberg if my body had matched my words. But I learnt that your body always tells a story. Credibility isn’t just about having the right words; it’s about embodying them. When every part of you aligns, people don’t question whether to trust you. They just do.

About the Author

Jordana Borensztajn is a keynote speaker, TEDx presenter and communications expert. As an MC, comedian, trainer and performer, she helps individuals and teams unlock their communication power through joy, laughter and learning. The Little Book of Influence is her fourth book.

The post 5 Body Language Mistakes that Kill Your Credibility appeared first on The European Business Review.

It’s lovely to have you with us, Ms. Chopra! In a recent article, you describe “misalignment” as the hidden leadership blind spot in AI transformation. Why do you believe this issue persists even among highly sophisticated organizations?

In many sophisticated organizations, readiness is often assumed rather than examined. Leaders invest heavily in strategy, governance, and technology, and understandably expect those elements to carry transformation forward.

What AI does, however, is change how decisions are actually made. It introduces probabilistic outputs, shared accountability, and new trust dynamics. If leadership teams haven’t aligned on how judgment, escalation, and ownership work in that environment, misalignment persists quietly—even when everything else appears mature.

Having worked with Fortune 100 boards and investors for years, what are the earliest signals leaders should look for that indicate AI initiatives are drifting into what you’ve called “execution theater”?

The earliest signals are usually behavioral. Decision cycles slow instead of accelerating. Teams seek additional validation even when insights are strong. Leaders override outputs informally, without shared reflection.

Execution theater tends to emerge when organizations focus on visible progress rather than confidence in their decisions. It’s not a failure of intent—it’s a signal that trust and clarity haven’t yet caught up with capability.

As a founder building an AI-native investment intelligence platform, how has your perspective on alignment shifted from theory to operational necessity?

My perspective shifted through repetition, not theory. After years in financial services and then building AlphaU as an end-to-end decision infrastructure across sourcing, evaluation, risk, and investment decisioning, I kept encountering the same pattern. We built systems that worked, yet at the highest-stakes moments, hesitation still surfaced. Teams paused, re-ran analysis, or quietly overrode insights—not because the data was wrong, but because trust and ownership were uneven.

That experience changed how I think about alignment. It stopped being a leadership concept and became a decision requirement. When leaders aren’t ready to trust and act on the intelligence in front of them, even strong systems slow down. That’s when readiness became measurable for me—not philosophically, but operationally.

From an investor’s perspective, how does misalignment within leadership teams translate into tangible value erosion?

It usually appears first in decision velocity. Opportunities are delayed, priorities shift frequently, and execution becomes cautious rather than decisive. Over time, this creates governance drag and weakens confidence both inside the organization and in the market.

What makes this difficult is that these signals don’t immediately show up in financials. They surface as momentum loss. By the time they’re obvious, recovery is much harder.

Your book, Move First, Align Fast, also introduces measurable frameworks for Human–AI Alignment. Why was it important to turn trust and readiness, often seen as “soft” factors, into hard metrics?

Because leadership can’t govern what it can’t see. Boards and senior leaders are rightly focused on safety, ethics, and compliance—but those controls don’t tell you whether an organization is actually ready to act on AI. Readiness gaps show up elsewhere: when trust fractures under pressure, when decision velocity slows even as insight improves, or when adoption is mandated rather than earned. Without visibility into those conditions, leaders end up reacting late to problems that were predictable early.

Measurement doesn’t reduce leadership to numbers; it creates a shared operating language. Used well, readiness metrics function as both a compass and an early warning system—helping leaders stay oriented as AI reshapes decision-making, while surfacing alignment, accountability, and execution risks early, so they can be addressed deliberately before they harden into systemic failure.

AI doesn’t replace judgment. It requires leaders to be more disciplined and consistent in how judgment is applied.

Many leaders assume better models or more data will solve adoption challenges. Based on your experience, what actually needs to change in leadership behavior when AI enters the decision-making loop?

Leaders must shift from “deploying AI” to “governing decisions.” That includes clarifying decision rights, setting norms around overrides, and being explicit about how uncertainty is handled without losing credibility.

AI doesn’t replace judgment. It requires leaders to be more disciplined and consistent in how judgment is applied.

In boardrooms today, what questions about AI risk and value creation are still not being asked but should be?          

Most boards are focused on whether AI is compliant, secure, and ethically deployed. Those are necessary questions, but they address safety, not scale.

The questions that are often missing are about readiness:

• Are leadership systems prepared to absorb AI into real decision-making?
• Where do decision rights become unclear?
• Where does accountability diffuse?
• Where does speed slow despite better insight?

Boards should also be asking how AI changes operating rhythms and incentives. Are leaders aligned on when human judgment overrides AI, and who owns the outcome? Are we measuring whether AI is improving decision velocity, not just output quality? Without these questions, organizations risk doing the right things technically while failing to capture value operationally.

Women leaders are often expected to bridge gaps, build consensus, and manage complexity. How do you see women uniquely positioned to lead in this era of Human–AI collaboration?

Many women leaders have learned to operate with alignment, clarity, and shared accountability because they’ve had to. Those expectations were constraints for a long time.

In the AI era, they’ve become preparation. AI rewards leaders who can integrate perspectives, communicate uncertainty without losing credibility, and maintain momentum without relying on positional authority.

What’s changing is not women, but the leadership environment itself. AI is selecting for these capabilities, regardless of title or background

Looking ahead, what gives you the most optimism about the future of leadership as AI becomes a permanent presence at the decision table?

AI is forcing a reset. It makes misalignment visible and rewards coherence. That creates an opportunity to strengthen leadership systems rather than compensate for them.

I’m optimistic because it encourages a more deliberate, more human form of leadership—one grounded in trust, clarity, and responsibility.

Success, to me, is when humans remain confident decision-makers in an AI-rich world.

And lastly, what does success look like to you?

Success, to me, is when humans remain confident decision-makers in an AI-rich world. When leaders understand how to work with AI—trusting it where it’s strong, questioning it where it’s not, and staying accountable for outcomes—rather than feeling displaced or overridden by it.

At a broader level, success is building leadership systems where the next generation can move fast without fear, use AI without losing judgment, and make complex decisions without eroding trust. When Human–AI collaboration strengthens human agency instead of weakening it, AI stops being intimidating and becomes enabling. That’s when progress becomes sustainable.

Executive Profile

Deepika Chopra is the Founder and CEO of AlphaU and the author of Move First, Align Fast (Wiley 2025) . She works with leaders, boards, and investors on leadership readiness and decision confidence in complex, high-stakes environments, focusing on how Human–AI collaboration can be governed to strengthen judgment, accountability, and execution at scale.

Get the book: Wiley or Amazon

The post Deepika Chopra on Leadership Alignment and Decision-Making in the AI Era appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Melinda McCormack

Human transformation, not digital transformation, will define the next decade of leadership. The leaders who will shape the future will not be the ones who apply the most pressure, but those who understand humans and their emotions, leading with clarity and compassion.

For decades, leadership has been defined by strategy, structure and productivity. We mastered digital transformation, systems design and operational excellence. Yet while organisations became more technologically advanced, the human system within them did not receive the same scientific attention. We can analyse markets with remarkable precision, but we still struggle to understand the emotional landscape of our workforce.
This ga, the science of human understanding, is now reshaping what effective leadership means.

While organisations have invested heavily in technology, process and digital skills, the emotional infrastructure that supports human performance has received far less attention. The irony is that the workforce is more educated, diverse and interconnected than at any time in history. Yet, workplaces still rely on outdated assumptions about how people think and behave. The science of human understanding offers leaders a more accurate and predictive lens through which to drive performance and shape culture.

The most significant barrier to performance today is not capability. It is the human understanding gap: the distance between what organisations expect from people and what the human brain and nervous system require to operate at their best. The leaders who close that gap will shape the next era of business.

Where Performance Actually Breaks Down

Performance problems are still routinely interpreted as issues of motivation, skill or resistance to change. Neuroscience tells a different story. Emotion determines behaviour long before logic does. The brain continuously evaluates whether an environment feels safe or threatening. When people feel seen, valued and secure, the cognitive functions responsible for innovation, collaboration and problem solving become fully available. When they do not, energy shifts to self-protection and performance narrows.

Perfectionism, withdrawal, overwork and disengagement are not personal shortcomings. They are protective biological responses. Strategy does not collapse because people are incapable. It collapses because people do not feel safe enough to support it.

Until leaders understand humans as profoundly as they know systems, they will continue to treat emotional problems with operational solutions — and the results will remain inconsistent. 

Empathy and the Neuroscience of Human Performance

Empathy remains underestimated, not because it is unimportant but because it has been misunderstood. Empathy is not a social preference; science shows it is a strategic capability that provides visibility into the emotional drivers behind behaviour. When leaders understand how people feel and why, they unlock the factors that influence performance and decision-making.

The brain’s ongoing assessment of psychological safety determines whether individuals contribute or retreat. When people feel understood and valued, clarity, creative thinking, and confidence return. Trust becomes the performance multiplier that reduces friction, accelerates alignment and strengthens resilience.

Empathy in practice is the capacity to recognise the emotional context, understand what is driving behaviour and respond in a way that brings safety and clarity. When this happens consistently, people move from caution to contribution and from resistance to adaptability. The emotional environment becomes a performance system rather than a constraint.

The Next Era of Leadership

Technology is evolving at an incredible pace, but the true key to gaining a competitive edge lies not just in advanced systems but in visionary leaders who grasp the importance of the human element. While skills and products can be replicated, the emotions that drive individuals are unique. When people feel secure, even the most ambitious strategies can thrive. Remember, empathy is not just a nice-to-have; it’s a vital ingredient that fuels high performance and transforms workplaces into thriving hubs of creativity and collaboration.

Boards and executive teams need to redefine leadership effectiveness. Delivery and decision-making matter, but they are no longer sufficient on their own. The real test is whether leaders can shape the emotional conditions that unlock contribution at scale. Human-first leadership is not a sentiment-driven trend. It is a strategic shift driven by data on burnout, disengagement and psychological safety. Organisations that treat trust, belonging and emotional clarity as performance variables rather than employee preferences are beginning to see faster decision-making, sharper accountability and stronger innovation. Emotional readiness will become as critical to strategy adoption as operational and financial readiness.

Human transformation, not digital transformation, will define the next decade of leadership. The leaders who will shape the future will not be the ones who apply the most pressure, but those who understand humans and their emotions, leading with clarity and compassion. This is the balance that unlocks contribution at scale: the heart that feels with the mind that leads. When leaders create the emotional conditions that convert capability into contribution, organisations will accelerate.

About the Author

Melinda McCormack is a leadership futurist, change strategist, and author of PULSE: Empathy Is Your Edge. A sought-after speaker and contributor on human-first leadership, she helps executives and boards build empathy as a competitive advantage through her programs and 1:1 executive coaching at Impact with Empathy. For more information visit: www.melindamccormack.com

The post Why Empathy is Becoming the Most Scalable Performance Technology in Business appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Anthony Moss

If your business feels stuck or if you are ready to leap forward with more confidence the first step is awareness. Identify your current stage. Be honest about what is holding you back. And then choose the support structure that will help you grow into the CEO your business needs next.

In the life of every business, growth rarely follows a straight line. From the spark of an idea to becoming a recognised industry leader, businesses evolve through distinct stages. So too must the CEOs who lead them. Understanding where your business sits in this cycle and what your next evolution demands of you is critical. Equally important is knowing how to fast track your way forward. For many private and founder-led companies, the right support structure can make all the difference between plateauing and propelling to the next level. Let us explore the four key stages of growth and what it takes to move through them with clarity and momentum.

Stage One: The Early Stage

This is the startup phase. The business is young, energy is high, and every new client or sale is a win. Founders wear many hats, making rapid decisions and doing whatever it takes to get the venture off the ground. Leadership in this stage is hands-on and directive. Agility and instinct dominate as systems are still forming. The risk here is burnout, misalignment, or running out of resources before the business model proves itself. The opportunity lies in shaping culture early and validating the value proposition with speed and focus. The CEO’s role is to inspire belief and build the first version of the team.

Stage Two: Fighting for Position

This is the most difficult and dangerous stage. The business is no longer a start-up, but it is not yet breaking through to consistent performance. Results are erratic, resources feel stretched, and frustration builds. Leaders constantly react instead of shaping the future. Here many businesses remain stuck, trapped in a whirlpool of complexity. Some team members are growing; others are out of their depth. Strategy is responding to the latest opportunity. Profit and cash flow become unpredictable.

For the CEO, this is the make-or-break phase. The need for strategic clarity, team capability and external perspective becomes urgent. Yet, the path forward is often clouded by legacy thinking and internal noise. This is where the CEO must evolve from problem-solver to performance enabler. The fast-track here involves letting go of control, inviting in experienced external thinking, and building the strategic muscle to navigate bigger decisions with more confidence.

Stage Three: Transforming Organisation

This is where the shift begins. The business has found product-market fit. The right team is forming. Strategy is clear, and execution improves. There is a sense of flow and alignment. The business is learning from its successes and failures, not just surviving them. The CEO’s role shifts again. No longer directing every move, they focus on creating an environment where the organisation can learn, adapt and deliver consistently. Culture becomes a lever, not a lag.

At this stage, an effective CEO is building systems that sustain performance and expanding the business’s thinking beyond immediate delivery. The company starts to shape its industry identity and build external partnerships that matter. The fast-track from here comes from targeted expertise. Whether entering new markets, acquiring talent, or developing IP, the right strategic advisory structure provides both challenge and reassurance. It helps the CEO see around corners and avoid the comfort zone.

Stage Four: Industry Leader

This is the stage most aspire to but few reach. The organisation is not just delivering results, it is respected, resilient, and forward-looking. It sets benchmarks others follow -it is knowns as the ‘go to’ in its domain. There is a culture of renewal, not just repetition. Here, the CEO becomes a shaper of industry narratives. They must balance present performance with future reinvention. Internal capability is high, but external thinking remains critical to avoid stagnation. Decisions become less about fixing and more about scaling and transforming.

At this stage, leadership becomes nuanced. The CEO is now a curator of excellence, choosing the right opportunities, guiding purpose, and ensuring the organisation reinvents before it is forced to. Fast-tracking from here is about staying uncomfortable. It means inviting new perspectives, embracing radical ideas, and ensuring the business remains agile even at scale. The smartest CEOs are those who remain curious and refuse to coast.

The CEO’s Challenge: Capability Before Comfort

A business can only grow as fast as its leadership capability. Yet many CEOs unknowingly become the constraint. They either do not have access to the thinking they need or have built an environment where challenge is avoided. One of the fastest ways to move from one stage to the next is to build a structure that brings in targeted expertise, holds up a mirror, and creates strategic pressure for growth without taking away control.

Whether through a high-performing executive team, a trusted circle of mentors or a structured Advisory Board, having your own A-team of people vested in your success is a game changer. It provides a multiplier effect on your efforts, helps lift your leadership focus from operational to strategic, and accelerates the organisation’s learning. It reminds you that you need not do it alone.

If your business feels stuck or if you are ready to leap forward with more confidence the first step is awareness. Identify your current stage. Be honest about what is holding you back. And then choose the support structure that will help you grow into the CEO your business needs next.Because real transformation does not come from doing more. It comes from thinking differently and surrounding yourself with those who challenge, clarify and believe in what is possible.

About the Author

Anthony Moss is a strategy and governance specialist, and author of The CEO Game Changer: How An Advisory Board Can Unleash Your Business Potential. With over 30 years of commercial experience and a track record of working with over 180 companies, Anthony helps private company CEOs break through growth barriers with clarity, confidence, and capability. As Founder of Lead Your Industry, he partners with ambitious leaders to build high-impact Advisory Boards that fast-track results. Learn more at www.leadyourindustry.com or connect with Anthony on LinkedIn at linkedin.com/in/anthonymoss.

The post The Four Stages of a CEO’s Growth (And How to Fast Track it!) appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Ben Hughes

This article explores what business leaders can learn from musicians, highlighting resilience, improvisation, purpose-driven work, and deep listening. Drawing parallels between the stage and the boardroom, it shows how musicians’ adaptability, creativity, and connection-building offer a powerful model for modern leadership, organisational culture, and navigating uncertainty with agility and authenticity.

Welcome to the music business: the toughest industry on earth. It is a machine that devours dreams and demands resilience. Any business leader understands a daily grind, but the climb within music is unlike any other. The myth suggests only the ultra-famous have made it, but the truth is far broader: countless people in creative, technical, and management roles within the music business have built and sustained thriving careers behind the spotlight.

What strikes me most as an entrepreneur and musician is how the music business mirrors countless other industries yet with one defining difference. It has its own pressures, products, timelines, and workflows to master and overcome, but most people in it, especially artists, are willing to delay reward for the sake of long-term purpose. They will work for years on uncertain returns because the art itself is worth it.

Imagine telling your employees: Do this job, and you may or may not get paid in ten years. No one would agree, yet that is the reality for most artists. They commit to the long game. The question is why are they willing to do this, how are they capable of it, and what can companies learn from that mindset?

The traditional model of punishment and reward is familiar, but musicians are not driven by simple incentives. In a time of financial insecurity, promising a distant payoff is no longer ethical or effective for business owners. To inspire genuine commitment, companies must weave motivation and purpose into the fabric of their culture.

Any serious musician is a master of hustling, finding opportunities, negotiating pay, creating products, and building audiences. If workers in other fields displayed the same energy, many would become millionaires. But money is rarely the main goal for artists: art is! Hustling is simply how musicians keep their art alive.

That hustle involves building relationships, honing craft, mastering technology and social media, assembling teams, pitching, budgeting, and performing often all in the same week. Few professions require juggling so many moving parts.

I live this every day through my work as the artist Hughzy and as director of CherryUp Projects. Navigating the music business demands constant adaptation, resourcefulness, and communication. Every artist I manage has taught me that success lies in balancing instinct with structure. While boardrooms rely on systems and strategy, musicians rely on rhythm and improvisation. Those who can blend both keep creativity, connection, and courage alive in a world that evolves faster than any plan.

Modern musicians, whether on stage, in studios, or across digital platforms, are masters of resilience, communication, and reinvention, skills today’s leaders need most. No performance ever goes exactly to plan. A string snaps, a sound fails, an audience shifts mood. Musicians do not stop; they adapt. Improvisation is not mere flair; it is a disciplined skill built on listening and response.

In contrast, the corporate world often clings to fixed strategies and five-year plans. Structure has its place, but rigidity can be fatal in uncertain markets. A musician’s mindset offers an alternative: planning matters, but so does flow, the ability to move lightly and adapt in real time.

Take jazz musicians. They perform within frameworks yet move freely within them. The best leaders do the same, setting clear parameters while allowing flexibility. Meetings that encourage improvisation, where ideas evolve dynamically, often spark innovation that spreadsheets cannot.

Musicians spend years learning to listen to tone, timing, and tension. Great players know when to lead, when to support, and when silence carries more power than words. Through my own projects, I see how success always depends on relationships, how you listen, respond, and show up. A career in music is ultimately a career in human connection.

Taylor Swift proved this when she built a global following to billionaire status by turning connection into community. Ed Sheeran and Yungblud did the same. They are not just creating fans, they are creating families.

In business, listening is often undervalued. Too many meetings become performances of authority rather than collaboration. Yet the best music is built on mutual awareness, with each part adjusting to the others in real time. In a band, everyone contributes. In contrast, the boardroom can reward dominance over teamwork. Musicians remind us that collaboration is not weakness, it is creative strength.

Leaders can learn from great session players, those who blend seamlessly to make others sound better. In music, ego kills groove; in business, it kills culture. Most musicians do not create for money alone. They create to express, connect, and contribute something meaningful. That sense of purpose becomes their compass through uncertainty.

Businesses, too, must show purpose, not as marketing but as moral infrastructure. Employees and consumers want to know why an organisation exists beyond profit. Musicians teach that authenticity cannot be faked. Audiences know when a performance lacks heart; stakeholders sense the same. When a company’s purpose resonates like a melody, clear, consistent, and human, it inspires loyalty that no advertising can buy.

Every musician knows failure: missed gigs, poor reviews, empty rooms. Yet they continue. Resilience comes from understanding that progress is not linear and rejection is not final. In business, resilience is equally vital. Musicians treat setbacks as creative data, signals to adapt and try again. Leaders who adopt that mindset turn failure into growth.

A musician’s greatest power lies in presence, the ability to be fully engaged in the moment. When performing live, distractions disappear. There is only the song, the sound, and the shared experience. In leadership, presence is equally magnetic. Too often, executives hide behind slides or jargon, losing the human connection that makes communication memorable.

Performance, like leadership, is not about perfection, it is about honesty. A wrong note does not ruin a concert if the emotion is real. Likewise, leaders who communicate with sincerity, even imperfectly, build trust more effectively than those who deliver flawless but empty words.

The boardroom does not need to become a stage, but it could learn from one. When strategy feels stuck or teams feel disconnected, remember the lessons of music: tune in, find your rhythm, and adapt to both consonance and dissonance. When everyone listens, adapts, and performs in harmony, business, like music, becomes something far greater than the sum of its parts.

About the Author

Ben Hughes (Hughzy) is a Liverpool musician whose global career spans performing with major artists, developing talent, and extensive studio work. Ben has taught at UK universities, spoken at TEDx and major festivals. He is the author of Make Music Your Business: The Musician’s Blueprint for a Thriving Career, founder of Cherry Up Projects, and host of the podcast More in the Moni. 

The post What Can the Boardroom Learn from the Musician? appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Thomas Keil and Marianna Zangrillo

Most boards still treat evaluations as a compliance exercise rather than a catalyst for change and improvement. In this article, we explore how chairs and directors can convert board evaluation into behavioral shifts, strategic focus, and measurable progress, turning 2026 into a year of meaningful, lasting governance change.  

Every autumn, as board calendars crowd with year-end work, a familiar ritual unfolds across Europe. Feedback forms circulate during board meetings, directors fill-in lengthy questionnaires, consultants conduct interviews and assemble topics and themes, and finally chairs prepare for conversations that feel necessary yet often rather futile. The annual board evaluation, meant to sharpen performance, often ends with a polished report, a neat list of recommendations, and a quiet sense of closure. Yet, if you speak candidly with chairs and directors they will admit a in convenient truth: most evaluations change very little. A director we interviewed put it bluntly: “The board evaluation process is broken in many companies.” 

The real work of governance happens not in the diagnosis but in the decisions that follow. 

In conversations with chairs over the past year, a recurring theme emerges: boards are increasingly aware of the widening gap between insight and action. They often know what needs to change, whether it is the dynamics within the room, the clarity of roles, the courage to challenge, or the discipline of follow-through, but find it difficult to convert that awareness into new patterns of behavior once regular business resumes. The gravitational pull of the agenda, with its financial updates, regulatory matters, and urgent operational topics, quietly pushes development to the margins. 

Boards that succeed in turning evaluations into lasting change tend to share three characteristics, none of which require radical restructuring, and all of which demand a willingness to see evaluations not as an administrative requirement but as part of a broader cultural shift. 

First, effective boards treat the evaluation as a strategic instrument rather than a compliance exercise. These boards make time not only to review what the assessment has uncovered but also to reflect on why certain patterns persist and what they signal about the board’s readiness for the organization’s next phase of growth or transformation. Chairs who adopt this mindset often frame the evaluation as the trigger of strategic renewal: an opportunity to connect governance to strategy and long-term value creation. Instead of asking, “What did the evaluation say?” they ask, “What does this mean for the way we lead the organization in the future?” This subtle shift in framing opens space for more constructive conversations about the board’s role, especially in organizations undergoing digital transformation, sustainability transitions, leadership changes, or international expansion in a world of geopolitical upheaval. 

Second, boards that translate evaluations into action focus deliberately on behaviors, not just structures. Governance often appears, at least on paper, to be an exercise in frameworks, charters, processes, and decision rights. But the real drivers of effectiveness are human: the way directors listen, the way dissent is expressed, the level of trust between executives and non-executives, and even the emotional undercurrents that influence how decisions are made when information is incomplete, or stakes are high. 

Evaluations that lead to real change tend to surface these deeper issues. They reveal, for instance, whether challenge is constructive or performative, whether psychological safety is present or merely assumed, and whether the board’s discussions are shaped more by habit than by genuine inquiry. When directors see behavioral insights not as criticism but as opportunities to strengthen collective performance, the evaluation becomes a turning point rather than a procedural requirement. 

Third, boards that embed change adopt a rhythm of follow-through that is as disciplined as the evaluation itself. While that may sound like an overkill, many boards still emerge from evaluations with a list of ten or twelve recommendations, far too many to implement with any seriousness. The boards that improve consistently choose three priorities, assign ownership, and revisit progress every quarter with the same attentiveness they apply to financial oversight. Then, in each quarter, they can focus on a single theme, such as decision-making quality, information flows, committee effectiveness, or succession planning, allowing the board to build new habits gradually rather than attempt wholesale transformation in a single burst of enthusiasm. 

This quarterly check-in approach also has an important psychological effect on the whole organization. It signals that the board is not simply reviewing itself out of obligation but that it is committed to continuous improvement. Over time, this commitment builds a culture where feedback becomes normal, where directors feel more accountable to one another and the organization, and where governance becomes dynamic rather than static. 

Of course, none of this is possible without leadership, and for that, the chair’s role is pivotal, not as an enforcer but as a steward of the board’s evolution. Chairs who successfully guide their boards through change tend to do five things consistently: they create an atmosphere in which honest dialogue is possible, they model openness to feedback, they protect time in the agenda for reflection, they link evaluation outcomes to the board’s long-term purpose and they remind directors, gently but consistently, that governance excellence is not a destination but a practice. 

As organizations prepare for the uncertainties of the next year, economic volatility, geopolitical change, technological disruption, the boards that will thrive are those willing to approach evaluation as the beginning of a developmental journey rather than an end-of-year checkbox exercise. They will recognize that governance transformation does not start because a report recommends it but because people choose to embrace change in the way they collaborate, challenge, reflect, and lead. 

If boards embrace this mindset, 2026 can genuinely become the year they shift from simply noting what needs to change to actually doing something about it. Evaluations will stop being documents that gather dust and instead become useful windows into how the board really works. Governance, in turn, will feel less like a set of rules and more like something alive: a way of working that adapts, learns, and supports the organization through moments that require steadiness and honesty. 

About the Authors

Thomas Keil and Marianna Zangrillo are strategy and leadership experts, advising CEOs, chairs, and boards globally through The Next Advisors. They are co-authors of The Next CEO, The Next Leadership Team and new book The Next Board: Delivering Value Today while Making the Board Fit for Tomorrow, out now, published by Routledge  

The post Making 2026 the Year of Real Governance Change: Turning Board Evaluations into Action appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Dr Helmut Schuster and Dr David Oxley

AI headlines warn of a job apocalypse, but history tells a different story. We love to catastrophize ahead of every major shift, yet we always adapt…eventually. Some will leap ahead, others will lag, but those outcomes are shaped by our choices…not some all-power AI… at least for now!

“AI will eliminate 300 million jobs by 2030.” “A million London jobs will vanish.” “Seven in ten workers fear replacement.” The headlines are bold, breathless, and brilliant at generating clicks. But behind the sensationalism lies a familiar, and very human emotional response: catastrophizing.

We love to imagine the worst. Remember Y2K, the Armageddon that wasn’t? Governments spent an estimated $300 billion preparing for an impending technological apocalypse; planes grounded, power grids dark, chaos imminent. When the clocks finally struck midnight, nothing happened. Not even a flicker of a fridge light.

Or take the panic over barcode scanners in the 1980s. They were supposedly going to destroy supermarket jobs. Yet the number of cashiers actually increased, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the only real change was that customers eventually ended up doing some bagging themselves.

We’ve Been Here Before

Every major technological revolution follows the same arc. First, we inflate expectations beyond reason. Then, we panic. And finally, we adapt so successfully that we forget we were ever afraid.

This moment is no different. The Gartner Hype Cycle offers a useful lens for understanding what is happening. Right now, AI sits proudly at the “Peak of Inflated Expectations,” where predictions are wild, and timescales impossibly short.

History shows us that technology doesn’t destroy employment at a global scale. In 1990, the world’s labour force was approximately 2.28 billion. By 2020, it had grown to about 3.81 billion (World Bank). The internet dramatically reshaped employment in the 1990s and 2000s, but it did not eliminate work. It created new sectors, new skills, and entirely new kinds of economic value.

Above all, humans have a track record of adapting. We complain loudly during transitions, then, often reluctantly, embrace the new normal. From the steam engine to the spreadsheet, progress has always been met with initial resistance. Yet each time, we end up with more prosperity and more opportunity than before.

So, Who Should Actually Be Worried?

The common belief is that automation first replaces manual labour. In the AI era, the opposite may be true. This technology is exceptionally good at cognitive repetition and information processing. That means some of the first jobs to feel pressure will be those that sit in the professional middle.

Middle management, mid/back office, administrative coordinators, customer support roles, sales operations teams, and non-specialist software developers are all facing the first wave of disruption. According to McKinsey, approximately 30 percent of tasks within existing jobs are likely to be automated by 2030. Importantly, it is tasks, not entire professions, that are being automated. But when most of a role’s tasks can be handled by machines, the profession must adapt or die.

When Predictions Go Too Far

Of course, with any emergent technology, there are wild predictions that stretch credibility. Recent reports by Sky News, claim that interpreters, mathematicians, and even historians could soon be obsolete. Historians? Will we genuinely entrust the entire preservation and interpretation of culture to systems trained on the internet? Even the most sophisticated language model cannot yet replace expert judgement, contextual nuance, or ethics.

The lesson here is that predictions are often exaggerated. In 1899, the U.S. Patent Office Commissioner apocryphally declared that “everything that can be invented has been invented.” Edison’s early investors believed the phonograph was commercially useless. We consistently underestimate the resilience of human demand and overestimate the speed of technological takeover.

Professions Will Evolve, Not Evaporate

Journalism will continue to thrive where truth, critique, and investigation matter. Accountants and lawyers will still interpret ambiguous regulation and calm anxious clients. Bankers, traders, and financial advisors will still manage trust. Customer service will still require empathy, escalation handling, and accountability.

Even in software development, one of AI’s strongest use cases, the landscape is changing, not disappearing. GitHub reports that 92 percent of U.S. developers already use AI tools. The most valuable engineers will be those who can guide machines, correct them, and translate business needs into reliable systems. AI may write the first draft of code, but humans still define what matters and what good looks like.

The Real Divide: Adapt or Fall Behind

The disruptive line is not between humans and machines. It is between humans who embrace AI and humans who resist it. Those who integrate AI into their skillset will become faster, more accurate and more effective. Those who choose not to adopt it will be overtaken.

There will be turbulence. The professional middle layers will feel the squeeze first. But as with every technological evolution, new opportunities will emerge. We saw it with Microsoft Office in the 1990s: the early adopters accelerated their careers. Those who refused to learn? They were quietly replaced by those who did.

The winning formula is not machine without human or human without machine. The most successful workers will be those who combine human intuition with computational power. These “cyborgs,” half human, half machine, will outperform both humans alone and AI alone.

Don’t Fear the Change — Shape It

The choice ahead is simple. We can hide and hope disruption passes us by. Or we can embrace our role as adaptable, evolving, inventive contributors to the next phase of work. AI is not arriving one day in the future; it is here today.

The biggest risk is not being replaced by a robot but being replaced by a human who uses one. If history teaches us anything, it is that the workforce does not shrink when technology advances. It shifts. It reinvents. And those who step forward early will have the most to gain.

The AI revolution is not a job apocalypse. It is an invitation to level up.

About the Authors

Dr Helmut Schuster and Dr David Oxley are leading career experts and authors of Artificial Death of a Career: How to stay relevant and thrive in the age of AI (Practical Inspiration Publishing).

The post AI Panic: Middle Workers are Most at Risk – Yet We’ll Adapt appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Dr. Emilia Bunea

“Lead by your values” sounds simple. But what if your top value is power? Surprisingly, research shows that both power-driven and altruistic leaders can inspire others if they connect personal motives to shared meaning. Effective leadership isn’t moral perfection; it’s the skill of aligning and sometimes reshaping values to create collective direction.

There is no shortage of advice on values. “Lead according to your values” urge leadership best sellers, gurus, and coffee mugs. But what if my top values fall squarely in the “self-enhancement” category – prioritizing personal success and happiness over noble altruism? Are some values inherently better than others? And if so, shouldn’t I push myself to lead by those “superior” ones instead?

Let’s take a cool-headed, research-informed look at the value conundrum.

Psychologists use Schwartz’s model of Basic Human Values to organize values along two main dimensions:

1. Self-enhancement vs. self-transcendence.When values center on the individual, they highlight power, achievement, and success; when they emphasize the collective, they stress altruism, care, and the universal good.

2. Openness to change vs. conservation.Valuing novelty, experimentation, and flexibility contrasts with upholding tradition, fulfilling social obligations, and favoring conformity.

One might assume that leaders who prioritize self-enhancement or conformity would struggle to inspire others. In fact, research shows that leaders from all four value orientations can fire up their followers. Whether you value achievement and success, love and care, tradition and conformity, or novelty and flexibility, you can still be a transformational leader. The “lead by your values” mantra may have a point.

Yet several important caveats apply.

• A Minimum of Self-Transcendence

A leader who is a heartless bastard and proud of it will find it hard to inspire. It’s fine to value power and achievement first, but some concern for others is necessary. There is also a virtuous feedback loop: many leaders start out with a strong power motivation, but as they feel responsibility for and attachment to their teams, their self-transcendence values grow.

“But,” you might say, “what about all those self-absorbed leaders, in public life as well as in organizations, who still command a loyal following?” Ask their followers to describe them: “selfish” or “narcissistic” is unlikely to top the list. And if those words appear, they will usually be qualified with “appears so, but is actually good-hearted.”

• Strong Moral Absolutes

Unlike personal values, moral absolutes tend to be universal. They often take the form of “Thou shalt nots,” and tend to condemn wronging others. Violating them triggers strong moral emotions, either other-condemning (anger, disgust, contempt), or self-conscious (shame or guilt). Humans around the world share a basic moral code, and there are indications that some of it is programmed in our brains from birth. For example, we all possess a sense of fairness and we experience negative emotions, from an early age, when we see it violated. Research shows that having – and communicating – a strong moral code is an essential part of inspiring leadership.

• Communicating Alignment

Inspiring leaders interpret and frame their own and their followers’ values to highlight shared ground. Those selfish, power-hungry, yet admired leaders you were wondering about earlier? They succeed because they also communicate values that followers care deeply about – often those they perceive as threatened.

When Your Team’s Values Clash with Yours

But what if the values of your new team or organization don’t align with your own? Perhaps you’ve joined a group that prizes competition over collaboration (self-enhancement), or one that overemphasizes harmony and helping others (self-transcendence) at the expense of results. In such cases, one of your most important leadership tasks is guiding a shift in the team’s values.

Three Keys to Shifting Team Values

• Only Preach What You Can Practice

For instance, you might correctly conclude that your team needs to collaborate more. But if you yourself are naturally highly competitive and individualistic, simply talking about how there is no “I” in “team” is unlikely to inspire anyone to set aside their individual agendas and work for the collective good. If you really believe collaboration is good, shift your own values towards it, and demonstrate it yourself first.

• Pay Up

A leader’s values gain credibility when the leader sacrifices something to uphold them. Will collaborating with another team in your company hurt your own performance metrics but benefit the organization overall? If you want your team to value collaboration, they must see you taking it seriously – even when it costs you.

• Respect Tradition

Paradoxically, leaders are most successful in driving change when they concomitantly emphasize respect for continuity and tradition. Franklin Roosevelt achieved acceptance of his “New Deal”, an unprecedented change in the government’s role, by tying it to traditional American values. In the mid-20^th century, Pope John XXIII led some of the most sweeping changes in Catholic practices in centuries, while framing them as rooted in the Church’s longstanding mission. Even when changes are dramatic, finding what should continue and thrive helps reassure followers that their core identity remains intact. This is a terribly difficult task in these tough times, when you cannot even promise your team that they will have a job tomorrow. But it is especially now that your role is crucial in helping the group find the enduring story that unites and defines them.

In times of uncertainty, leaders who turn values from abstract words into daily choices create a source of trust and direction that no crisis can erode.

About the Author

Dr. Emilia Bunea, CFA, is a leadership scholar and educator. She previously served as CEO of Metlife Romania and CFO of ING Insurance Europe. Her research on corporate leadership was published earlier in 2025. Emilia’s latest endeavor is as an author.  Her upcoming book, Leadership for the CFO, is available November 14, 2025 from Routledge.

The post Beyond Virtue: How Effective Leaders Work With, and Change Values appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Hans-Petter (”HP”) Dalen

AI literacy has become a critical leadership competency, enabling executives to assess risks, opportunities, and ethical implications of AI adoption. Closing the skills gap ensures responsible integration, drives productivity, and aligns AI with business strategy. Leaders who cultivate literacy can future-proof operations, foster innovation, and guide organisations through transformative change.

Today, nearly every organisation is experimenting with artificial intelligence (AI) — yet how many have mastered its effective use?

Recent research shows that 60% of leaders report an AI literacy skills gap within their organisations,  underscoring the urgent need for education. This gap is not just technical — it is strategic. AI literacy has become a core leadership competency, enabling executives to make informed, ethical, and effective decisions in an AI-driven world.

What AI literacy really means for business leaders

AI literacy is about more than understanding what AI can do. It’s the ability to question outputs, recognise limitations, and assess implications for strategy, operations, and culture. Importantly, it is everyone’s responsibility, not just that of executives. Those who work with processes day-to-day often have the clearest insight into where AI can create value. Empowering them to identify opportunities and shape AI solutions ensures adoption is practical, effective, and fully aligned with organisational goals.

But it exists on a continuum. At one end lies awareness – recognising AI’s capacity to automate tasks or generate insights. At the other is deep expertise – overseeing responsible implementation, assessing ethical risks, and anticipating organisational impact. Most leaders sit somewhere in between: intrigued by AI’s potential but unsure how to deploy it effectively.

This gap matters. Without a foundational understanding of how AI can and should be used, blind spots emerge, leading to inefficiencies, missed opportunities, or reputational risks. Embedding AI successfully requires literacy at the top: leaders who can identify where it adds value, align it to business goals, and ensure it is applied responsibly.

AI’s impact on workforce strategy

AI is already reshaping how organisations operate, from automating routine tasks to transforming recruitment and employee engagement. Two-thirds of the 3500 senior leaders across Europe and the Middle East who responded to a recent IBM and Censuswide survey reported already seeing significant productivity gains from AI at their organisations.

Leaders who lack AI literacy risk mismanaging this opportunity — creating resistance, talent gaps, or misaligned strategies. For example, generative AI and workplace assistants can enhance productivity and employee experience, yet misinterpretation or oversight can introduce bias, privacy, or governance risks. Understanding these dynamics is essential for leaders to integrate AI responsibly through clear guardrails and human oversight.

Bridging the literacy gap

To harness AI’s full potential, leaders must align learning and development initiatives with business objectives. Building a culture of AI literacy — where curiosity, critical thinking, and ethical awareness are encouraged — ensures that AI is viewed as both a competitive advantage and a responsibility.

AI-literate leaders know when to automate, when to apply human judgment, and how to evaluate the return on investment. They understand how AI can enhance productivity, predict outcomes, or improve the employee and customer experience — without losing sight of the human factor.

Without this understanding, AI adoption often remains superficial, and leaders will struggle to capture tangible metrics which show its true value and impact on operations. To deliver lasting results, organisations need systemic integration — embedding AI intelligently into strategy, operations, and talent management.

IBM as Client Zero: Embedding AI literacy from within

At IBM, we treat AI literacy as a leadership and cultural priority through our Client Zero philosophy — becoming the first user of our AI products before they reach the market. This hands-on experience helps leaders understand how AI works in practice, its limitations, and the ethical considerations involved.

Initiatives such as the watsonx Challenge, which trained nearly 170,000 employees to design AI agents, and the AskHR agent, which supercharged our HR chatbot to handle 11.5 million interactions in 2024, have strengthened AI literacy across the workforce. Leaders and employees alike report greater confidence in applying AI responsibly and making informed decisions about adoption and oversight.

By testing internally, we can also reduce privacy, accountability, and governance risks – while ensuring leaders gain practical knowledge to guide the organisation effectively.

The leadership imperative

Closing the AI literacy gap is no longer optional – it’s a leadership imperative. Executives who can critically assess AI’s risks, rewards, and real-world implications will shape the next era of business transformation.

As AI continues to redefine work, commerce, and society, the depth of a company’s leadership literacy will directly determine its ability to innovate, build trust, and future proof its operations.

Leaders who commit to continuous learning and ethical integration will not only unlock AI’s full potential but also guide their organisations responsibly through one of the most profound technological shifts of our time.

About the Author

Hans-Petter (”HP”) Dalen, is IBM’s Business Executive for AI in EMEA. He has 25 years of experience in IBM and has for the past many years discussed AI Use Cases and how to operationalize them across many industries.

The post AI Literacy: A Leadership Imperative appeared first on The European Business Review.

As founder and CEO of ZeroBounce, Liviu Tanase has built one of the most trusted names in email deliverability. Under his leadership, the company has evolved from a single email validation service into a full suite of deliverability tools. Most recently, it launched ZeroBounce ONE, a unified platform that simplifies how businesses improve their email performance. 

Speaking with The European Business Review, Tanase shares how his approach to leadership has evolved, what AI means for the future of communication, and why the human touch will always remain at the core of technology.

You’ve built several successful ventures. What personal qualities or habits have been most critical in helping you sustain momentum as an entrepreneur?

Two traits have really helped me sustain momentum: I’m stubborn, and I have a lot of energy for what I do. I wouldn’t call being a workaholic a quality, but I doubt I would have gone very far without persistence and drive.

When it comes to habits, I make a point of staying in tune with what’s happening in the world, especially in tech. The best products anticipate a need before the market even realizes it. So I stay curious, follow new innovations closely, and think ahead about what challenges people might face next. Of course, I’m not always right, but it’s a great exercise in imagination and entrepreneurship.

How has your perspective on leadership changed from your early days as a founder to leading ZeroBounce today?

My perspective on leadership has changed completely. When I started my first business, all I could think about was the product and how to deliver the best experience to our customers. I didn’t think much about building a team culture or developing people. New people would join us and we’d throw them in the water and let them learn to swim.

Investing in your team is tremendous, because happy employees create happy customers. And happy customers always come back.

Today, I lead two companies, and ZeroBounce alone has more than 100 employees. While I’m still very focused on the quality of our products, I’ve learned that leadership is about much more than that. I ask myself: What kind of culture are we building? Do our employees have a sense of purpose? How can we make their experience better?

Investing in your team is tremendous, because happy employees create happy customers. And happy customers always come back.

Looking back at your career, what has been the most unexpected lesson about building technology companies that you wish you had known earlier?

The most unexpected lesson was to trust my instincts more. You can never be 100% sure your product is going to work, and that uncertainty never goes away completely.

When you’re first starting out, you’re even more unsure. Of course, you rely on market data and initial customer feedback. But mostly, you operate based on gut instinct and a belief that what you’re building will serve its purpose and be of service to people.

When I first ran the concept of ZeroBounce to some of my business partners, they thought it was a terrible idea. A niche B2B software-as-a-service (SaaS) company? They thought the chances of making it successful were slim. But I had another email marketing company and could sense how the market was going to shift.

Email validation is now a must-have for all mass senders – and I’m glad I trusted my instinct and went on to build ZeroBounce. It’s now the go-to email deliverability platform for half a million customers around the world. We’re beyond grateful they choose us every day. 

ZeroBounce has become a recognized name in email deliverability. What leadership strategies have helped you keep the company competitive in such a fast-changing industry?

I could sum it up this way: we never rest on our laurels. That mindset runs through everything we do – from product development to the way we treat every one of our customers.

We started as an email validation company, and that foundation helped us become a recognized name in the industry. But we’ve continued to add new services to the platform because we listened to our customers’ feedback through the years. From email scoring to deliverability tools and an email finder, all these services have shaped ZeroBounce into the company we are today.

Many of the features are actually a direct result of customer feedback. We read and respond to every message, social media post, and review – and share all suggestions with our product team. In a real sense, we’ve built ZeroBounce together with our customers.

Another key strategy has been investing in education from day one. Our marketing and PR team launched with a blog, and since then, our content library has grown tremendously. We now publish original studies, reports, guides, and host webinars that draw large audiences. When you think and act like a publisher, people begin to see you as a trusted source of knowledge. That’s something we’ll always strive for. 

What is the larger mission that drives ZeroBounce, and how do you keep your team aligned with that vision as you grow?

Our mission has always been to help people use email safely and more effectively. That hasn’t changed since day one. It’s the foundation for everything we do, from how we build our tools to how we support our customers.

Every team member learns about this mission from the start, but more importantly, they see it in action every day. It comes through in our decisions, our priorities, and the way we treat our customers. That shared sense of purpose makes it easy for everyone to move in the same direction.

We also talk about our mission often – whether in company-wide meetings or in everyday chats – because it’s not a one-time effort. It’s something you keep alive through constant communication and example.

Your team recently launched ZeroBounce ONE. How does this new platform represent the next chapter for your company and reflect the way you approach innovation?

ZeroBounce ONE is tied to our mission of helping companies succeed with their email communication. We thought of a way we could serve them even better by making our entire platform easier to access and use.

ZeroBounce ONE is a subscription that brings together our email deliverability suite, plus 25,000 monthly email validation credits, at a price lower than what the credits alone used to cost.

Previously, 25,000 validation credits cost $175 per month. Now, for just $99 per month (or $79 per month billed annually), ZeroBounce ONE customers gain not only the same 25,000 credits, but all our other tools – Email Warmup, DMARC Monitor, Blacklist Monitor, Inbox Placement Testing, Email Server Testing, and Email Finder – at no additional cost.

Marketers kept telling us deliverability tools felt expensive and fragmented as they had to use separate vendors. ZeroBounce ONE unifies everything into one subscription so businesses don’t have to choose between validation and deliverability. They can get both.

At a time when many SaaS subscriptions are soaring in price, ZeroBounce ONE defies the trend and sets a new standard for value. We’ve made enterprise-grade deliverability tools affordable and accessible to every marketer. And we’re giving them more than ever – for less than they were already paying. 

AI is changing the way companies think about personalization, automation, and data quality. From your perspective, what role will AI play in shaping the future of email deliverability?

AI can analyze massive data sets, detect patterns almost instantly, and help companies make smarter decisions, like predicting which emails might bounce or when to send for the best results.

Our team sees AI as an incredible support system for humans, not a replacement. The human side – strategy, empathy, understanding what makes communication meaningful – still matters just as much. I think the companies that thrive will be the ones who use AI to amplify human expertise, not replace it. 

Beyond deliverability, how do you see AI transforming the broader communications ecosystem, and what opportunities or risks does it create for companies like yours?

AI is changing how we create, personalize, and deliver messages across every channel, from email to chat to social. Companies can now reach people faster and with more relevance than ever before.

But that also comes with responsibility. The easier it becomes to automate communication, the greater the risk of losing authenticity. If every message starts to sound the same, people will tune out. That’s why the real opportunity is in using AI to enhance human connection, not replace it.

For companies like ours, AI opens incredible possibilities to make communication safer, smarter, and more effective. At the same time, it challenges us to stay ethical, transparent, and focused on the human being at the other end of every message.

Fast-forward to the next decade. What do you hope ZeroBounce will stand for in the industry, and how do you envision email’s place in the future of global communication?

A decade from now, I hope ZeroBounce continues to stand for trust, innovation, and reliability. We’ve built our reputation on accuracy and security, and I want us to keep pushing those standards higher while helping businesses communicate more effectively.

If ZeroBounce can keep that human element alive, and help companies reach people in a genuine way while protecting their data and reputation, then we’ll have done our job well.

Email will keep evolving, but it will always be at the heart of digital communication. What will change is how intelligent it becomes: more automated, more personalized, and better integrated with other channels. AI and automation will make it smarter, but the human intention behind every message will still matter most.

If ZeroBounce can keep that human element alive, and help companies reach people in a genuine way while protecting their data and reputation, then we’ll have done our job well.

Want to get more out of your email marketing?

Even the best campaigns fail when emails don’t reach the inbox. With an average of 28% of email lists going bad each year, data accuracy is everything. ZeroBounce helps you keep your lists clean and your messages deliverable. If your email marketing could use a boost, sign up for ZeroBounce. You can check your first 100 emails for free, with 99.6% accuracy guaranteed.

Executive Profile

Liviu Tanase is a serial entrepreneur and telecommunications executive with more than 17 years of experience. He founded five companies and has participated in three exits creating quadruple-digit returns. In 2015, he founded email validation and deliverability company ZeroBounce. ZeroBounce helps businesses maintain email data quality and offers several deliverability tools to ensure the successful delivery of emails to the inbox. Liviu Tanase is also an email deliverability thought leader. He’s a contributor to Inc., Entrepreneur, and countless other industry publications.

The post ZeroBounce CEO Liviu Tanase on Leadership, AI, and the Future of Email appeared first on The European Business Review.

Robotics continues to evolve as one of the most transformative forces in modern industry. In this interview, Romain Moulin shares his lifelong passion for machines and his perspective on how innovation, leadership, and automation are shaping the future. He highlights the importance of curiosity, technical excellence, and strategic vision in driving sustainable progress.

What first sparked your interest in robotics, and how has that passion evolved throughout your career? 

I’ve been fascinated by machines for as long as I can remember. As a child, I spent hours building with LEGO Technic, and growing up near a factory only deepened that curiosity. When I was 14, I watched the French Robotics Cup on E=M6 and thought, “One day, I’m going to do that.” Every year after that, I’d stay up late on the night it aired, imagining the robot I would have built. At 20, I finally competed, and that same passion has stayed with me ever since. Even today, I still love designing new mechanisms – just last night, I modelled a robotic finger in Onshape to improve how our system grabs bins. 

Having worked in both technical and leadership roles, how do you balance engineering expertise with the demands of leading people and organisations? 

In my role as CEO, I’ve found it’s really a 50–50 balance. My strong technical background is both a strength and a potential weakness. If you lean entirely to one side, it doesn’t work: you either end up with a company that’s poorly managed operationally, or one led by a CFO who doesn’t fully grasp how the product should resonate with the market. In the end, a technology company’s success depends on aligning what’s technically possible with what the market truly needs, and every leader in the organisation has to understand that. 

In your experience, what qualities are most important for leaders in the robotics sector to cultivate in order to drive sustainable innovation?

Curiosity is key. The robotics sector is evolving at an incredibly rapid pace, from advances in AI and perception to new materials and manufacturing methods. Leaders need to constantly look beyond their own organisation and stay engaged with the broader ecosystem. It is about keeping a ‘Day 1 mindset,’ as Jeff Bezos says: never assume the work is done and always question how things could be improved.

Leaders need to constantly look beyond their own organisation and stay engaged with the broader ecosystem.

Strong technical acumen is just as critical. In robotics, every innovation sits at the intersection of hardware, software and logistics, and understanding those connections is what allows leaders to make the right decisions. Sustainable innovation comes from leaders who can combine deep engineering insight with strategic vision, ensuring that technological progress translates into real-world, practical, scalable solutions. 

How do you view the current state of robotics in Europe, and what forces are shaping its development?

Automation has deep roots in Europe, especially in Germany and Austria, who have long excelled in the field. Today, as robotics increasingly relies on software, data, and mathematics, France has a real opportunity to play a larger role in this new phase of automation. 

However, we still face challenges in building a stronger industrial ecosystem, particularly when it comes to suppliers. At the same time, competition from China is evolving, with manufacturers expanding their presence through broader product portfolios and increased global reach. The key for Europe will be to leverage its engineering excellence while developing a more agile and connected industrial network that can compete on both innovation and scale. 

What lessons from your career stand out when it comes to managing growth in industries where technology moves faster than regulation and adoption? 

In our industry, regulation and adoption are keeping pace with technological progress. Within warehouses, regulation remains pragmatic and supportive, which gives us the freedom to innovate and design systems exactly as we envision them. And on the adoption side, the response has been excellent.

This is why growth in robotics is ultimately about discipline: delivering innovation at a pace the market can absorb, while keeping quality, reliability and consistency at the core. 

The real challenge is not regulatory or societal resistance, but execution – by scaling technology reliably and ensuring every customer benefits from the same level of performance. This is why growth in robotics is ultimately about discipline: delivering innovation at a pace the market can absorb, while keeping quality, reliability and consistency at the core. 

An example of this is the next generation Skypod, which builds on the success of the original system by delivering higher performance, increased storage density, and advanced software capabilities. These improvements enable seamless fleet management, reduced downtime, and allow customers to conveniently scale operations with greater efficiency.

As automation and robotics become more widespread, what do you see as the implications for the future of work and workforce skills?

Low-skilled labour in warehouses will continue to decline, but in reality, these are jobs that many people no longer want to do, given their physically demanding, repetitive, and often high-risk nature. At the same time, automation is creating new opportunities for skilled roles, particularly in maintenance, system operations, and engineering. 

Education and training will be essential to bridge that transition. Without strong investment in technical education, we risk facing a significant shortage of maintenance technicians and engineers. The future of work in logistics will depend on how effectively we prepare people for these higher-value, technology-driven roles. 

Looking ahead, how do you imagine robotics transforming supply chains and industries globally over the next decade?

Warehouses will become fully automated, but not with humanoid robots: the future of logistics is about efficiency, not imitation. We will see increasingly intelligent and adaptive systems, like the Skypod, that boost throughput and maximise storage density, enabling warehouses to handle greater volumes within the same footprint.

Automation will extend beyond the warehouse as well, connecting production, transportation, and fulfilment into a continuous, data-driven supply chain. The coming years will be defined by how well companies integrate robotics into the broader flow of goods, creating resilient networks that are faster and more flexible.

Executive Profile 

Romain Moulin is the CEO of Exotec, a company he co-founded with Renaud Heitz in 2015. As a former robotics architect and technical engineer at GE and BA Système, Romain spent 10+ years immersed in deep technology systems before he shifted his attention to solving the challenge of retail warehouse automation. He was born and raised in France and graduated from a top French engineering university, SUPAERO. 

The post How Robotics Innovation Is Transforming Global Warehousing and Supply Chain Efficiency appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Dr Paul Vanderbroeck

More than two millennia after his death, Julius Caesar remains one of history’s most compelling case studies in leadership. Thus, in this article, leadership scholar Dr Paul Vanderbroeck outlines six lessons drawn from both Caesar’s successes and failures, offering powerful and applicable insights for leaders navigating today’s complex business world.

“Caesar’s career shows that leadership is not only about strategy or results – it’s about balance between vision and empathy, control and collaboration.”

More than two millennia after his death, Julius Caesar remains one of history’s most compelling case studies in leadership. His rise from ambitious young politician to ruler of Rome reveals timeless lessons about influence, reputation, and human behaviour inside large, competitive systems. He’s the only leader whose name became the title of the highest political office: Caesar in Latin, Kaiser in German, and Czar in Russian. His leadership principles continue to resonate in today’s complex business world, offering valuable insights for leaders of all levels.

But Caesar’s legacy is a paradox: brilliant yet imperfect. His career is both a blueprint for success and a stark warning of how success can come to an abrupt and tragic end. It serves as a cautionary tale, reminding leaders of the potential dangers that can accompany power and success.

Below are three lessons from Caesar’s successes – and three from his failures – that offer powerful insights for leaders navigating today’s organisations.

1. Build and Live Your Leadership Brand

Long before the term “personal brand” entered the corporate lexicon, Caesar mastered it. In a Republic obsessed with reputation, he understood that results alone were not enough; leaders also needed a clear identity.

His brand rested on three enduring values: clemency, service to the people, and good governance through transparency. He famously pardoned defeated enemies, rewarded loyal followers with opportunities, and published Senate records to make the government more accountable.

For modern executives, Caesar’s life offers a clear lesson: define your leadership brand early and live it consistently. A few authentic, visible values can create the trust and continuity that transform a competent manager into a respected leader.

Values matter only when they are paired with delivery. Caesar’s brand thrived because he matched his words with tangible outcomes – from land reforms to veterans’ welfare. Consistency between principle and performance remains the gold standard of leadership credibility.

2. The Power of Your Narrative

Caesar didn’t wait for others to tell his story – he wrote it himself. His “Commentaries on the Gallic War” were more than battlefield dispatches; they were carefully crafted narratives that presented him as a decisive commander who gave credit where credit was due.

He also mastered symbolic communication: turning public funerals, games, and monuments into stages for his message. When he restored the neglected statues of his uncle Marius, he wasn’t just honouring family – he was signalling his political lineage and legitimacy.

In today’s world of short attention spans and constant noise, the same principle applies. Leaders who fail to communicate are quickly forgotten. Strategic communication – clear, confident, and consistent – is the key to transforming competence into influence.

3. Build Alliances with Balance

Before his dictatorship, Caesar created one of history’s earliest coalitions: the “First Triumvirate”, an alliance with Pompey and Crassus. Each brought distinct assets – military force, wealth, and political skill – and together they achieved what none could alone.

The secret was mutual benefit and balance. For seven years, the alliance worked because no one partner dominated the others. It collapsed only after Crassus had fallen in battle, when the equilibrium broke and rivalry filled the void.

Modern leaders often face a similar challenge. Partnerships – between departments, companies, or even CEOs and boards – thrive on balance and shared interests. When one side takes too much power or fails to communicate, collaboration gives way to conflict. Caesar’s success shows that great alliances are built not on trust alone, but on structure and mutual accountability.

4. Beware of Biased Feedback

Caesar’s eventual downfall began not with betrayal but with insufficient feedback. As his power grew, his inner circle became less willing to challenge him. Advisors filtered information to protect their own positions, shaping a reality that suited their interests. Caesar himself did little to invite feedback.

When conflict loomed with Pompey, Caesar relied on intermediaries rather than confronting his old ally directly. A single honest conversation might have averted Caesar from crossing the Rubicon into civil war.

Hierarchies breed echo chambers. Without deliberate systems for honest feedback – peer reviews, reverse mentoring, or “red teams” that challenge assumptions – leaders risk steering in the dark.

Strong leaders don’t just tolerate dissent; they institutionalise it. Caesar, for all his intellect, did not.

5. Strengths Can Become Weaknesses

What propelled Caesar to the top eventually doomed him. His decisiveness, organisational mastery, and drive for control – the qualities of a great leader – became destructive when Rome no longer needed a conqueror but a stabiliser.

Once in power, Caesar, impatient for getting things done, continued to lead in a top-down way: issuing reforms in quick succession, mistaking silence for buy-in, and frustrating influential stakeholders. His ability to act swiftly, once his defining strength, turned into an inability to slow down and listen.

Many executives suffer the same fate. The competencies that ensure early career success – expertise, precision, and assertiveness – often become liabilities at the top. Senior leadership demands a pivot from doing to enabling, from being the smartest person in the room to creating a room where others can think.

Caesar never made that shift. His leadership model remained rooted in command-and-control, even as the context demanded consensus and empathy.

6. Mastering the Intangible is the Hardest Skill

Caesar’s most significant flaw was his lack of emotional intelligence. Despite his famed clemency, he repeatedly misread the emotions of those around him. In Gaul and Spain, he was blindsided by uprisings while he believed that peace had been established. Later, he failed to sense resentment among Roman senators whose influence he had curtailed.

On the Ides of March, 44 BC, Caesar entered the Senate unguarded, unaware that his colleagues were plotting to kill him. It wasn’t arrogance that doomed him – it was emotional blindness.

Modern leaders ignore emotional undercurrents at their peril. Empathy, humility, and the ability to “read the room” are not soft skills; they are strategic assets – power without empathy isolates. Influence without trust invites rebellion – whether from employees, investors, or the public.

As Caesar learned too late, careers end when leaders stop listening.

The Timeless Equation of Leadership

Julius Caesar’s successes reveal the power of clear values, strategic communication, and balanced partnerships. His failures warn of isolation, overreliance on personal strength, and the fatal absence of emotional intelligence.

For today’s leaders, the equation remains unchanged:

• Define who you are before others do it for you.
• Create space for truth, even when it’s uncomfortable.
• And remember that trust – not fear – is the foundation of lasting power.

About the Author

Dr Paul Vanderbroeck is a Swiss-Dutch historian, leadership scholar, and executive coach. He is the author of Lead Like Julius Caesar. Timeless Leadership Lessons From History’s Most Influential Leader (2025), Leadership Strategies for Women (Springer, 2014), and The International Career Couple Handbook (Springtime Books, 2021). With over two decades of experience advising senior leaders across sectors, Paul bridges the gap between ancient insight and modern leadership practice.

The post What Leaders Can Learn from Caesar’s Successes and Failures appeared first on The European Business Review.

In an era saturated with information, Vazgen Gevorkyan argues that true leadership is defined not by access to data, but by the cultivation of wisdom. Drawing from his diverse experience in infrastructure, banking, and hospitality, he explores how uncertainty, lifelong learning, and moral clarity shape effective, entrepreneurial, and resilient leadership today.

When information is everywhere, Vazgen Gevorkyan makes a very persuasive case that the leader’s currency is not information, but wisdom.

His work – in infrastructure, banking, and hotels – is representative of a focus on the application of knowledge through prudent judgement.

Gevorkyan asserts, “We have never had as much information at our fingertips; however, access cannot necessarily be translated into knowledge.”

He asserts that the paramount competence when dealing with the educated individual is the ability to filter, evaluate, and judiciously utilize information.

Learning Outside of Textbooks

Gevorkyan indicates that, on occasion, the best information comes from the least likely places.

He argues that his childhood, full of folk stories, made him no more impressionable than his university degree, asserting, “Education takes place in classrooms and ‘in the wild’ – from the environments and experiences that made us.”

It was the hunger for deeper knowledge and not the desire for honors that motivated him towards the goal of a Ph.D. He says that his dissertation work on resource-conservation management perhaps seemed too unorthodox. But it had a lasting significance for his subsequent work on the discipline.

Gevorkyan suggests that the endeavor into higher education is beyond superficial statements. It essentially means the development of one’s knowledge in order to make informed decisions in everyday contexts.

Embracing Uncertainty

While our time often urges one towards entrenched careers, Gevorkyan celebrates uncertainty. He acknowledges that at the age of 25, he found himself uncertain about his future professional directions, treating uncertainty as a vital force leading towards self-development.

“Doubt leads people to pursue inquiry, to throw themselves into the acquisition of knowledge, and into the refusal to be bound by a narrow definition of success.”

His rich experience in hospitality has taught him that “interpreting the mood or implicit expectation of a guest can also be a form of education.”

He says that dealing with problems in real-time is something that no book could ever prepare one enough to handle.

The Entrepreneurial Spirit

Gevorkyan sets a clear barrier between the fields of corporate business and entrepreneurship. While corporate methods show individuals how to manage risk within predetermined limits, “entrepreneurship accepts risk and tolerates freedom.” He observes that, as much as the two have their own merit, one should be mindful about the differences between the two.

He advocates that the greatest leadership transcends charisma, saying that one must demonstrate discipline, determination, and accountability.

“It is about empowering others, being clear headed under difficult conditions, and owning up when things go wrong.”

And finally, Gevorkyan asserts that the true measure of success is beyond commercial. “I foster curiosity, decency as founding values, and sustainable systems. Those are the things I try to instill when I mentor new startup founders.”

He asserts that, in the context of the information age, an individual’s worth is exclusively dictated by their decision-making ability, rather than by their achievements.

“Genuine education goes beyond the accomplishment of awards; it is the establishment of a lasting inclination towards lifelong learning, the expansion of one’s knowledge, and the prudent utilization of that intensive knowledge.”

About the Author

Vazgen Gevorkyan is a global entrepreneur recognized for transforming digital banking through mobile-first solutions and strategic global partnerships. With a career spanning banking, hospitality, infrastructure, and sustainability, he operates in Armenia and the U.S., mentoring entrepreneurs and leading initiatives that integrate economic development with meaningful social impact.

The post Why Wisdom is The New Map For Today’s Leadership appeared first on The European Business Review.

AI is no longer a technology problem but a leadership test. Here, Deepika Chopra highlights leadership readiness as a measurable capability built on trust, alignment, and decision velocity, arguing that it equips boards to move from compliance to conviction and govern AI transformation with speed, coherence, and accountability.

The Governance Illusion

Across industries, AI has moved from experimentation to expectation. Industry research suggests that while a significant majority of global enterprises report active AI programs, a much smaller percentage indicate they have realized measurable ROI. According to available McKinsey research, this performance gap appears to persist even as governance frameworks mature and ethics boards proliferate. The technology is performing as designed — it’s leadership alignment that isn’t.

The technology is performing as designed – it’s leadership alignment that isn’t.

For decades, executives have managed digital transformation as a series of technical or operational challenges. But AI is different. It requires an organization to do something leaders rarely measure: trust a system they do not fully control.

That leap from control to conviction has become the new frontier of competitive advantage. Governance ensures safety. Readiness determines scale.

The Illusion of Control

Most AI strategies over-index on control mechanisms: oversight boards, model audits, and risk reviews. These systems are essential but incomplete. They mitigate liability without generating momentum.

The deeper issue is what I call the control paradox — the more organizations try to control AI outputs, the less they invest in cultivating trust in its insights. In doing so, they slow adoption and erode value.

Across multiple financial institutions, internal reviews consistently showed that AI models outperformed human analysts by 15-20 per cent in forecasting accuracy. Yet in most cases, fewer than 35 per cent of managers used those forecasts in decision-making. The pattern was clear: lack of confidence, not capability.

AI didn’t fail. Conviction did.

From Culture to Conviction

For years, executives have cited “culture” as the obstacle to transformation. But culture is not the barrier; it’s the outcome of what leaders believe and reward. Conviction — the collective confidence to act on intelligence — is the real driver of readiness.

Leadership readiness measures the speed and strength of that conviction. It is not about technical preparedness, but about how rapidly belief in AI’s value diffuses across the organization.

High-readiness organizations exhibit three traits:

1. They build trust in the system.
2. They create alignment around purpose and boundaries.
3. They maintain decision velocity — the ability to move from insight to action without hesitation.

When these forces move together, AI scales. When they fracture, transformation decays into Execution Theater — visible activity without measurable progress.

“Culture describes what an organization believes. Conviction determines what it does with those beliefs when algorithms challenge human judgment.”

The Conviction Equation: Trust × Alignment × Decision Velocity

1. Trust: Confidence That Compounds

Trust is the foundation of readiness. It determines whether humans act on machine insight or override it out of habit. Industry research indicates that a substantial majority of data leaders report challenges in fully tracing AI decisions, with many organizations experiencing deployment delays due to explainability concerns.

This confidence isn’t static — it compounds through transparency, performance consistency, and shared learning. Research suggests that organizations reporting higher trust levels in AI systems tend to demonstrate significantly better adoption rates compared to those where trust metrics are not systematically tracked.

Building this foundation requires intentional cultivation, not assumption. It begins with how leaders communicate uncertainty — acknowledging what AI can and cannot do builds credibility faster than insisting on perfection.

2. Alignment: Coherence Across the System

Alignment ensures that every part of the organization interprets AI’s role in the same way. Misalignment is rarely malicious; it is systemic.

Executives may view AI as a growth driver. Risk teams often focus on exposure management, HR may emphasize workforce implications, and Operations typically consider implementation challenges. Each view is rational, but together they create drag.

Industry studies suggest that enterprises with clearer alignment on AI objectives tend to achieve faster implementation timelines and improved cross-department collaboration. Alignment, unlike consensus, is not agreement on everything; it is clarity on shared intent.

Leaders build it by articulating both vision and limits — defining what AI will and will not replace, who remains accountable, and how learning loops feed back into governance.

3. Decision Velocity: Turning Insight into Action

Velocity is the difference between insight and impact. It reflects how quickly organizations move from recommendation to responsible execution. Decision velocity is often mistaken for speed, but it’s really about confidence under uncertainty.

Fast organizations aren’t reckless; they are aligned. They know which decisions can be made autonomously, which need oversight, and which require ethical debate.

Research from MIT Sloan and BCG (2024) found that top-performing organizations make AI-driven decisions 2.5 times faster and with half the error rate of their peers — not because they automate more, but because they trust their process for escalation and review.

Fast organizations aren’t reckless; they are aligned. They know which decisions can be made autonomously, which need oversight, and which require ethical debate.

The Readiness Deficit

If trust, alignment, and decision velocity define readiness, most organizations are still in deficit. In a 2025 IAPP Governance Survey, 77 per cent of enterprises reported that they have governance structures in place but no metrics for organizational readiness. Only 14 per cent could quantify the impact of AI decisions on business outcomes.

This gap explains why AI maturity doesn’t translate to business performance. Companies measure what they can control, such as accuracy, compliance, uptime, etc., but not what actually drives adoption: belief, coherence, and confidence.

“Until readiness is tracked as systematically as revenue, the gap between AI ambition and execution will persist”

Governance Without Conviction

Across Europe, the EU AI Act, AI Pact, and ISO 42001 have redefined the global standard for responsible AI. These frameworks are essential — they protect citizens, ensure accountability, and set ethical floors.

But governance without conviction can paralyze progress. Compliance reduces risk; it doesn’t create value. Leadership readiness converts ethical frameworks into execution frameworks — embedding trust metrics, feedback loops, and learning systems into board oversight.

“Regulation creates guardrails. Readiness provides traction”

How Leaders Build Readiness Capital

Boards that move from compliance to readiness take three practical steps:

Add a Readiness Brief to the Board Pack

Alongside financial and risk metrics, include indicators of trust, alignment, and decision velocity.

Track decision cycle time, override rates, and sentiment data from cross-functional teams.

Create Alignment Rituals

Replace ad hoc updates with structured reflection sessions where leaders review AI decisions, errors, and lessons learned.

Consistency builds cultural predictability, and predictability builds trust.

Reward Conviction, Not Caution

Recognize teams that move responsibly but decisively — where ethical agility meets speed.
In readiness-driven cultures, conviction is treated as a measurable performance indicator.

Readiness in Practice: Composite Insights

*The following represents composite insights drawn from multiple organizations across different sectors to protect confidentiality while illustrating common patterns in AI readiness transformation.

Across financial services, healthcare, and manufacturing, a pattern emerges: organizations with strong technical AI performance but weak human confidence. In multiple observed cases, adoption rates among middle managers remained below optimal levels despite AI models showing measurably superior performance compared to human-only analysis.

The breakthrough came when leadership teams shifted focus from training campaigns to readiness measurement. Boards introduced conviction dashboards tracking trust metrics and decision velocity. Cross-sector “conviction reviews” became standard practice — structured sessions where teams examined which AI recommendations they overrode and the reasoning behind those decisions.

The observed results showed consistency across industries: Within 12-18 months, adoption rates demonstrated substantial increases. Trust metrics showed meaningful improvement. Efficiency gains varied significantly based on organization size and sector context.

Technology performance remained constant. Leadership alignment transformed everything.

From Compliance to Confidence

The World Economic Forum’s 2024 “Future of Jobs Report” lists “AI governance and risk management” as one of the fastest-growing skill sets for directors. Yet skill does not equal readiness.

When boards measure readiness as carefully as compliance, they gain a new form of governance capital: confidence.

True readiness is not just about having governance expertise, it’s about cultivating organizational conviction. When boards measure readiness as carefully as compliance, they gain a new form of governance capital: confidence.

“Confidence is contagious. It fuels adoption, accelerates learning, and transforms ethics from a constraint into a catalyst”

The Leadership Imperative

The next decade of digital leadership will not be defined by who adopts AI fastest, but by who aligns it best. The winners will be those who can translate responsible principles into decisive action —  organizations where technology scales at the speed of conviction.

Leadership readiness is no longer a soft capability; it’s a strategic differentiator.

“The technology is ready. The question is: are you?”

About the Author

Deepika Chopra is the founder and CEO of AlphaU AI and author of Move First, Align Fast (Wiley, 2025). Her frameworks equip boards and executives to measure trust, alignment, and decision velocity as predictors of AI performance. She previously held senior leadership roles at Citi, AIG, and Siemens, directing large-scale AI transformations.

References 

• McKinsey & Company (2024). “State of AI: Global Survey and Enterprise AI Adoption Trends”.

• Dataiku Research (2024). “AI Implementation and Trust Studies: Cross-Industry Analysis”.

• OneTrust Governance Research (2024). “AI Readiness and Organizational Alignment Studies”.

• International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) (2024). “AI Governance and Readiness Metrics Survey”.

• World Economic Forum (2024). “Future of Jobs Report: AI Skills and Leadership Capabilities”.

• McKinsey & Company (2024). “Digital Transformation and AI Strategy: Executive Leadership Research”.

• Deloitte (2024). “AI Governance Implementation: Global Enterprise Survey”.

The post Leading Through Alignment: Turning Organizational Readiness into a Boardroom Advantage appeared first on The European Business Review.

Our modern culture has become obsessed with comfort, convenience and quick fixes. If even a hint of challenge emerges – mentally, physically, emotionally – we often rush to eliminate it. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: comfort doesn’t prepare you for the inevitable challenges of life. Hardiness does. Here’s what you need to know.

Hardiness is more than just being tough or resilient. It’s a specific psychological construct representing a pattern of attitudes and skills that provides the courage and strategies to turn unexpected change and stressful circumstances from potential disasters into growth opportunities.

First identified by researchers Salvatore Maddi and Suzanne Kobasa through a groundbreaking 12-year study at Illinois Bell Telephone during massive industry disruption (and outlined in their 1984 book The Hardy Executive: Health Under Stress), hardiness has emerged as the key factor that distinguishes those who thrive under extreme stress from those who succumb to it.

While two-thirds of employees in Maddi and Kobasa’s study experienced significant health and performance deterioration during their workplace disruption, one-third not only maintained their health and performance, but also flourished.

What made the difference?

These resilient individuals demonstrated three interrelated attitudes that together constitute hardiness:

• Challenge: The view that change is normal and a challenge that presents opportunities for growth and learning, and the willingness to lean into challenges rather than shy away from them.
• Control: The belief that you can influence outcomes and your overall destiny through your efforts, rather than feeling powerless in the face of external forces.
• Commitment: A tendency to involve yourself deeply in whatever you’re doing with a genuine sense of purpose, rather than feeling detached or alienated from your life and work.

Hardiness tested in the crucible of war

No discussion of hardiness would be complete without examining the extraordinary case of Vice Admiral James Stockdale, whose experience as a prisoner of war in Vietnam represents perhaps the most profound real-world test of hardiness principles in modern times.

Stockdale was shot down over North Vietnam on 9 September, 1965. He spent the next seven and a half years in Hôa Lò Prison (sardonically nicknamed the ‘Hanoi Hilton’ by American POWs), including a mind-boggling four years in solitary confinement and two years in leg irons. He was also tortured 15 times.

What makes Stockdale’s story remarkable is not just that he survived, but also how he survived – by consciously applying the principles of Stoic philosophy he had studied before his capture.

Stockdale had learned about the Stoics from a philosophy lecturer during his time at university, where the American Navy had sent him to study a master’s degree in international relations to prepare him for senior roles. Stockdale was so impressed by the teachings of the Stoics that he brought a copy of the book The Enchiridion by Epictetus to war with him.

“I’m leaving the world of technology and entering the world of Epictetus”, Stockdale whispered to himself as he parachuted into enemy territory after his aircraft had been shot down early in the war. This wasn’t just a poetic thought; it was a profound psychological shift that would prove crucial to his survival.

The Stockdale paradox

In the prison, Stockdale put the principles of hardiness into action:

• Challenge: He viewed his imprisonment not just as suffering to endure, but also as a test of character with meaning and purpose. He saw himself as responsible for maintaining the honour of his fellow prisoners and upholding the military code of conduct.
• Control: He focused relentlessly on what he could control – his own responses, his leadership of other prisoners, his internal discipline – while accepting what he couldn’t control, such as his captivity and the torture.
• Commitment: He remained deeply engaged with his role as the senior officer among the prisoners, establishing a chain of command, creating the mission ‘To return with honour’, and developing a code of conduct that helped many prisoners maintain their integrity under extreme duress.

Stockdale later articulated what became known as the ‘Stockdale Paradox’, which embodies the essence of hardiness:

You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end – which you can never afford to lose – with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be.

This cognitive balancing act of maintaining unwavering faith while facing hard truths is precisely what hardiness research reveals about resilient individuals: they simultaneously accept the reality of their situation, while maintaining the belief that they can eventually overcome it.

About the Author

Dr Paul Taylor is a keynote speaker, podcast host and thought leader with post-graduate qualifications in psychology, exercise science, nutrition and neuroscience. Driven by the belief that we can grow from stress and live longer, healthier lives with the right habits, Dr Taylor helps individuals and teams unlock the power of psychophysiological hardiness to perform at their best. Visit https://www.paultaylor.biz/.

The post Why Hardiness is the Psychological Edge That Turns Stress into Growth appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Charlie Curson

Strategy is a mindset and skillset anyone can learn. Here, Charlie Curson, author of Be More Strategic, explores what strategy really is, helping individuals at every level think clearly, act intentionally, and focus on what truly matters. By thinking and acting strategically, anyone can lead, influence, and create lasting impact.

For many people, the word strategy still feels remote: the preserve of CEOs, consultants, and corporate boardrooms filled with slide decks and jargon. But in reality, done well, strategy isn’t an ivory-tower exercise. It’s a way of thinking and acting that can help anyone, in any role, at any level, to create greater clarity, confidence and impact in their career – and also in their broader lives.

What Strategy Actually Is

The problem starts with the word itself. Strategy is one of the most overused and misunderstood terms in business. We tend to confuse it with planning, and though complementary, the two couldn’t be more different.

Planning is about what happens next: a sequence of tasks and actions that often reduce anxiety (in the planner) and provide clarity and structure. Strategy, on the other hand, is about what matters most. It’s about making deliberate choices, defining direction, ruling things out, and connecting intentions to outcomes.

As I write in Be More Strategic, a strategy recognises your most critical challenges, leverages your strengths, and focuses your efforts and resources coherently. It’s about deciding where to play and how to win, not in the combative sense of defeating your competition, but in the human sense of aligning your decisions, time and energy around what really counts.

Once you see strategy through this lens, it stops being the domain of the few and becomes a vital skill for everyone in their careers, and also in daily life.

A Learnable Set of Skills, Mindsets and Behaviours

Being strategic isn’t an innate talent; it’s a learnable craft. Over two decades as a strategy consultant, facilitator and leadership coach, I’ve identified twelve key practices that define what I call “strategic mastery” – skills, mindsets and behaviours that anyone can hone and develop.

Strategic people think broadly, not narrowly. They:

• Remain curious, listen deeply, and challenge their own assumptions and preconceptions.
• Are comfortable with uncertainty, make decisions with incomplete information, and can hold multiple perspectives and paradoxes without becoming paralysed by them.
• Act decisively but reflect thoughtfully, aware that they need to commit to their decision, yet have the humility to accept their mistakes.
• Collaborate inclusively (which is far rarer than you might imagine), communicate persuasively, and influence effectively.

None of these traits require a title or corner office with all the perks. They require self-awareness, discipline, and the courage to slow down and think before reacting. As one of my clients said recently, “I realised I didn’t need a promotion to be more strategic, I just needed to change how I showed up, and do so consistently.”

A Day in the Life of a Strategist (at any level)

To bring this to life, allow me to introduce you to Billie. Billie isn’t a CEO; she’s a team lead in a busy organisation. But she thinks and acts – and leads – like a strategist every day.

Billie starts by paying attention – to her environment, to her people and their behaviours, to her own thoughts and feelings. She listens more than she talks. She asks questions. She deliberately invests time connecting the dots between what’s happening in her team with what’s happening across the wider organisation – and further afield. When challenges arise, she frames the issue clearly before seeking potential solutions. She invites diverse viewpoints, from less obvious sources, knowing that the best strategies are rarely born in isolation.

Billie doesn’t wait for senior leaders to set the direction. She creates clarity for her team and helps them align around shared goals, aided by her courage and competence to ‘challenge upwards’. Her influence grows naturally, not because of her job title, but because of how proactive she is in how she thinks and acts.

We all know a “Billie” and have the potential to become one ourselves. The essence of being strategic is not where you sit on the (dreaded) ‘org chart’, but how you engage with the world around you.

Strategy Is a Team Sport

The myth of the lone strategist – the brilliant Founder or CEO having a eureka moment – has done us all a disservice. In truth, great strategy is rarely a solo sport. It’s the product of diverse perspectives, open-minded discussion, and the courage to challenge assumptions together and recognise our blindspots and biases.

And, when people across an organisation learn to think and act strategically, the quality of conversation changes. The conversations that should happen, do happen. Meetings shift from defending positions to exploring possibilities. And teams stop firefighting and start focusing on what truly moves the needle.

Through this work, strategy becomes cultural – not a standalone, hard-to-understand-let-alone-apply document.

Bringing Strategy into Your Career and Life

So how do you start applying the strategic mastery practices in your own world?

Clarify your ambition. Ask yourself: Where do I want to play, and how do I want to win? Define success on your own terms.

Diagnose your challenges. Identify the biggest obstacles or patterns that hold you back or stand in your way.

Focus your energy. Strategy is as much about what you say no to as what you say yes to.

Stay curious. Listen, learn, and seek out different perspectives, especially the uncomfortable ones.

Reflect and adjust. Strategy is never fixed. It evolves as you do.

These steps work whether you’re leading a team, managing your career, or designing the life you want to live.

The Call to Action

Being strategic isn’t about hierarchy; it’s about humanity. It’s about thinking clearly in complexity, acting with intention, and learning continuously.

If you’ve ever been told to “be more strategic,” take it as an invitation, not a reprimand. The skills are available to everyone, not just the CEO and other senior leaders. In fact, when more people across an organisation, or within a community, begin to think and act strategically, that’s when real transformation happens.

Start with awareness. Practise curiosity. Make deliberate choices. Take action. In doing so, you’ll not only advance your career, but also build a more purposeful, fulfilling life, one decision at a time.

About the Author

Charlie Curson is a strategic advisor, accredited leadership coach and the author of Be More Strategic: 12 Essential Practices for the Life and Career You Want. He advises founders, leaders and teams on strategy, leadership and growth, and is an angel investor in early-stage businesses.

The post Why Strategy Isn’t Just for CEOs – and How to Implement It appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Deepika Chopra

In the global race to unlock AI’s transformational potential, most organizations have focused on technology acquisition rather than organizational alignment—creating a critical leadership and governance blind spot. While competitors deploy similar algorithms and infrastructure, true advantage lies in a company’s collective conviction to act on AI insights at scale. This article uncovers how the Alignment Gap—the divide between technical deployment and human adoption—quietly undermines billions in strategic investment, and presents a governance framework for converting alignment into a lasting source of competitive performance.

Every board has an AI strategy. Few have an aligned one. According to McKinsey’s 2025 State of AI, only 13% of enterprises achieve scaled impact from their AI investments. The other 87% aren’t failing from technical limitations — they’re drowning in organizational misalignment.

The Problem: When Strategy Hits Reality

The boardroom falls silent when the quarterly AI progress report lands on the table. The numbers tell a familiar story: millions invested, impressive pilot results, but enterprise adoption remains stubbornly low. The chief technology officer points to infrastructure readiness. The chief human resources officer cites change management programs. The chief operating officer highlights training completion rates. Yet none address the real barrier hiding in plain sight.

AI doesn’t slow organizations down. Misalignment does. While boards focus on technical capabilities and ethical frameworks, the silent killer of AI transformation lurks in the space between strategy and execution — what we call the Alignment Gap. This gap transforms billion-dollar strategies into what we term Execution Theater: impressive performances of progress that generate activity without impact.

The Alignment Gap represents the critical disconnect between AI deployment capability and organizational conviction to act on AI insights. It’s not about culture, change management, or technical readiness — concepts we understand very well. It’s about something more fundamental: the collective willingness to embrace algorithmic decision-making when it matters most.

“AI doesn’t slow organizations down. Misalignment does.”

Across industries and geographies, this readiness gap looks the same: technology leads, leadership follows.

Consider the paradox facing today’s leaders. Organizations invest billions in AI capabilities while simultaneously creating approval processes that neutralize AI’s speed advantage. They preach data-driven decision-making while defaulting to human judgment when AI recommendations challenge conventional wisdom. They celebrate AI innovation while maintaining organizational structures designed for pre-digital workflows.

“Technology is exponential; belief is linear. The gap between them is where AI strategies stall.”

Why Strategy Isn’t Enough

Most AI strategies focus on what we can implement: the models, the data, the infrastructure. But strategy without alignment is just expensive theater. The real test isn’t whether AI can analyze customer behavior or optimize supply chains — it’s whether the organization will consistently act on those insights when they challenge existing assumptions, processes, or power structures. This recognition positions Alignment as a ROI multiplier, the critical factor that determines whether AI investments generate transformational returns or become costly experiments.

“Strategy without alignment is just expensive theater”

A global financial services firm illustrates this perfectly. Their AI trading algorithms consistently outperformed human traders, yet adoption remained limited. The problem wasn’t technical — it was organizational. While the trading desk embraced AI recommendations, the compliance team resisted them, concerned about regulatory scrutiny. Risk management demanded additional validation layers that neutralized AI’s speed advantage. Each department interpreted the AI strategy through its own operational lens, creating a fragmented approach that diluted impact*.

*Case study details have been anonymized and generalized to protect client confidentiality. Examples represent composite insights from multiple organizational assessments.

How Misalignment Shows Up

The Alignment Gap manifests in predictable patterns across organizations. Decision hesitation increases when AI recommendations conflict with conventional wisdom. Override rates spike when AI insights challenge departmental priorities. Implementation timelines stretch as stakeholders seek additional validation. Fear-based decision-making replaces confidence-based execution.

Unlike technical failures, which produce clear error messages, alignment failures create subtle resistance. Projects don’t fail catastrophically — they slowly lose momentum. Budgets get approved but utilization remains low. Training gets completed but behavior doesn’t change. The organization appears to be progressing while actually standing still, trapped in what research identifies as the “responsible AI implementation gap,” where organizations are already taking steps to govern AI but lack systematic approaches to professionalizing AI governance.

“The organization appears to be progressing while actually standing still”

The Consequence: Billion-Dollar Blind Spots

The economic impact of Execution Theater extends far beyond failed projects. Organizations trapped in this performance mode face systemic value erosion: extended implementation timelines that increase costs and delay competitive advantage, reduced adoption rates that limit return on AI investments, and decision paralysis that neutralizes AI’s primary benefit — speed. The theater continues because metrics show activity: training completed, models deployed, governance frameworks established, while actual transformation remains elusive.

More insidiously, the Alignment Gap creates a negative feedback loop — the Misalignment Spiral. Initial resistance leads to reduced AI utilization, which produces suboptimal results, which reinforces initial skepticism. Organizations trapped in this cycle often conclude that AI doesn’t work for their industry or use case, when the real issue is their inability to align around AI-enabled decision-making. Recent research reveals this pattern affects organizations across all sectors and regions, with most remaining in early-stage AI maturity despite significant investments.

The Solution: AI Readiness Intelligence

The next era of governance will not be about understanding AI better,  it will be about aligning faster. As AI capabilities advance exponentially, organizational conviction must evolve at a matching pace. The leaders who recognize this shift earliest will build the most sustainable competitive advantages.

AI Readiness Intelligence transforms the invisible challenge of organizational conviction into measurable governance capital. It operates through three dimensions: Trust (algorithmic confidence across functions), Alignment (coherent understanding of AI’s role), and Decision Velocity (speed of confident action).

Action Steps: Four Immediate Moves

1. Map Your Trust Gradients

Stop measuring overall AI sentiment. Start mapping trust levels across departments, use cases, and decision types. Identify where confidence thrives and where skepticism creates drag.

2. Audit Alignment Assumptions

Test whether different parts of your organization understand AI’s role consistently. Misaligned expectations create friction regardless of technical sophistication.

3. Measure Decision Velocity

Track time-to-action from AI insight to implementation. Establish clear governance frameworks that accelerate appropriate risks while maintaining oversight.

4. Invest in Alignment Infrastructure

Build shared understanding, trust calibration, and decision frameworks before deploying sophisticated AI. Alignment functions as an ROI multiplier.

Conclusion: The Readiness Imperative

The Alignment Gap isn’t a temporary implementation challenge — it’s the defining leadership test of the AI era. Organizations that can close this gap systemically will translate AI investments into transformational impact. Those that cannot watch expensive pilots accumulate without producing enterprise value.

The technology is ready. The question is whether leadership can align fast enough to match it. The imperative for boards and executives is clear: develop the capability to measure and manage alignment through AI Readiness Intelligence — turning organizational conviction into a sustainable competitive advantage.

About the Author

Deepika Chopra is the Founder & CEO of AlphaU AI and author of Move First, Align Fast (Wiley, 2025). Her frameworks equip boards and executives to measure trust, alignment, and decision velocity as predictors of AI performance. She previously held senior leadership roles at Citi, AIG, and Siemens, directing large-scale AI transformations.

References

1. McKinsey Global Institute. (2025). The state of AI: How organizations are rewiring to capture value. McKinsey & Company. March 2025.

2. World Economic Forum AI Governance Alliance. (2025). Advancing Responsible AI Innovation: A Playbook. WEF Reports. September 2025.

3. International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP). (2025). AI Governance Profession Report 2025. IAPP and Credo AI.

4. Davenport, T. H., & Ronanki, R. (2018). Artificial intelligence for the real world: Don’t start with moon shots. Harvard Business Review, 96(1), 108-116.

5. Dataiku. (2025). Global AI Confessions Report: Data Leaders Admit Lack of AI Visibility. Dataiku and Harris Poll. October 2025.

6. European Commission. (2024). Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 on Artificial Intelligence (AI Act). Official Journal of the European Union.

The post The Leadership Blind Spot in AI: How Misalignment Derails Transformation and ROI appeared first on The European Business Review.

If the very words “Ladies and gentlemen, unaccustomed as I am…” bring you out in a cold sweat, just breathe deeply into a paper bag and take heed of Adrian Furnham’s impeccably delivered advice for those faced with the ordeal of speaking in public.

Business people often have to give lots of talks and interviews. They may have to address the shareholders’ meeting and the annual conference. They have to talk to their department regularly and may have to attend and talk at many conferences. Some do podcasts to their staff on a regular basis. The talented and confident ones do TED talks. Hence the popularity of presentation skills courses.

Further, being an “inspirational speaker” may generate a very lucrative income. Corporate conferences in exotic locations, after-dinner yarns with famous people present, and high-powered international groups – all want lively speakers. At minimally £10k a talk, plus expenses, it can be a very nice little earner. Top speakers can command over £100k for a simple talk, some five times that. It is the preferred money-spinner of retired politicians.

Speech-making is often pure theatre.

Public speaking is a skill. Speakers need to know P-words – pitch, poetry, pause, and pace. They need to understand metaphor and repetition. They also need the C words – confidence, cadence, conviction, and colour. Speech-making is visible thought. It is performance, and the performer often needs to be inebriated with zeal and exuberance.

Speech-making is often pure theatre. The orator has to be at once proud and humble, powerful and powerless. The talk needs to be both visceral and intellectual. Most of all, it needs to be personal and emotional, exclamatory and climactic. Great oratory is usually poetry. The writer must understand alliteration and imagery. It is important to use and understand symbolism and meter. No wonder so many great speech-makers are often classically trained.

The message goes from the heart to the head and – note – vice versa. Speakers need exploit the “Rule of Three”. They need to use alliterations and pronounce the difficult words clearly.

Many speakers, particularly politicians, practise their gestures, their eye contact, and all their movements. Many “psych” themselves up before a great speech so that they come across well.

Television has changed oratory and made it more difficult. Close-ups mean that every small eye movement, every drop of sweat, every wrinkle is seen and commented upon. The orator is in up-close, intimate, feet away from you. Further, sound bites dictate the ultra-importance of catchphrases. Speeches are often rehearsed and timed – the gestures, the voice, and the pauses. Some speakers revise up to the last moment.

Sometimes the audience has “plants” who clap, yelp, and holler at the right time with euphoric, orchestrated hand-clapping. The cameras know when the speaker moves; gestures have been synchronised with speech. Cuts to the crowd are pre-planned by the camera crew.

The paradox is that authenticity and naturalness cannot easily be taught. Speeches have to be clear, simple, and genuine but that is often the problem. It takes a lot of effort to be natural!

Good speeches can, and often should, be spellbinding, mesmeric, hypnotic. Hitler knew the secret of oratory before scriptwriters and make-up artists. He wasn’t young, but nor were Churchill and Mandela when their greatest and most memorable speeches were given. Youth is energy, hope, the future. Youth is passion, optimism, and idealism. Hence the importance of pace of speaking and moving.

Great speeches are about journeys. They need to capture a sense of destiny and destination. They create tension by specifying a challenging problem but then they offer a solution. They must inspire trust. Many speakers make recognisable gestures like “hand on heart” or “praying hands”.

Great speeches are about journeys. They need to capture a sense of destiny and destination.

Many researchers have studied great orators and, indeed, great speeches. Equally, famous people who have to give many speeches and who are poor orators are often teased for their inadequacies. Because speaking to great crowds is often highly anxiety-provoking, the non-verbal behaviours contrast with the verbal behaviours. This includes sweating, self-touching (particularly around the mouth), and clearly faked and rehearsed smiles. Indeed, anxiety management is one of the most important tasks for business and other speakers.

Presentation techniques

Giving a presentation is one of the most daunting prospects for many. According to some often-quoted popular research, a large percentage of UK citizens would rather have their leg cut off than speak in public. Public speaking is inherently different from social conversations. There is no turn-taking, often no verbal feedback, and no safety net. You feel vulnerable, tense, and lonely standing in front of a malicious audience. One starts to wonder how these other people do it so well (or not, as the case might be).

There are two components to a successful presentation: the content of the speech, and its delivery. It is both what you have got to say and how you say it that matters. Acting skills might not be as necessary in order to report your company’s third-quarter performance figures. But they do help, if for no other reason than to gather confidence and lose inhibitions. On the other hand, it is words that paint pictures, not gestures or facial expressions, so make sure you’ve got ideas worth listening to.

Public speaking and presentation-giving is a monologue, well-practised, often manically rehearsed and logically organised. Because one party of the communication process (the audience) has to keep silent for prolonged periods of time, the other party has to ensure that it keeps the interaction engaging or attention-worthy.

Types of speakers

Many businesses employ motivational speakers. Many countries have organisations (speakers bureaux) with dozens of speakers “on their books”. They tend to be academics, media stars, politicians, and successful business people (entrepreneurs) who get handsomely paid for relatively short after-dinner or conference speeches. In one sense, there is nothing new about the concept of a motivational speaker. Our parents had Billy Graham, Lord Soper, and, of course, Churchill. Such speakers were nearly always found in religious, political, or military contexts. They had the ability to uplift the heart, to perk up the dispirited, to energise the weary, and to convert the indecisive.

More importantly is, how do motivational speakers actually perform and what can we learn from them?

There are versions of the genre: the manic evangelist, the sincere believer, the serious comic. They are curiously very different in style but similar in content. The manic evangelist is really an American export. They require lots of audience participation. One is required to jump, clap, scream, sing, and perform other crypto-cheerleader activities in the course of the day. Their speech is often musical and full of rhythm. The sincere believer is the street-corner preacher who tells his moving tale with timing, passion, and anecdote. The serious comic is a night club act that is full of riotous humour but interspersed with the serious message, which may be delivered in a quite different tone.

Of course, there are other types. The studious professor does not always go down too well. Nor does the braggardly entrepreneur or the past-sell-by-date sports personality. TV presenters can keep going years after retirement because they are recognised by the public, who believe they know them personally.

Content and style of talks

To “deconstruct” a talk is an interesting challenge. There are similar metaphors and techniques in all motivational talks. There is a lot of “I believe” talk and repetition. Phrases that somehow “taste good” are often repeated; for example, “Talent is not enough”, or the very famous “Ask not what your country can do for you …”, and “I have a dream …”.

But most of all, one notices the metaphors in the story. People seem best attuned to stories, called case studies in business schools. From early childhood, we learn about this world and its rules through stories that have structure, believable characters, and often a moral. The first is the journey or, often, the race. This emphasises both the past and the future. It is about having goals, and the journey to reaching them.

All good stories have structure: beginning, middle, and end. They can contain puzzles and dilemmas. But they need resolution – ideally a victory for the truth, the right, and the virtuous.

The stories are also, of necessity, about fortitude, tenacity, and endurance in the face of setback. What is inspiring is how the obstacle was overcome, how the failure turned into success, how the lesson to overcome the disappointment was the key factor. It’s the solution to the problem of evil in theology: evil is there to teach us a lesson.

Another theme is the fall of the proud, how cockiness and egotism led to failure. There is a lot of talk about the best / worst experience of one’s life and how one learned life’s lessons that later enabled one to be a success. Parents and friends sometimes appear in the talk. This is the social support / teamwork bit that managers like their staff to hear. There is reference to synergy, interdependence, and the necessity of give and take in teams.

Nearly all stories have happy endings. They have to be upbeat, positive, moral tales. They are full of homilies, heartwarming stories of “little people” whose simplicity, essential goodness, and wisdom won the day. They call for acting, to let the voice, the gesture, and the posture match the themes in the story.

In the case of motivational talks, they are deeply anti-fatalist in the sense that we make our destiny. We make our beds and we lie in them. We are, and can be, captains of our fate and masters of our ship. And at the heart of everything is the C-word uttered so often everywhere nowadays: change or, better, progress. The theme is how, if you change your goals, change your strategy, change your lifestyle, change your foolish ways, you too can win an Olympic gold medal, become the top salesman, etc. Life is not a dress rehearsal. Unlike with Marks and Spencer, you can’t get a refund. With only the talent you have, enthusiasm, determination and a good team, you can win big.

Great orators never ignore “pitch, pace, and pause”. Hit the right notes, vary speed, pause for effect. Learn rhetorical devices, such as the power of repetition, the magic number three, the influence of body language to punctuate and emphasise. Get the pace and timing right, tickle the heart strings with stories of joy and sadness. and have a happy ending … and you too could be a motivational speaker.

Speech-giving and emotions

Giving speeches and presentations is stressful for most people. It is the most common of all phobias. People vary in their reaction to the prospect of public speaking. It ranges from the “buzz”, nervousness, anxiety, all up to utter panic. However, often the tension is good. It is known that experienced presenters would deliberately recreate the conditions of apprehension before and during the performance (for example, Enoch Powell would not visit the toilet before giving speeches).

Physiologically, public speaking is related to rising blood pressure, increased heartbeat, and sweating. Adrenalin rushes through the body. Muscles in the neck and chest constrict, sometimes affecting the voice and causing it to tremble. Relaxing breathing exercises should take the tension away and, generally, taking a few deep breaths should also do the job.

Emotions influence speech rate. Some “belt through it” to get it over with. Speed of delivery is also very important. To communicate effectively, you need to slow down substantially, from the conversational rate of 170-180 words per minute to 120-130. Although that might feel too slow in the beginning, it makes your message digestible to your listeners.

To keep your audience going, you need to alternate between tones, swing the notes, and switch tempo.

Fear of the audience is usually (but not always) irrational. It stems from the phobia of being ridiculed or intimidated by the audience, thus creating a “me against them” confrontational attitude. Generally, however, listeners do not want you to make a fool of yourself in front of them so they can laugh.

Good public speaking needs to be melodic, like singing. Our brain seems “wired” in the way that any novel stimulus, auditory, visual or kinesthetic, gradually dissolves in the surrounding noise some time after the initial exposure. Thus, motionless, monotonous speech loses the audience’s attention very fast. To keep your audience going, you need to alternate between tones, swing the notes, and switch tempo. In other words, you need to conduct your speech as if you are telling a story or singing a song, building up the suspense and intriguing the listener. To do that, exaggerate your pitch and create an exciting sequence.

The more senior you become in business, the more often you have to talk in public to both friends and foes, colleagues and shareholders, the local and international media. It has been said that a company owner or a shareholder could, by their performance alone, influence the share price. A conspicuously calm, clear, and confident speaker can allay the fears of investors. Equally, a bumbling, nervous, rattled speaker can lose the trust of everybody.

Body language of the speaker

The presenter has to be engaging and entertaining, they have to both lead and be led by the audience. Gestures, movements, facial expressions, and eye gaze patterns are the most common non-verbal signals during speeches. Non-verbal signs in speech-making and presentations can be broadly divided in two categories: affirmative and negative. Affirmative gestures emphasise, stress, and highlight the verbal message; they engage the audience and keep it focused and interested. Negative signs are those associated with tension, anxiety, and nervousness; they are distracting, unnecessary, and generally best avoided at all times.

Positive body language signs are either explanatory or evaluative. Explanatory gestures clarify the meaning of what is being said, accentuate viewpoints, and call attention to the message. They can also serve the purpose of sustaining audience’s attention or help the speaker elucidate their verbal communication. Evaluative gestures and facial expressions comprise those types of non-verbal cues that are exhibited by the audience. Public speaking is a credibility exercise; it takes both guts and ability. It is an art and a science, a performance and a lecture.

Max Atkinson, academic, author, and researcher, who was an expert researcher in public speaking, suggests some non-verbal tips:

One has to display open body language signals. This projects both the confidence of the speaker and the trustworthiness of the message. Folded arms and the associated closed, hunched posture will influence the quality and the projection of your voice and articulation by making your chest constrict. It makes sound projection more problematic. Open posture is also said to communicate the honesty and sincerity of both the speaker and their communication.

One of the first things a speaker has to learn is to open up and be less rigid on stage. Stand up straight, legs apart, head up. Use clear gestures and always make eye contact.

The public tends to interpret a folded-arms gesture as defensiveness, comfort, missing armrests, and feeling cold. Consequently, Atkinson advises not folding your arms during speech, be it an interview or a talk. However, that is because of the widely spread belief propagated by the mass media and the like that it signals defensiveness and hostility, not because it actually does. Just keep your arms open and you are much more likely to create a favourable impression.

Anxious non-verbal body language not only distracts the speaker from the delivery, but also diverts the audience from attending to the message. Again, such speakers are judged as lacking ability and, for that reason, cannot keep their audience’s attention. Non-verbal cues that communicate anxiety are fiddling with objects or hair, nervous pacing, “white knuckle syndrome” (clenching fists or gripping objects too hard), and self-touching.

Some gestures can be a potential distractor, while others are good to capture and sustain attention, such as sudden pointing, a sharp raise of the arm, etc. Think Elon Musk and the Nazi salute. They show excitement and energy, and break the routine. On the other hand, repetitive movements – swinging, swaying, pacing up and down – can be annoying.

While gestures are natural to conversation and can be used for various reasons, conscious inhibition of movements is likely to interfere with the flow of speech. If you would like to either use or not use a particular gesture or facial expression while speaking in public, you could try practising speaking in front of the mirror. This would allow you to learn when you use this particular gesture and how undesirable it is. It is good to seek the opinion of close, truthful friends. Rehearse the speech with the movements until the new pattern becomes literally second nature. Otherwise, allow the original gesture to be as it is, as conscious monitoring would only impair your performance.

The bigger the audience is, the more you should exaggerate the gesticulation. Theatre actors know well about the power of dramatisation of one’s message. The same clearly goes for voice; the larger the room and the more people listening, the louder the volume should be.

So …

Whether it is giving the “best man” speech, pepping up your staff, facing the shareholders, or giving a big conference speech, you need to learn the art of public speaking. Some people are “naturals”, most are not. But it is pretty impossible to do well in business without having to do talks, interviews, and presentations. However good you are at business, if you can’t persuade and charm others by your rhetoric, you will never reach the top.

Choose your hero and analyse their text and performance. Sign up for a drama course. Get honest feedback from “critical friends”. And practise, practise, practise.

About the Author

Adrian Furnham enjoys public speaking. He has spoken at events for up to 15,000 people in different countries from Azerbaijan to Uganda. In doing so, he exploits his sub-clinical histrionic personality disorder and has very exotic and sometimes well-paid holidays through conference speaking. He currently lectures at BI: Norwegian Business School.

REFERENCES

• Atkinson, M. (1984) Our Masters’ Voices: the Language and Body Language of Politics. Routledge.

• Atkinson, M. (2004). Lend Me Your Ears: All You Need to Know About Making Speeches and Presentations. London: Vermilion

• Atkinson, M. (2008). Speech-Making and Presentation Made Easy, London: Vermilion.

• Cairns, C. (2019). Public Speaking Without Fear: How to Overcome Anxiety and Present with Confidence (1^st ed.).

  Publishers Press.

• DeWaele, J-M., & Furnham, A. (2025). “Facing Argus: Personality and Public Speaking Anxiety”.

• Furnham, A., & Petrova, E. (2011). Body Language at Work. London: Routledge

• Tewari, M. (2022). Ten Ways To Master Public Speaking and Effective Communication (1^st ed.). New York Notion Press

The post Presentations, Speeches, and Talks: Getting the Gift of the Gab appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Ravi Rajani

This article helps leaders redefine their definition of charisma, whilst unveiling a specific framework to help others feel significant in your presence. The outcome? Sparking connection, intimacy and building trusted relationships with your team, customers and more. 

Growing up, I had charisma horribly wrong. I thought it was about showcasing what one would label “extroverted” character traits and receiving attention, accolades, and awards. Whilst I honour my younger self for doing the best he could with the consciousness he had, I’m thankful that my definition of charisma has evolved.

Today, I define charisma as an innate superpower, which everybody possesses, that helps others feel significant in your presence, in turn, increasing your capacity for influence. Here’s my truth: you don’t become charismatic because you were already born charismatic. Every single one of us has this innate superpower; we just need to unearth it. For some, their comfort with silence and ability to create the space for a meaningful conversation might be their vehicle for charisma. For others, it could be their ability to share vulnerable stories that give people permission to be themselves. You get the picture, right? Charisma looks different on different people, and that’s the beauty of it.

Here’s the million-dollar question: as a leader, how do you make others feel like they matter when they’re around you without feeling contrived, inauthentic or overly engineered? Whilst there are several paths at your disposal, I’d like to introduce you to the art of giving meaningful compliments that matter.

I believe everybody has a genius. Is it your team member’s flair for articulating complex ideas in a simple manner? Is it your direct reports’ ability to code their way out of a paper bag? Or maybe it’s your new recruit’s depth of empathy that helps them connect with others in a profound way. The list goes on. The question is, when was the last time you truly made somebody in your team feel seen for their genius? According to Professor Norihiro Sadato, the study lead and professor at the National Institute for Physiological Sciences in Japan, when we receive a compliment, it activates the same part of our brain (the striatum) that lights up when we receive a financial reward. Not only does giving a meaningful compliment build trust, loyalty and inspire somebody to own their genius; it makes you memorable too.

In my own career, when mentors, teammates and peers have recognized me for my gifts and saw me for who I truly am, without trying to change me, it made me want to run through a brick wall for them. It also inspired me to own my uniqueness and ensure I don’t “dim my light” in a society obsessed with telling you to color between the lines. But, how does one give a genuine compliment without being superficial?

Picture this. You’ve just walked out of a client pitch with your Head of Partnerships, Jamie Picker. You enjoyed their presentation so much that you offer a compliment. Here’s what comes out of your mouth: “Hey, Jamie, incredible presentation!” Full stop. That’s it. Harmless? Maybe. However this is a surface-level compliment that lacks depth and intentionality. In essence, your compliment lacked three things: authenticity, specificity, and impact. Enter my ASI Framework.

• “A” stands for authenticity, meaning lead with a genuinely positive observation.
• “S” stands for specificity, meaning quit being generic.
• “I” stand for impact, where you acknowledge how this moment personally affected you.

During Jamie’s presentation, he shared a vulnerable story that deeply resonated with your potential customer. It sparked an emotion, shifted their perspective, and inspired you to use more storytelling in your own pitches, conversations and presentations. So, what might a genuine compliment look like that encapsulates these sentiments?

“Hey Jamie, that was one of the most impactful client pitches I’ve ever heard you deliver. That story you shared in the first few minutes about struggling with diabetes your entire life was extremely eye-opening, and the way you tied the core message back to the fitness tracker we sell was masterful. Your approach has inspired me to use more storytelling in my own presentations. Thank you for that.”

See the difference between the two approaches? “Incredible presentation” is a throwaway comment. Not just because it’s absent of the ingredients within the ASI Framework, but because it’s missing intimacy. There’s zero proximity between you and what you thought about Jamie’s pitch, or the impact they had on you through their presentation. By using the word “I” (as in “one of the most impactful client pitches I’ve ever heard you deliver”) and attaching the compliment to you directly, it increases its potency, level of warmth and reduces the connection gap.

When you do this with positive intention, from a mindset of abundance and focus on quality compliments over quantity, you’ll become the type of leader who others want to follow. The end result? Someone who’s able to cultivate authentic relationships, increase employee engagement and create a high-trust culture.

Note: Adapted excerpt from Relationship Currency: Five Communication Habits For Limitless Influence and Business Success by Ravi Rajani.

About the Author

Ravi Rajani is an international keynote speaker, communication expert, and LinkedIn Learning instructor, with over 65,000 people having taken his courses on Conscious and Charismatic Communication. Recognized as one of the world’s leading thought leaders on storytelling and communication, Ravi has worked with mission-driven leaders, teams and organizations such as Oracle NetSuite, T-Mobile, and Sherwin Williams. Over the years, Ravi has helped companies and people like this become masterful communicators, tell compelling stories, listen with intention and build meaningful relationships that amplify revenue growth and cultivate a culture of trust. He is also the author of Relationship Currency: Five Communication Habits for Limitless Influence and Business Success.

The post Embody True Charisma: Be the Leader Everyone Wants to Follow appeared first on The European Business Review.

Employment law, like so many aspects of 21st-century life, is subject to constant evolution. It’s challenging for employers, who must be aware of their legal responsibilities at all times, but also for employees, who need to know exactly where they stand. Enter Tessa Harris and her team at Redmans.

You have built an impressive career in employment law, now serving as Employment Law Director at Redmans. What inspired you to specialise in this field?

Having a family who are largely in the medical profession, I have always been interested in medicine and healthcare (even questioning whether, at one point, I chose the right profession). So, I initially wanted to specialise in clinical negligence.

However, during my Legal Practice course, which I carried out at the University of the West of England in Bristol, clinical negligence was not a topic to specialise in, so one of my optional modules was employment law. Since it felt easier than my other modules, I enjoyed it the most out of all.

It is also fast-paced and ever-changing, which means I have to be on my toes. I benefited from knowing the law and understanding my rights as an employee, as did my friends and family when ad hoc advice was needed.

Following the end of my university life, as luck would have it, a paralegal opportunity arose in the Employment team at Lyons Davidson solicitors. And although I grabbed the opportunity merely because it was one foot in the door in an incredibly competitive industry, I quickly discovered how much my enjoyment of employment law actually increased in practice.

I found employment law to be highly relatable, as most of the population is employed or in some form of work capacity. It is also fast-paced and ever-changing, which means I have to be on my toes. I benefited from knowing the law and understanding my rights as an employee, as did my friends and family when ad hoc advice was needed.

I love that I can help so many people, and every person’s case is different. I couldn’t imagine being in a position where some of my clients find themselves having been unfairly dismissed or discriminated against. But I can, however, as an employee, sympathise with them. I am therefore able to show a human / relatable side of being a lawyer, which can be lost in other legal areas.

How have your academic and professional experiences, including your master’s in Clinical Negligence, shaped your approach to employment law and client advocacy?

I say this to many aspiring lawyers that a degree, the Legal Practice course, and a training contract are all useful to gain the basics of the theoretical side of law. However, I only had a firm grasp of what I was doing once I had a caseload myself, and I was applying the theoretical side of law to actual real-life situations.

Nothing can prepare you for dealing with those initial client calls, drafting and submitting your first claim form, or representing your client, during the first preliminary hearing.

As Employment Law Director, you balance client work with mentoring and guiding your legal team. What principles define your leadership style in such a people-focused area of law?

Being a specialist in employment law, I know first hand how poor management can result in significant repercussions. So, I am always conscious of ensuring that I strike a fine balance between acting in the best interests of the firm as a business, as well as my team.

The most important principle is that I will always listen and take opinions and points on board. If I can find a solution, fantastic; if I can’t, I will suggest alternatives.

Because of the nature of my role and my experience, I have developed empathy and look to understand the “why” before reaching a conclusion. While I honestly communicate the potential issues that may occur, I also look to work with my team to reach a conclusion and a way forward.

Moreover, part of managing a team is being able to make difficult decisions. So, having an open and transparent dialogue and offering support from the start allows those difficult decisions to be communicated with discussion and suggested options, where equal respect is offered both ways.

I am very fortunate to work with an incredible team, where we have developed a fantastic working relationship. As a collective, we work on solutions and ways forward and always support one another.

Redmans is one of the few UK firms that focus solely on employment law and has earned recognition for its success in resolving cases efficiently. What makes Redmans’ approach distinctive, and how does this shape your work with clients and colleagues?

The lawyers we hire are key to maintaining our high levels of success at Redmans solicitors. We pride ourselves on being approachable and try to offer solutions where clients may feel there are none.

In our initial calls, we will always offer advice and suggest best ways forward for clients. We believe that the human approach is key, as empathy and understanding are so important.

While more experience will assist with having these skills, we also ensure that our new recruits are the right fit for not only working as a team but, equally, for offering the same level of approachability and professionalism that our clients come to expect.

The discussion around employee empowerment and day-one rights has become increasingly important. How do you think these developments are influencing workplace culture and employer responsibilities?

It’s significantly reshaping workplace culture and redefining employer responsibilities. As employees increasingly expect greater autonomy, fair treatment, and a voice in decision making, organisations are being challenged to create more inclusive, transparent, and supportive environments, which in my view is a positive way forward.

Employers are expected to offer more by way of training, communication, and mental health support to meet the expectations of this new workplace culture.

Workplace culture is shifting from traditional, top-down management to more collaborative and flexible styles. This then allows employees the space to be more engaged, motivated, and innovative, which can lead to higher productivity. However, this also means that employers are expected to offer more by way of training, communication, and mental health support to meet the expectations of this new workplace culture.

Employers are now, more than ever, accountable for creating safe and respectful workspaces. It requires a review of pay equality, work-life balance, diversity and inclusion, and harassment prevention. A higher onus is on employers to ensure that employees are safe, and if day-one rights come in (which seems likely), the risk to employers is far more significant. Thus, policies and procedures will need to be reviewed carefully, legal advice sought and prepared in readiness for this change.

Mental health and well-being have become top priorities in many workplaces. How do you see employment law supporting this shift toward healthier and more inclusive working environments?

The law hasn’t changed much since the implementation of the Equality Act 2010, which protects those who have a disability from discrimination. Although not everyone who struggles with mental health issues will be considered disabled, that does not necessarily mean that employees who do struggle with mental health have nowhere to turn to.

Health and safety regulations require employers to provide a safe physical and mental working environment, reducing risks of injury and stress. So, businesses are now swiftly adapting their ways of working to accommodate mental health and provide support systems in place.

Implementation of stress risk assessments at work and providing hybrid working for a positive work-life balance are two areas which employers seem to adopt at present. Additionally, employment law covers areas such as equal pay, protection against unfair dismissal, flexible working rights, and parental leave, all of which contribute to an employee’s well-being and work-life balance.

From your experience handling cases such as disability discrimination and absence management, what key trends or challenges are shaping employment law today?

Since COVID, employers have adopted hybrid working, which has improved work-life balance. However, now that some time has passed, some have reduced that flexibility or removed it completely. This has resulted in many employees, who have relied upon such flexibility to manage their mental health and personal circumstances, feeling disgruntled and stressed.

So, the vast majority of discrimination claims that I now receive are with a greater focus on mental health as a disability.

In the past, physical impairments were traditionally the conditions relied upon for disability discrimination claims. However, with the growing recognition of mental health conditions, such as anxiety, depression, and PTSD, employers are increasingly required to consider adjustments for mental-health-related absences or performance issues, even before determining whether the condition is in fact a disability or not. This helps to ensure that they have taken steps to protect themselves from the possibility of litigation.

There is also more of an emphasis on reasonable adjustments being implemented at work. A rising expectation for employers is that they be proactive in ensuring that adjustments have been discussed and implemented.

Moreover, employers are expected to consider each individual pattern of absence per employee, as a generalised absence-management policy tends to be outdated and rigid in structure. Adapting a more flexible way of managing absence would show that care and attention have been given to the individual’s needs.

Failure to do the above can lead to grievances being raised and, again, litigation.

Looking ahead, how do you see employment law evolving to meet the changing expectations of employees and employers in the future world of work?

As employee awareness grows and their rights increase, so will litigation matters. With day-one rights likely to be implemented as well, employment law practitioners are likely to see an influx of cases, which will have a knock-on effect on the capacity of Acas and the Employment Tribunal.

I foresee an increase in not only unfair dismissal claims but, given how the culture is shifting, in disability discrimination claims, specifically failure to make reasonable adjustments, as well as discriminatory dismissals by way of sickness absence.

Employers will need to have a sound business justification for removing or reducing flexibility around hybrid working. While, at present, Employment Tribunals tend to avoid interfering with how a company wants to run its business, if there is no sound commercial reason for the justification, this could result in Tribunals finding that such action is unlawful. Again, employers should be considering, therefore, why they need to change, what the pros and cons are, and what alternatives can be offered to assist those most in need.

Fairness and inclusion are key. A reasonable employer will now be expected to include its employees in decision-making processes, consider individual needs based on any underlying medical condition, and adopt a supportive and understanding environment. If an employer does not, there is likely to be a significant litigation risk.

Executive Profile

Tessa Harris is the Employment Law Director at Redmans solicitors and is at the forefront of managing diverse cases. Serving as a deputy to the firm’s Partner, she brings her wealth of experience to supervising and guiding the legal team.

She focuses on litigation, particularly in areas like disability discrimination and absence management.

The post Evolutionary Forces at Work: Keeping Abreast of Employment Law appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Anthony Moss

Life at the top can be a lonely place. In successful companies, the CEO needs decision-making confidence, and the leadership team needs the appropriate skills to take the business to the next level. There’s one key thing that they need to consider to supercharge their decision making.

Life at the top can be a lonely place. In successful small companies, the CEO needs decision-making confidence, and the leadership team needs the appropriate skills to take the business to the next level. Capability evolves over time. Unless there is an internal or external catalyst for dramatic change, the step-change in capability is likely to be slow and incremental. The same applies to you. If your skills and frame of reference remain the same, your capability also remains the same. Maybe you’re already upskilling yourself, your people and your leadership team. From time to time, you engage expert consultants to address known challenges. If you have a board, your discussions might be well-meaning, but perhaps the conversations tend to be repetitive or focus too much on operations and not enough on strategy. You’re doing everything possible to scale beyond Fighting for Position, but you know something is missing. The pressure to find the right solution falls squarely on your shoulders.

Commercially Lonely

Sitting at the top of a company is what I describe as a commercially lonely position. People assume that the title of CEO bestows you with superhuman skills to achieve all tasks no matter what the needs of the company. This expectation comes from the people you lead and your fellow shareholders and directors. There are often decisions that need to be made that cannot be discussed with other people in the organisation, and there is pressure from the board, whether perceived or real, to ‘have the answers’. This is how it feels to be commercially lonely. 

Constructively Discontent

CEOs are also hardwired to think there is a better way, even if they can’t quite articulate what ‘better’ looks like or how to achieve it. Despite their success, they know that the market share could be greater, efficiency could be better, and company profits could be higher. The thought pattern is this: I love what we’re achieving, but we could be doing much more. This powerful motivator is inherent in most CEOs; it motivates the CEO to drive the next growth stage. However, communicating your discontent can have the opposite effect on your leadership team. Being what I call Constructively Discontent can demotivate your team if they consistently perceive you, their CEO, as dissatisfied.

You’re playing the business version of Snakes and Ladders, navigating the highs and lows in one minute, with total control, while losing it all the next minute, causing a huge impact. You must find the right balance in setting the performance expectations of your team to motivate, not demotivate. At the same time, you often must take charge in pressing circumstances when it is not appropriate or possible to explore your options before making a decision. This is the role you have chosen. You can choose to stay in this mode, figuring it all out as you go and evolving slowly, or you can fast-track your learning and build a support structure around you that can lend you the skills to take your business to the next stage swiftly and with confidence.

I described CEOs who are commercially lonely. When independent advisers are appointed to the Advisory Board, it becomes a forum where the CEO can discuss any issue of concern, particularly those that cannot be discussed with other staff members. These conversations might relate to strategies that will impact business performance, employment, leadership team capability, and even the navigation of difficult conversations with fellow shareholders/directors.

The CEO can explore and discuss potential initiatives without judgement. The Advisory Board can challenge, support, and offer alternative ideas that the CEO can consider.
This is about ensuring that they are focused on the important and not the urgent-unimportant. That said, the CEO retains control. Seeking the counsel of the Advisory Board
does not mean that advice binds them. The CEO is free to decide the course of action.

With an Advisory Board acting as a coach, mentor and expert advisory team, the CEO has a support structure that empowers them with the right mindset and skill set to be the best they can be. This translates to better decisions and leadership that ultimately leads to better performance and is the key to transcending your business’s Fighting for Position stage to becoming an industry leader.

About the Author 

Anthony Moss is a leading authority on Advisory Boards with over 30 years of commercial experience and a track record of working with over 180 companies. He helps private company CEOs break through growth barriers with clarity, confidence, and capability. As Founder of Lead Your Industry, he partners with ambitious leaders to build high-impact Advisory Boards that fast-track results. Learn more at www.leadyourindustry.com.

The post The Real Reason CEOs Feel “Commercially Lonely” and How to Fix It appeared first on The European Business Review.

As mental ill health becomes the leading cause of workplace absence, leadership must redefine its priorities. For World Mental Health Day, experts share practical strategies – from fostering psychological safety and coaching cultures to modelling healthy habits and tackling vaping – showing that wellbeing-centric leadership drives performance, resilience, and sustainable organisational success.

According to the CIPD’s latest Health & Wellbeing at Work Report, mental ill health has now overtaken all other causes of long-term absence. Nearly half of organisations (47%) report a rise in mental-health-related absences, yet fewer than one in three (29%) equip line managers with the training to address the issue.

This gap exposes a critical weakness in leadership capability. Employee wellbeing is no longer optional – it is a core business priority with direct consequences for performance, retention, and resilience.

As World Mental Health Day (10 October) approaches, we asked six leading voices in leadership and organisational wellbeing to share their practical advice. Their message is clear: leaders who put wellbeing at the centre of their agenda will build healthier, more productive, and more sustainable businesses.

Leadership’s Duty of Care

Lord Mark Price, former UK Trade Minister, founder of WorkL, and author of Work Happier, believes wellbeing must be viewed as both a moral duty and a commercial necessity. His Workplace Happiness Survey places global wellbeing at just 73%, with more than one in four employees at risk of low wellbeing. Anxiety and low mood score as low as 66%.

“Employees are clear about what they need,” Price says. “Practical mental health support such as therapy or mental health days, flexible and shorter working hours, and fairer pay structures that match today’s realities.”

When leadership prioritises fair pay, work-life balance, and psychological safety, the benefits are tangible: reduced stress, higher engagement, and what Price calls a “20% productivity lift” associated with high wellbeing. “Creating a respectful, positive workplace isn’t a perk,” he insists. “It’s prevention – and it secures long-term performance gains.”

Practical Actions to Build Safety and Learning

Barbara Salopek, author of Future Fit Innovation and CEO of Vinco Innovation, emphasises that psychological safety is not an abstract ideal but a practical leadership responsibility.

“Too often I have seen workplaces where it’s all about blame, not learning,” she says. “Switching this perspective requires effort from leadership first.”

Her advice is straightforward:

• Replace “Who’s at fault?” with “What did we learn?”
• Celebrate learning, not just results.
• Create regular spaces where employees can speak openly without fear.

“These small, consistent actions reduce stigma, improve wellbeing, and foster innovation,” Salopek explains. “When employees feel safe to speak up, organisations gain twice: healthier teams and stronger performance.”

Glimmers, Grit, and Getting Real

For Gavin Oattes, global speaker and author of Confidently Lost: Finding Joy in the Chaos and Rediscovering What Matters Most in Life, the conversation about wellbeing must go deeper than perks. “The 2025 CIPD report confirms what many of us feel in our bones—work isn’t working for everyone,” he says. “If you’re still viewing wellbeing as a nice-to-have, it’s time to recalibrate.”

Oattes argues that mental health is about creating space for people “to breathe, to belong, and to bring their whole selves, wobbles and all.” In his own experience, what mattered most were not grand gestures but “glimmers—micro-moments of connection, joy, and being seen.”

He urges leaders to model rest, to notice small signs, and to embrace play. “Adults learn best through play. It unlocks new thinking, disarms fear, and builds connection faster than any strategy slide. Mental health is the heart of sustainable leadership. Treat it that way—with compassion, curiosity, and a little creative mischief.”

From Command-and-Control to Coaching

Dominic and Laura Ashley-Timms, CEO and COO of performance consultancy Notion and authors of The Answer is a Question, highlight the cost of outdated management styles.

“Too often, management training focuses on the ‘what’ of management, not the ‘how’ of engaging people,” they note. As a result, managers default to command-and-control, which pressures them to always have the answers while marginalising employees.

Research shows the stakes are high: Gallup estimates that disengagement costs the global economy $8.8 trillion. Yet the Ashley-Timms argue that the solution lies not in more mental health training, but in tackling the root cause of disengagement.

Their solution is Operational Coaching®, an enquiry-led approach proven in London School of Economics research to dramatically improve engagement, productivity, and inclusion. “Asking powerful questions rather than providing all the answers gives employees autonomy, confidence, and psychological safety,” they explain. “It’s a management revolution—one that leaders urgently need to embrace.”

Role Modelling Healthy Habits

Leaders are often guilty of neglecting their own wellbeing, warns Nik Kinley, leadership consultant and author of The Power Trap.

“Most leaders, on their way up, work longer than they should, sacrifice personal life, and look after themselves less well than they ought to,” he explains. “Then one day they’re at the top—and what they do becomes more visible. If they cut corners with their health, it sends a message that such behaviour is normal, even expected, if you want to succeed.”

The challenge, Kinley admits, is that changing entrenched habits can be hard. But World Mental Health Day is an opportunity to reflect. “Senior leaders should take a moment to identify one area where they can send a different message—by role modelling healthier choices. Even small changes in behaviour can ripple across an organisation.” 

Building Psychological Safety Through Trust

Fay Niewiadomski, award-winning change strategist, leadership coach, and author of Decisions That Matter points out that data alone can mislead. She recalls seeing a dysfunctional team reporting fewer incidents than a high-performing one. “The numbers told a statistical lie,” she explains, “because incidents were left unreported out of fear of punishment and lack of trust.”

For Niewiadomski, psychological safety is not a myth but a function of corporate culture: “Culture equals leadership’s beliefs, thoughts, values, feelings, and resulting behaviours—and how these are communicated to the workforce.”

She recommends three steps to build trust:

1. Make it safe to speak up and find collaborative solutions.
2. Be consistent in how behaviours are rewarded.
3. Use accountability as a tool for problem solving and growth.

“Psychological safety isn’t soft,” she argues. “It’s the foundation of high-performing, resilient teams.”

Tackling Vaping to Protect Wellbeing

Finally, Dr Marc Picot, GP, vaping expert, and author of The Last Puff, highlights how nicotine dependence undermines both health and workplace performance.

“Employees who vape often struggle with focus, productivity, and stress,” he explains. “Sustained vaping is linked with anxiety and mental health challenges, which contribute to absenteeism.” For employers, the costs include higher insurance premiums, reduced efficiency, and lower retention.

Picot recommends simple steps:

• Share information about the risks of vaping.
• Encourage wellbeing initiatives, such as coaching or group support.
• Create an open culture where employees can discuss challenges without judgement.

“Supporting employees to quit vaping is a tangible way for leaders to prove their commitment to wellbeing—while also improving performance,” he adds.

From Intention to Impact

Taken together, these expert insights highlight one truth: wellbeing must move from the margins to the core of leadership and strategy. Whether it’s building trust, modelling healthy behaviours, shifting from blame to learning, creating micro-moments of joy, empowering through coaching, or tackling health risks like vaping, leaders have practical levers they can pull today.

World Mental Health Day is not about token gestures. It is a reminder that leaders have a duty of care – and an opportunity. Prioritising wellbeing not only protects mental health but strengthens productivity, creativity, and resilience.

The post Putting Wellbeing at the Heart of Leadership – Expert Insights for World Mental Health Day appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Janthana Kaenprakhamroy

Female and minority entrepreneurs face many challenges, and Janthana Kaenprakhamroy highlights the advice that can help them overcome this and make an impact. She examines the UK’s new £500m initiative to support diverse founders and fund managers, arguing that inclusive capital allocation is not charity but a strategic growth driver.

Being the founder of a business can be a challenge – especially when you come from an under-represented background. In my case, as a Thai woman from a working-class background, I have had to prove myself more in front of investors, with them questioning my credibility or assuming my business ambitions were lifestyle rather than scale-focused due to internal biases.

This is not just about fairness. It is about unlocking growth. Women and ethnic minority founders are innovating in dynamic sectors – fintech, insurtech, healthtech, green solutions and more. Ignoring these groups means overlooking vast markets and in fast-growing sectors.

However, there is a new opportunity opening up in the UK’s entrepreneurial ecosystem. In July 2025, the Chancellor announced a £500 million package for underrepresented entrepreneurs and emerging fund managers. This includes:

• £400m to support investment fund managers from diverse backgrounds.
• £100m dedicated to women-led businesses, with £50m earmarked for female-led venture capital funds via the Invest in Women Taskforce.

The £400m package spans three pillars: the Enterprise Capital Funds programmed backing more diverse fund managers; micro-funds investment around £10-15m; and backing partners, such as venture capital funds, to invest smaller amounts into those without a prior track record or personal wealth to become investors.

This is a big deal. But as with all big deals, opportunity can slip through gaps unless founders know how to navigate the terrain. Here’s what I’ve learned, what to watch out for, and how this funding can (and should) be put to work.

Advice for Female and Minority Founders in Fundraising

Fundraising isn’t easy, and as a woman or minority founder you’ll face extra hurdles – I’ve been there. What helped me was learning to cut through the noise, back myself and not settle.

• Persistence and building strong networks have proven essential to me in the development of my business. I sought out accelerators, mentors and supportive investors who understood the value of my vision.
• Storytelling has been vital too – demonstrating not just financials but the real-world impact of your business. Transparency and traction speak louder than bias; showing growth and resilience helped overcome many preconceptions.
• Own your story, unapologetically. Investors don’t just buy business models, they buy people. Your unique journey is part of the value proposition. If you don’t tell it, someone else will tell a diminished version, or worse, ignore it.
• Show progress, however small the wins. Milestones such as first customer, pilot success, positive feedback, revenue and traction build credibility. They help counter bias: when someone sees you achieving, it’s harder to dismiss.
• Pick your investors carefully. Not all capital is equal. The right investor gives you more than money – they offer a network, advice and entry into greater avenues. The wrong one adds stress, distracts you or limits your future options.
• Know your numbers. Be able to speak revenue, burn rate, customer acquisition cost, lifetime value, runway. Strong metrics help you negotiate, set clearer, realistic expectations, and keep the discussion grounded in facts not bias.

Pitfalls to Avoid 

Many pitfalls are often caused by pressure, eagerness or misinformation. Pitfalls to avoid include:

• Talking small – If you see big potential, state it. Understating your ambition often leads others to undervalue you.
• Relying on one deal – Until the funds are in your account, don’t assume. Always have fallback options and keep talking to multiple investors.
• Taking bad terms – A deal that seems “good enough now” may have strings that hurt further down the line.
• Over-apologising or overdefending – You’ll often preempt questions or challenges. It’s fine to pause, gather your thoughts and respond with confidence. Being reactive or defensive can signal nervousness.

How the UK’s £500m Initiative Can Be the Most Impactful

With this new funding, we can drive systemic improvement, not just issue one-off cheques. Real change demands sustained, large-scale investment, continuity, and accountability. The opportunity is to rewire how capital is allocated: use multi-year, outcomes-linked funding that scales what works and sunsets what doesn’t. Keep the focus on outcomes over appearances, and judge success by where the money flows and what it delivers, not by who administers it.

Funding should target women and minority founders in high-growth arenas—AI, fintech/insurtech, healthtech, and green innovation. This isn’t charity; it’s fixing a market inefficiency.

The package’s support for first-step fund managers and micro-funds is exactly where to start. The binding constraints are access to capital and networks. Anchor commitments, first-loss guarantees, and co-investment for emerging managers will lower those barriers, diversify the investment pipeline, and surface high-potential founders who are currently invisible to mainstream capital.

Capital must be paired with capability. Build a two-track support system:

• First-time founders: mentorship, incubators/accelerators, operator clinics, legal/accounting/cloud credits, regulatory sandboxes, and curated network access to build traction.
• Experienced founders: scale capital, procurement pathways, enterprise pilot budgets, export support, and direct customer access to compress sales cycles and accelerate growth.

This requires whole-ecosystem execution.

• Government: seed/anchor funding, tax and procurement incentives, diverse supplier targets, and transparent reporting.
• Investors: capital plus structured mentorship, inclusive investment committees, feedback loops for rejected pitches.
• Corporates: ring-fenced pilot budgets and supplier-diversity commitments that convert to multi-year contracts for qualifying startups.
• Industry bodies & founders: peer networks, showcases, and playbooks that share what works.

Finally, set measurable outcomes – pilots converting to paid contracts, follow-on funding rates, revenue and jobs created, and time-to-first-enterprise deal. What gets measured gets scaled.

By targeting capital where innovation is fastest and tailoring support to a founder’s stage, we don’t just help women and minority entrepreneurs start, we enable them to scale, compete globally, and deliver outsized returns. This is smart economic policy and a durable growth strategy.

Why Diversity in Capital Allocation is Commercially Smart

Backing women and ethnic minority founders isn’t just for equity – it’s a growth strategy.

• Untapped markets – Diverse founders bring cultural fluency, trust, and ready-made distribution into communities incumbents miss, unlocking new revenues. For global businesses, these founders de-risk expansion by pinpointing real use cases, navigating local norms and procurement, and exploiting wider market gaps.
• Better innovation – Diverse teams bring different perspectives and lived experiences, all of which help spot unmet needs, biases or design flaws. This translates into more resilient and innovative problem-solving.
• Risk diversification – Homogeneous portfolios are highly correlated (and brittle). Diversity across founders, sectors, and markets reduces concentration risk and improves risk-adjusted returns.
• Human-capital ROI – Investing in diverse founders activates underused talent, translating into more productivity, jobs, and tax revenue. By combining lived-experience with deep insight into the communities and emerging markets they serve, they build and adapt products with tighter product–market fit – resulting in leaner builds, cleaner unit economics, and faster monetisation.

Conclusion

Female and minority founders should lean into the new funding schemes that are available and build momentum through networking, persistence and showing impact. Use every small win, connection and support to build your case.

Backing women and under-represented founders isn’t a gesture of fairness – it’s a growth strategy for the UK. The £500m initiative will only deliver if capital is paired with capability and access by the government, investors, corporates and industry bodies. Measure what matters and we’ll enable women and under-represented founders to start, scale, and lead – driving innovation, resilience, and long-term UK competitiveness.

About the Author

Janthana Kaenprakhamroy is the CEO of Tapoly, an award-winning insurtech serving SMEs and freelancers. Recognised by Forbes as one of the Top 6 Women Founders to Watch, she has been named Insurance Leader of the Year (Women in Finance Awards 2021), Innovator of the Year (UK FinTech Awards 2023), and one of TechRound’s Top 50 Women in Tech (2025). She was a former chartered accountant and internal audit director at investment banks, having previously worked at UBS, Deutsche Bank, JPMorgan, and BNP Paribas.

The post How Women and Under-Represented Founders Can Make an Impact appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Dr. Sarah Matt, MD, MBA

The graveyard of failed health tech startups is littered with brilliant code and breathtaking valuations. Yet, their failures were rarely technical; they were profoundly human. This article argues that the missing code in digital health is not a better algorithm, but a different kind of leadership. High emotional intelligence (EQ) leaders, who prioritize empathy, trust, and the messy realities of patient care, are the ones who can bridge the gap between shiny innovation and sustainable, real-world adoption.

Let’s be brutally honest. For every dollar invested in health tech, a graveyard of well-funded, beautifully coded failures grows larger. We’ve seen telehealth platforms once valued at nearly $2 billion go bankrupt. We’ve watched AI-powered diagnostic tools fail to gain traction despite flawless algorithms. The post-mortems often blame market timing or reimbursement hurdles. But they’re wrong.

The real reason health tech fails so spectacularly has little to do with the tech itself. It fails because of a profound leadership gap. It fails because it’s often led by people who understand code but not chaos. They understand data, but not despair. They can build a seamless user interface, but can’t navigate the messy, high-stakes, deeply human ecosystem of actual healthcare.

As a surgeon who pivoted to technology strategy early in my career, I’ve had a foot in both worlds. I’ve seen the promise of digital tools firsthand, but I’ve also lived the frustrating reality of their implementation: the endless clicks in an EHR that pull your eyes away from a patient, the “pilotitis” of a revolving door of disconnected apps that overwhelm clinicians, and the cold, hard truth that technology cannot fix a broken system.

The missing code isn’t a new programming language. It’s high emotional intelligence (EQ) in the C-suite. High-EQ leaders are the essential bridge between the sterile environment of a tech incubator and the unpredictable reality of a clinic, a hospital ward, or a patient’s home. They build systems that don’t just work in theory but thrive in practice. Here’s how:

High-EQ Leaders Build for Trust, Not Just Tech

Low-EQ leadership is obsessed with the “what.” What does the algorithm do? What is the ROI? What are the features?

High-EQ leadership is obsessed with the “who” and the “how.” Who will this serve? How will it earn their trust? They understand that in healthcare, trust is the ultimate currency. Without it, the best technology is just expensive vaporware.

Look at the programs that succeed. They aren’t just dropping tech into a community; they are co-designing solutions. In Syracuse, New York, Dr. David Lehmann’s street medicine team provides care to the unhoused population. The innovation isn’t a fancy app; it’s the consistent, reliable presence of a doctor on a sidewalk. The trust they build is what unlocks the ROI, dramatically reducing costly emergency room visits. High-EQ leaders know that technology can only scale what’s already there. If trust doesn’t exist, you’re just scaling alienation.

They Design for the Five Pillars of Access, Not Just a Single Metric. In The Borderless Healthcare Revolution, I frame access around five interdependent pillars: Physical, Financial, Cultural, Digital, and Trust/Knowledge. Low-EQ leaders tend to focus on just one or two; usually the digital and financial pillars. They build a great app but forget that a patient may lack the broadband to use it (a Digital Pillar failure) or that the language in the app doesn’t resonate with their cultural background (a Cultural Pillar failure).  We saw this in rural Alaska, where Medicaid policy forced indigenous patients to take a floatplane to a clinic just to log into a telehealth appointment, a perfect example of a system blind to its own flawed processes.

A high-EQ leader sees the entire ecosystem and thinks about the full system. They ask the tough questions:

• Will this work for someone on a weak cellular signal? (Physical/Digital)
• Does this account for the fact that a patient might not trust a doctor who doesn’t look like them? (Cultural/Trust)
• Is this truly affordable, or are we just shifting costs? (Financial)

They design for the messy reality of a patient’s life, not the clean logic of a spreadsheet.

They See People, Not Just Data Points

One of the most dangerous myths in health tech is that data is neutral. It’s not. AI algorithms trained on historically biased datasets don’t solve underlying problems; they amplify them with terrifying efficiency. A high-EQ leader understands this isn’t an academic debate; it’s a direct threat to performance, market access, and the bottom line. They demand diversity not just in their teams, but in their training data. They push for “fairness audits” and build governance structures that ask, “Which populations will this fail, and what will that failure cost us?” They know that an algorithm that works perfectly for a white male in Silicon Valley might be dangerously inaccurate for a Black woman in rural Alabama. An algorithm that fails for a significant portion of the population is not a breakthrough; it’s a liability that will show up in lawsuits, reputational damage, and a shrinking market share.

Exhibit 1: Low-EQ vs. High-EQ Leadership in Health Tech

The Ultimate Algorithm is Empathy

The future of healthcare won’t be won by the company with the smartest AI or the sleekest user interface. It will be won by leaders who have the courage to embrace the complexity of being human. It will be won by those who understand that you can’t code compassion, you can’t automate empathy, and you can’t build a trusting relationship with a chatbot (yet!).

We have enough shiny objects. What we need now are leaders with the emotional intelligence to see beyond the code and see the full system. We need leaders who recognize that the most powerful algorithm we have is, and always will be, our ability to earn the currency of trust. That’s the code that will finally bridge the border between what technology can do and what healthcare must be.

About the Author

Dr. Sarah Matt, MD, MBA is a surgeon turned health tech strategist on a mission to ensure geography no longer dictates care. A former Oracle Health exec and author of The Borderless Healthcare Revolution, she grounds her innovation by continuing to treat patients in rural and underserved communities.

The post Humanity as the Ultimate Algorithm: Why High-EQ Leaders are the Missing Code in Health Tech appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Professor Debbie Bayntun-Lees

New research from Hult International Business School offers a fresh perspective on male engagement in gender equity. The Gender Equity Mindset Model provides a practical, emotionally attuned framework to help leaders and HR teams understand and support men at different stages of allyship, moving from disengagement to active partnership in creating inclusive workplaces.

The Missing Piece in Gender Equity

The business case for gender-diverse leadership is well-established. McKinsey’s latest findings show organisations with high gender diversity are 25% more likely to outperform on profitability, while the World Economic Forum has repeatedly emphasised gender equity as a driver of resilience and innovation in leadership teams.

Despite this, progress remains slow, and one persistent gap is men’s limited involvement in driving that change.

In one of the organisations we studied, fewer than 10% of over 2,500 invited male leaders responded to a survey on gender equity. In the second, the response rate was even lower – just 3.6% out of over 13,000 senior male employees. While these figures initially appear discouraging, they speak volumes: many men are not opposed to inclusion efforts, but feel unclear about their role, uncomfortable with the discourse, or unsure how to engage without risk.

To create systemic, sustainable change, we must first understand how men perceive gender equity—and what organisations can do to help them step into allyship with purpose and confidence. That was the goal of our latest study, which received 576 responses in total. 

Understanding the Mindset Behind Allyship

Working with these two multinational organisations, we surveyed male employees across a range of business functions, seniorities, and geographies. Through qualitative and quantitative analysis, a clear pattern emerged: men don’t fall neatly into categories of “engaged” or “resistant.”

Instead, allyship emerged as a dynamic, developmental journey, shaped by organisational context, emotional readiness, personal identity, and cultural norms. We developed a framework to capture this progression: the Gender Equity Mindset Model. 

In our latest research, we found that men’s engagement with gender equity efforts doesn’t fall neatly into categories of “supportive” or “resistant.” Rather, allyship is a developmental journey, influenced by emotional readiness, organisational culture, personal experiences, and broader social norms. To help organisations understand, and support, this evolution, we developed the Gender Equity Mindset Model.

Figure 1: The Allyship Journey – Gender Equity Mindset Model

The model/this diagram maps four core stages that men typically progress through on their journey to allyship. Each stage is associated with a distinct mindset and emotional state, and each presents unique opportunities for leadership development and cultural change. While the stages are described sequentially, our data shows that men may move fluidly between them depending on their context, support systems, and leadership environment.

This diagram illustrates the four progressive stages of male allyship – Apathy, Ambivalence, Reflective and Responsible, and Energised and Motivated, each aligned with a dominant mindset and emotional state. It provides organisations with a lens to understand where men are in their journey and how best to support their development into active equity partners.

Figure 1: The Mindset Journey to Gender Equity

In Stage 1: Apathy, men express emotional detachment and intellectual disengagement from gender equity. The prevailing mindset here is one of zero-sum bias—the belief that gains for one group necessarily come at the expense of another. The emotional tone is often indifference or even quiet resistance, rooted in the perception that equity initiatives are unnecessary or irrelevant to their experience. As one participant shared, “It’s not something I’ve thought about. I’ve worked hard to get where I am—I assume others have the same opportunity.”

Stage 2: Ambivalence is marked by uncertainty and internal conflict. Here, men may agree with equity in principle but feel confused about their role or unsure how to contribute without risk. The dominant emotion is confusion, and the mindset is conflicted. Some men describe feeling excluded from the conversation or hesitant to speak for fear of being misunderstood. One participant reflected, “I’m aware of it, but sometimes it feels like the message is: ‘You’re the problem’- even if you’re trying to help.”

As men begin to reflect more deeply on their own social identity and observe the realities faced by women around them, they enter Stage 3: Reflective and Responsible. This stage is underpinned by a mindset of seeking solutions and an emotional shift toward awareness. It is often triggered by personal experiences, becoming a parent, mentoring a female colleague, or hearing stories of workplace inequality. “It makes me feel disappointed,” said one respondent. “I wouldn’t want my daughter to be treated like that at work.”

Finally, Stage 4: Energised and Motivated represents active, empowered allyship. These men are not only aware of gender equity issues, they feel a personal responsibility to challenge them. The mindset here is one of active allyship, and the emotional state is empowerment, often accompanied by urgency. These individuals advocate for systemic change, mentor others, and serve as visible champions of inclusion. As one participant put it, “It’s about doing what’s right, not just what’s expected. I want to be part of making this better – for everyone.”

From Awareness to Action: Targeted Interventions

One of the most powerful aspects of the Gender Equity Mindset Model is its developmental potential. It not only explains where men may be in their allyship journey; it also offers interventions aligned to each stage to help them move forward.

By aligning engagement efforts with the mindset stage of the individual, organisations can make allyship feel personal, possible, and purposeful.

Table 1: Enhanced Gender Equity Allyship Intervention Table

Why This Model Matters Now

Too often, allyship is framed as a compliance issue, or worse, a performance. But genuine allyship requires inner work, relationship-building, and a willingness to challenge dominant norms.

Our research also revealed several reasons why some men hesitate to engage in gender equity efforts. Many expressed a fear of saying the wrong thing, concerned that even well-intentioned contributions could be misinterpreted or criticised. Others worried about being perceived as “the problem”, especially in environments where gender conversations were framed in ways that felt accusatory. Some men felt excluded from equity discussions altogether, unsure if their perspectives were welcome or relevant. Underpinning all of this was a lack of clarity around what allyship actually entails—what it looks like in practice, and how to do it authentically and effectively.

Organisational culture can either amplify these fears or create the conditions for growth. When companies offer men the psychological safety to explore, question, and reflect without judgement, they create space for transformation.

“Men who haven’t personally experienced discrimination often don’t engage—not because they don’t care, but because they don’t see how they fit in.”
—Participant

Allyship as a Shared Leadership Responsibility

This work is not only relevant for HR – it’s a leadership issue.

Equity cannot be achieved through policy alone. It must be embedded in how leaders behave, how teams operate, and how individuals make decisions. Allyship should be recognised in leadership assessments, tied to progression, and supported through continuous learning.

“I want to lead a team where everyone feels valued, and everyone sees the value in others. That’s not just a DEI issue-it’s a business imperative.”
—Participant quote, Energised Stage

Organisations that do this well report not only improved engagement and innovation but also greater retention of talent, particularly among women and underrepresented groups.

Looking Forward: Building a Culture of Shared Commitment

The Gender Equity Mindset Model offers a new language for understanding where men are in their allyship journey. But more importantly, it offers a roadmap for how to move forward together.

We’re also in the process of piloting a self-assessment tool, enabling organisations to map individual mindsets and tailor development plans accordingly. If you’re interested in learning more or integrating this tool into your equity strategy, feel free to get in touch.

Meaningful change happens when people are invited into it, not pressured or excluded. When men are given space to grow, reflect, and act with purpose, allyship becomes more than a value, it becomes a shared, sustained practice.

That’s how we create the cultures we say we want.

About the Author

Professor Debbie Bayntun-Lees is Professor of Leadership & Organisational Development at Hult International Business School, specialising in inclusive leadership and organisational transformation. Her research focuses on allyship, systemic change, and how organisations build inclusive and resilient cultures through emotionally intelligent leadership.

The post The Missing Half: A Mindset-Based Approach to Male Allyship in the Workplace appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Nik Kinley

Human history shows a persistent failure to choose leaders suited for power. Capability is often valued over suitability, yet power inevitably changes people, amplifying flaws and undermining judgment. Organisations must assess how candidates handle authority, seek warning signs, and provide support to limit power’s corrosive effects on leadership performance.

As a species, humans seem to be remarkably slow learners sometimes.

Because if the history of leadership teaches us anything, it’s that we should be careful who we give power to. And yet, here we are, thousands of years later, apparently not so careful.

Don’t believe me? Just look across the Atlantic at current political leaders. Either direction will do. You’ll find individuals amazingly skilled in some ways, but whose flaws and negative traits seem to become amplified by the authority and influence they hold.

And our seemingly stubborn capacity to select leaders unsuited to power or vulnerable to its negative effects isn’t just limited to politicians. Because it is equally prevalent in almost every organisation.

Most businesses try to be careful who they select, of course. In fact, many invest heavily in assessment and selection processes. But they tend to focus on what leaders are capable of – on their ability to deliver results – rather than on how they will react to having power. And it’s a critical distinction. Because whether someone has the right qualities to deliver results is fundamentally different from how the power and status that comes with their role will affect them.

There is some overlap between capability and suitability, of course, because if someone is strongly negatively affected by power, their ability to do their job well will eventually be undermined. But the important word in that last sentence was eventually. Because the negative effects of power usually take time to build up, and most of the time, they don’t result in the outright failure of a leader, but more in a gradual undermining of their performance.

And power will have negative effects. No matter how strong a performer someone is, every leader is changed to some degree by the position they hold. By the way, it psychologically distances them from others, and the way it reduces how open people tend to be with them. In some, it can boost their ego and confidence, undermining openness, information flow and decision-making. In others, it can feed insecurity, driving defensive and overly dominant behaviours. Whatever the specifics, everyone is affected to some degree.

So, what are the things organisations can do and look for to ensure that the leaders they select are not just the best short-term performers but also the ones most suited to holding power? It’s a complex subject because how much people are affected by power is the result of a combination of individual, situational and organisational factors. As a result, there are few definitive rules, but there are some general guidelines firms can follow.

• Talk about suitability. The key thing we need to do is to explicitly consider suitability for power separately from capability for role. We need to do this because, otherwise, all we tend to see is someone’s capability – whether they can do what we need them to. This means we need to think through what power will do to people and, through how they use it, the impact they will have on both the people they lead, the culture they create, and the positions they hold.
• Look for red flags, not green lights. Statistically speaking, it is easier to predict failure than success. That’s because no one trait is enough to ensure success, but it can be enough to cause us to fail. And it’s the same with power. It’s easier to predict who will react badly to it than who will manage it effectively. So, rather than focusing on who to select, we’re often better off looking at who to avoid.
• Look for the effects of power already there. If someone already displays behaviours that we know power tends to magnify, then that is usually a warning sign. So, things to look for include overconfidence, a lack of curiosity, a tendency to overgeneralise, a lack of insight into their impact on others, fear of failure, high need for clarity, moralistic judgement, being strongly emotionally led or informed by instincts, and impulsivity.
• Beware of extremes. Individuals who are extremely anything are likely to be very hit-and-miss in how they respond to different situations and pressures. That’s not to say that they’ll always react badly to power. But you’re usually taking more of a gamble with them.
• Think ahead. It often takes time for power to take a toll. So don’t just think about what someone is like now. Think about what they’re going to be like in a few years. (Most of the candidates I meet when assessing CEOs for roles could add value in the short term. It’s the medium and long term when weaknesses usually start to have an effect).
• Be wary of power need and expediency. Having either a very low or high need for power is associated with poorer moral judgements. Specifically, more expedient behaviour and a tendency toward black-and-white, generalised moral judgements. Actually gaining power then tends to make this worse.
• Beware of impression management. People who seem strongly sensitive or concerned with how others view them and engage in a lot of impression management are often negatively affected by power. That’s because their sensitivity is almost always created by insecurity of some sort, which in turn means they are more likely to react defensively to any perceived threat to their power (such as negative feedback or having their thinking questioned).

Selecting leaders isn’t easy at the best of times. The failure rates of corporate leaders are evidence enough of that. But there are guidelines we can use, and until we start using them, our ability to improve who we select isn’t going to improve. In fact, it’s going to get worse.

Maybe there was a time when power was less toxic, and there were more checks and balances in place, when suitability for power was only 20-30% of what mattered. But as leadership roles have become more exposed, less secure, and more pressurised, the negative effects of power can have on people have intensified. And with this, the importance of individuals’ ability to deal with these negative effects has increased dramatically.

Of course, selecting the right people is only part of the solution. It needs to be accompanied by investing in better preparing leaders for how power can affect them, as well as providing them with better training and support to deal with its effects.

We won’t get it right every time, but by more explicitly considering suitability for power, we can at least minimise our mistakes. And perhaps, even learn from them.

About the Author

Nik Kinley is a London-based leadership consultant, assessor and coach with over 35 years of experience working with some of the world’s biggest companies. An award-winning author, he has written eight books, the latest of which is The Power Trap: How Leadership Changes People and What to Do About It, out 29 July 2025.

The post Is Your Star Performer Suitable For Power? appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Jens Laue, Matthew Robinson, Monique de Ritter and Michela Coppola

As Europe recalibrates its sustainability regulations, it may seem natural for businesses to ease efforts in collecting and integrating sustainability information. Yet the real opportunity is to move ahead — strengthening data, talent, and technology so that sustainability information becomes a driver of innovation, resilience, and long-term competitiveness.

“Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.”

Thomas Edison’s words resonate stronger than ever today as businesses face growing uncertainty around the future of sustainability regulation in Europe. Yet within the complexity lies opportunity for those willing to engage with regulation as a catalyst rather than as a constraint.

Over the past five years, the EU has set a global benchmark with the EU Taxonomy, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), and the proposed Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). The direction was clear: mandate detailed sustainability data disclosure to drive transparency, improve risk-management, and steer businesses towards sustainable, resilient models.

But even as rules shift, one signal remains clear: sustainability is becoming a long-term driver of performance and innovation.

Now, with economic headwinds and growing competitiveness concerns, reducing regulatory and administrative burdens is a key priority for governments, industry lobbies, and lawmakers. In this context, the European Commission proposed the Omnibus Simplification Package, which, if adopted in its current form, would significantly reduce the scope and depth of sustainability disclosure and due diligence requirements.

These moves have sparked debate. Is the EU recalibrating or retreating from its Green Deal ambitions? Is this no longer the EU’s “man on the moon moment”? Amid the uncertainty, the challenge for companies is to decide how to treat sustainability data in this shifting context.

The risk lies not in regulatory fluctuations, but in treating the collection of sustainability information as a compliance task rather than a strategic capability. Businesses may be tempted to pause or scale back efforts to collect high-quality sustainability data. But even as rules shift, one signal remains clear: sustainability is becoming a long-term driver of performance and innovation. Those who invest with foresight instead of pausing can gain a competitive advantage.

Accenture’s research shows that three strategic actions can turn sustainability regulation into a business advantage: building intelligent data infrastructure, embedding ESG metrics into core decision-making, and empowering teams to act on sustainability intelligence. Companies that take these steps are best placed to lead, regardless of how the regulatory landscape shifts.

Regulation as a driver of innovation

Leading businesses already recognize that if they embrace sustainability regulation in spirit, not just letter, it can become a source of strategic advantage.

A recent Accenture survey across five major European economies reveals a growing recognition of this mindset. Over half of business leaders already see sustainability regulation as a driver of competitiveness now. The figure rises to 65 percent in the medium term and 72 percent in the long term, evidence that more companies see the broader intent of regulation as a tool for national advantage (see figure 1).

Figure 1: Business leaders view sustainability regulation as a competitiveness driver

This perspective, however, goes beyond the aggregated, national level. Many leaders also recognize tangible benefits for their own organizations. Over half (54 percent) anticipate overall positive outcomes from current and upcoming sustainability legislation. And while rising operating costs are a concern, the top three expected outcomes are all positive: driving innovation, building brand trust, and staying ahead of investor and consumer demands (see figure 2).

Figure 2: Top anticipated outcomes of EU sustainability legislation

By treating sustainability data not as a reporting chore but as raw material for better decisions, companies can unlock powerful value.  Financial and non-financial performance should not be managed in isolation, nor should investment decisions be made in silos, as there is a strong correlation between traditional business decisions and sustainability impacts, and vice versa. Currently, fewer than 30 percent of large European firms integrate non-financial, ESG data into their decision-making processes but that’s changing. Nearly 60 percent expect to do so within three years, indicating that building a “sustainability intelligence” capability is becoming a strategic differentiator.

Turning sustainability data into a business driver: Three strategic actions

Forward-thinking companies are already taking strategic actions to harness sustainability intelligence. Their approach offers clear lessons for others, centered on three actions that deliver both immediate impact and long-term benefit:

1. Build robust, data-driven sustainability infrastructure to turn compliance into insight

For many companies, the challenge is not just a lack of information; it’s also the lack of infrastructure to make sense of it. New regulations are accelerating the demand for high-quality, granular, and auditable non-financial data. Yet most firms treat reporting as a siloed, manual exercise, narrowly focused on compliance. Organizations taking this reactive stance have limited strategic visibility and run the risk of falling behind more data-fluent competitors.

Leading organizations, on the other hand, are:

1. Adopting cloud-based solutions to streamline data management and enable real-time updates
2. Leveraging AI and machine learning to automate data classification, validation reporting, and analysis
3. Integrating sustainability metrics into enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems to enhance reporting accuracy, enable decision making, and generate efficiency.

These technologies are becoming core to how companies track, analyze, and act on sustainability signals.

Ørsted, for example, uses SparkCognition’s AI-powered Renewable Suite to integrate financial, operational, and third-party data—including weather forecasts—onto a single platform. This cloud-based system enhances data quality, enables self-serve models for actionable insights, accelerates fault detection, and fosters collaboration across the enterprise.

UPS spent years developing ORION, an AI-powered logistics engine that optimizes delivery routes in real time. The system not only cuts emissions, it also boosts operational efficiency, turning sustainability into a bottom-line driver.

A robust, connected data ecosystem can transform regulatory effort into an operational edge. By providing real-time insights, it can shift businesses from box-ticking to agile innovation, value creation, and industry leadership.

2. Embed non-financial intelligence into core decision-making

Building infrastructure is just the start; the real edge comes from using sustainability intelligence to guide strategy, operations, and capital allocation.  Few organizations are there yet. Forward-looking companies go beyond compliance, treating non-financial data as a lens for risk, opportunity, and long-term value, embedding ESG insights into core decision-making to anticipate change, seize advantage, and drive sustainable growth. To move from intent to impact, they focus on:

1. Developing integrated dashboards where leadership can access both financial and non-financial KPIs
2. Using AI-powered analytics to forecast risks and opportunities related to ESG performance
3. Aligning sustainability goals with investment and innovation strategies to attract responsible investors and future-proof the business

By embedding ESG metrics into enterprise dashboards and decision architectures, companies gain clearer insight into supply chain resilience, product lifecycles, climate risk, and stakeholder expectations.

Building infrastructure is just the start; the real edge comes from using sustainability intelligence to guide strategy, operations, and capital allocation.

For instance, BlackRock’s Aladdin Climate translates climate science and policy scenarios into climate-adjusted valuations, risk metrics, and financial models, equipping investors to anticipate how environmental risk will reshape valuations across portfolios.

This strategic integration treats sustainability intelligence as a strategic asset and drives better risk-adjusted returns, sharper innovation, and stronger stakeholder alignment.

3. Empower teams to act on sustainability insights

Data and dashboards mean little unless they drive action. Leading companies pair tools with talent and culture, embedding ESG intelligence into operations, adapting models, and bringing together the right skillset to use sustainability intelligence in real time, at scale. Measures include:

1. Upskilling employees in ESG analytics and data-driven decision-making
2. Embedding sustainability expertise across departments, ensuring that non-financial performance is part of business planning and operations.
3. Encouraging cross-functional collaboration between sustainability, finance, and innovation teams.

The answer is not to create isolated ESG teams, but embed sustainability literacy across functions and empower decision-makers—whether in finance, procurement or product development—to act with confidence and speed. This requires new capabilities, new incentives and, often, new governance models that align sustainability goals with operational execution.

Companies that equip teams with the right data, skills, and authority are creating cultures of continuous innovation, where sustainability is not just an objective, but a mindset.

Sustainability intelligence as a competitive advantage

Europe’s regulatory landscape may be shifting, but the direction is clear for businesses: sustainability is a defining force in how value is created, measured, and delivered. It remains a powerful driver of long-term competitiveness and innovation.

The European Competitiveness Compass and amendments put forward in the Omnibus Proposal underscore the need for a balanced approach, but simplification need not undermine the long-term benefits of sustainability initiatives. Organizations that invest in data capabilities, integrate non-financial metrics into decision-making, and build a sustainability-focused workforce will be better equipped to thrive in a rapidly evolving global economy.

The companies that invest with intention will be the leaders. They are building the infrastructure to turn compliance into insight. They are embedding sustainability intelligence into strategic decisions. And they are empowering teams to act on that intelligence, transforming sustainability from a reporting exercise into a source of resilience, efficiency, and growth.

In a time of uncertainty, the biggest risk is inertia. Competitive advantage will flow not to those who wait for regulatory clarity, but to those who use this moment to future-proof their business.

Sustainability is no longer a cost to manage. It is a capability to master.

About the Authors

Jens Laue is a Managing Director and Accenture’s global lead for Sustainability Measurement, Analytics, and Performance services.

Monique de Ritter is the Sustainability Measurement, Analytics, and Performance research specialist within Accenture Research.

Michela Coppola is the global CFO and Enterprise Value research lead within Accenture Research.

Matthew Robinson leads the sustainability team within Accenture Research.

The post Beyond the Regulatory Checkbox: Navigating Europe’s Shifting Sustainability Rules with Strategic Intent appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Bart Tkaczyk

Amid today’s complexity, continuous learning is leadership’s core discipline. This article reframes executive development as enterprise-critical, introducing the “executive learner” archetype—leaders who thrive through reflection, super-flexibility, and dynamic capability. With seven actionable dimensions and tools like “Executive Time-Outs,” it enables leaders to transform daily experience into strategic advantage—or risk obsolescence.

What separates relevant from replaceable in a world that changes overnight? In today’s high-stakes environment, it’s not pedigree—it’s the ability to learn, unlearn, and rewire at speed.

This article is for MBA students and candidates, executives and future executives, HR development professionals, management consultants, entrepreneurs, and business educators shaping the next wave of leadership. If you’re committed to building future-fit organizations—and people—this playbook is for you.

Long considered the gold standard for leadership development and career advancement, the MBA, executive education, and business education more broadly are now undergoing a profound transformation (Birkinshaw, 2024; Chatman, 2025; Dunne & Martin, 2006; Harrison et al., 2025; Hill, 2021; Jack, 2024; Lyons, 2017; Moules, 2016; Schoemaker, 2008; Walsh & Powell, 2020; Watson, 2024). New business realities, shifting stakeholder expectations, and human-centered values are demanding more than credentials—they’re demanding learning super-flexibility—and nothing short of continuing professional development and reflective learning. From theory-heavy training models to immersive, practice-based learning experiences, the executive development landscape is being rewritten—fast.

The critical difference? Training delivers content—it’s commonly activity-based. Learning drives growth—it’s results-driven. Training is typically instructor-led and designed to trigger specific behavior or skill change. It’s often reactive, pre-packaged, content-heavy, compliance-oriented, and box-ticking in nature. There’s still no bulletproof ROI on training—and the truth is, we don’t know if training creates success, or if success just buys more training… Learning, by contrast, is self-directed and work-based. It expands adaptive capacity through developmental experiences like coaching or mentoring. And you cannot pressure people to learn—period. Simply put: trainer-centered, menu-driven training may inform, but only strategically integrated learning transforms.

The learning that matters most does three things: it strengthens personal capability, advances professional capability, and impacts organizational capability.

Bottom line: learning is the new labor—it drives value, agility, and relevance—and it’s the defining edge for modern leaders.

In Response, Meet the Executive Learner:  A New Archetype

As seismic shifts in technology, geopolitics, sustainability, and social consciousness reshape the corporate ecosystem, the executive arena, and the fabric of organizational life, a new archetype is emerging: the executive learner—a leader who believes learning never ends and who embodies high learning agility, or what I call “learning super-flexibility”—an elevated, dynamic capability that spans seven vital dimensions:

• Exploratory drive—a proactive desire to seek out new ideas and experiences, energized by a hunger for learning, discovery, and growth.
• Reflective capacity—a disciplined habit of self-reflection that enables individuals to critically analyze their actions, identify blind spots, and recalibrate through internal dialogue, feedback, and lessons learned to improve future performance. It also encompasses meta-learning capacity (learning how to learn)—the ability to consciously monitor and upgrade one’s own learning strategies and processes over time.
• Cognitive range and flex-thinking—the ability to shift mental models and think fluidly across different knowledge domains and contexts. Leaders with high cognitive range can zoom in and out—moving from big-picture systems thinking to granular detail, from analytical logic to creative insight. They flex across disciplines in real time. Harnessing neuroplasticity, it recruits neuro-flexibility—the mental muscle to unlearn outdated patterns fast, relearn with smarter precision, and rewire thinking on demand.
• Relational intelligence and perspective-seeking—seeking out and engaging diverse voices, including those from different generations and cultures, to inform thinking and enable better decisions. It also involves cultivating team learning (teams serve as microcosms of the enterprise)—a disciplined, knowledge-creative practice of aligning group insight, fostering psychological safety, and accelerating collective performance through generative dialogue, strategic cohesion, agile teamwork, and the dynamics of social learning.
• Change confidence—the mindset that views change not as chaos, but as fuel for learning, adaptation, and strategic evolution.
• Strategic execution focus—aligning learning with purposeful, results-driven action that advances individual, team, and organizational goals.
• Personal insight—a clear-eyed understanding of one’s patterns, impact, and areas for growth and development. It also integrates an ethical learning mindset—applying an ethical lens and sound reasoning to the learning process itself.

Operationally, effective executive learners excel in both structured, forward-looking development (planned learning) and in learning opportunistically (adaptive, just-in-time, emergent learning). They acknowledge the tension between fast sense-making and deeper reflection—a dynamic I call the balance of speed and depth. They experiment, reflect, rapidly crack unfamiliar challenges, and consistently convert both success and failure into decisive learning and responsible action (bouncing forward, not just bouncing back).

Critically, to support this kind of behavior at scale, a healthy learning climate empowers all individuals and teams to experiment, test new ideas, learn from experience, and engage in ongoing (self-)development as a shared norm—not an exception.

Zooming out, in organizational terms, a learning organization is a future-fit enterprise that embeds and operationalizes continuing professional development and self-development for all into its culture—turning talent cultivation and individual and collective learning into levers for organizational super-flexibility, energized performance, strategic advantage, and sustained relevance. On the ground, continuous learning fuels creative innovation, supports evidence-based choices that elevate strategic decision-making, and accelerates organizational renewal.

In short, learning is not just a growth strategy—it’s a way of leading.

Future-Fit Executive: From Tradition to Reformation

Gone are the days of solving tidy, linear puzzles with static playbooks. Today’s leaders confront wicked problems: messy, evolving challenges with no clear definition, no single owner, let alone clear solutions. They don’t just manage change—they learn through it, from it, and because of it (Tkaczyk, 2021, 2022a, 2022b). Beyond that, these leaders are not just designers who imagine what could be—they are architects who turn vision into structure, sketching, shaping, and iterating the frontiers of tomorrow in real time. They lead not from behind a desk, but from within the system—reading signals, shaping moves, and powering change as it unfolds.

This ethos anchors The New MBA Playbook: An Updated Skills Mix for the Future Business World (Tkaczyk, 2025)—a strategic framework to revitalize executive learning, leadership development, and applied professional practice. But the transformation transcends acquiring new tools or tweaking yesterday’s tactics. This new wave of executive learners is unlearning outdated paradigms and embracing a skillset of dynamic capabilities that are as much about humanity as they are about performance—knowing that continuing professional development builds both confidence and credibility as a modern leader. The new playbook isn’t just an update; it’s a reformation. Ready or not, the future won’t accommodate hesitation, and it certainly won’t reward resistance. The future won’t wait for the unready—nor will it forgive the unwilling.

Beyond the Old Rules: 7 Strategic Shifts for the Executive Learner

Here are seven pivotal lessons from The New MBA Playbook—delivered not as idealized models or in abstraction, but through a kind of fast-cycle learning, often refined in real-world sprints and on-the-ground executive learning environments—that define this new breed of positive leadership. These lessons are crafted to bridge insight and execution, helping leaders—and their teams—apply what they learn in the heat of action through individual reflection and team learning alike. They also serve as catalysts for evolving not just leadership skills, but leadership identity itself.

Before diving into the seven shifts, a note on reflective learning is in order: skill-building and continuing professional development aren’t “one-size-fits-all.” Reflective practice helps leaders tailor their learning approach to what best fits their personal growth and organizational context.

Too often overlooked, reflective learning builds individual ownership of growth—shifting the focus from organizational responsibility to individual agency. Its real value lies in turning everyday experiences into strategic learning assets for future impact.

Take a strategic pause: consider maintaining a reflective learning journal (or log) to support intentional learning and sustained development. A well-kept learning and development journal not only facilitates growth toward competence and personal mastery—reinforcing your leadership learning discipline—it also provides tangible evidence of progress over time.

Such developmental rigor underpins the Executive Time-Outs: Learning Logs and Reflections ahead—strategic tools intended to turn experience into insight, and insight into action. Each shift is paired with a Time-Out: a structured reflection mechanism designed to help leaders learn both retrospectively and opportunistically from real-time events. This dual-track approach encourages reflection during action—adjusting and course-correcting “in the moment”—as well as after action, extracting learning intelligence to refine future thinking and behavior.

Together, these practices form a critical learning loop that sharpens judgment and enables executive learners to continually self-develop and lead from a place of elevated thinking and informed perspective in complex, fast-moving environments.

Lesson 1: From Models to Meaning: Behavioral Economics and Heart-Based Leadership

Leadership has long relied on rational models, forecasts, and metrics. But the modern executive learner understands that people do not always act rationally—and neither do markets. Behavioral economics has illuminated the biases and emotional drivers behind decision-making (think, for example, confirmation or self-serving bias). But where data ends, heart-based leadership begins.

Kindness; positive, productive energy; generosity; psychological safety; co-active followership; and trust are no longer soft skills—they are strategic assets. These leaders build positive psychological capital—optimism, hope, confidence, and resiliency—drawing from the science of positive organizational behavior to fuel innovation and sustained performance. The best executive learners don’t just ask, “What’s the ROI?” They ask, “What’s the human and social impact? Are we becoming happier, healthier—not merely wealthier?”

Increasingly, legacy economic systems, once driven primarily by survival instincts (and, at times, unchecked greed!), are now being fundamentally redefined to reflect human-centered frameworks and ideals—honoring human dignity, organizational virtuousness, and insights from both positive organizational scholarship and humanistic management. These shifts advance principles like the economy of communion, the common good, and universal betterment—moving far beyond narrow self-interested benefit.

Executive Time-Out 1: Learning Log and Reflection

How well do you balance data-driven decision-making with positive leadership and followership rooted in a people-first mindset? Are you actively energizing your workplace? Consider one way you could more meaningfully create and sustain high-quality connections at work—especially in moments of pressure—to lead with heart—then clarity, trust, and lasting impact.

Lesson 2: Liberating Workplaces: Blending Dialogic Organization Development and Generative Change

Command-and-control leadership is no longer the only—or the most effective—approach. Executive learners today embrace organizations as living systems—fluid, complex, and co-creative. Instead of robotically prescribing change from the top down, they initiate dialogic processes: open conversations rooted in inquiry that invite participation, spark collective intelligence, and foster design thinking and design innovation.

Using tools like positive organizational energy, collective sensemaking, and strategic super-flexibility, they foster cultures where transformation and organizational renewal emerge organically. These aren’t just change initiatives or programs —they’re movements with intent and momentum.

Executive Time-Out 2: Learning Log and Reflection

What’s one shift you can make to move from directing change to co-creating it? In your next initiative, how might you spark dialogue rather than issue directives? And how are you engaging your team in sustained, collective inquiry—examining the assumptions, mental models, and habitual processes that shape how learning unfolds in your everyday work and leadership? How can you even more intentionally cross-fertilize thinking and ideas across teams, functions, or stakeholder groups to unlock richer insight and nurture generative change?

Lesson 3: Helping Genuinely: Coaching and Consulting that Scale Positive Leadership

In parallel, the coaching revolution has moved beyond buzzwords and pop psychology. Today’s high-impact executives view coaching not as a remedial fix—coaching catalyzes positive developmental spirals over time. Grounded in evidence-based methods and organizational psychology, modern executive coaching is both rigorous and deeply human—but it’s only part of the equation.

Executive learners also rely on strategic, human-centered consulting that draws on deep expertise, integrative thinking, and a focus on long-term value. This new approach isn’t about stopgap measures or glossy presentations—it’s about partnering with the organization to solve complex challenges in sustainable, strength-based ways.

Whether through one-on-one, team or group coaching, or enterprise-level consulting, executive learners seek professional support that aligns with their purpose, values, and strategic goals. They invest in positive human resource and organization development that delivers not just improved performance, but also mindset shifts that stick and cultures that thrive.

In this model, organizational helping is not hierarchical—it’s collaborative, grounded, and growth-focused. Coaching or consulting, the goal is the same: real impact, not rhetoric, that resonates across culture and performance.

Executive Time-Out 3: Learning Log and Reflection

Are you deliberately prioritizing your own continuous development and self-development as a leader? Have you built a consistent discipline around it—one that supports sustained growth in both mindset and practice? Are you fully leveraging the executive coaching and human resource development consulting resources available to you? Consider whether your current learning ecosystem and developmental structures meaningfully challenge and stretch you in ways that align with your strategic goals. Can you demonstrate the link between human resource development practices and the organization’s capacity for continuous improvement through learning culture metrics?

Lesson 4: Ethics in Action: Designing for Behavioral Integrity

Why do well-educated, well-intentioned leaders sometimes cross ethical lines? Behavioral ethics provides the answer: we often act against our own moral compass not because we are bad, but because we are human—susceptible to bias, pressure, and blind spots.

Executive learners recognize this paradox. They create systems and cultures that support ethical behavior under stress, amid ambiguity, and in gray areas. They don’t point to ethics—they design for it. Transparency, accountability, and values-driven decision-making are embedded into operations, not relegated to the HR handbook. In doing so, they move beyond compliance and toward building the good enterprise—one where ethical clarity, human dignity, social consciousness, and business performance reinforce each other.

Executive Time-Out 4: Learning Log and Reflection

Think about a recent tough decision—how did organizational culture influence your ethical reasoning in that moment? Which systems or cues could you strengthen to make ethical behavior the default in complex situations? Any signals you might have overlooked? Consider how learning by self-insight—honest reflection on your motivations, triggers, biases, assumptions, and decision patterns—can deepen ethical awareness and support better leadership choices, especially when navigating moral tension in the future.

Lesson 5: Winning the Global Game: Developing Cultural Intelligence and Born Global Thinking

Today’s business world is borderless from day one. Future-ready executive learners understand that global success is not just about scale, but also about sensitivity. They cultivate cultural intelligence (CQ)—the ability to comprehend, adapt, connect, and lead across diverse contexts.

To grow internationally, they embrace “born global” strategies, using digital platforms, blitzscaling tactics, and agile frameworks. But their real advantage lies in their mindset: open, curious, and attuned to the nuance of local realities—where they often find unexpected inspiration, including through reverse innovation.

Executive Time-Out 5: Learning Log and Reflection

Where are your cultural blind spots as a leader? Identify one market, team, or stakeholder group where deeper cultural understanding could drive better outcomes.

Lesson 6: Amplifying Branding: High-Energy Stories that Resonate

Similarly, in an era saturated with noise, the strategic executive learner becomes a storyteller-in-chief and a narrative thinker. High-energy brands don’t just sell products—they integrate into valued activities or lifestyles and convey purpose. These leaders craft narratives that are genuine, resonant, and emotionally compelling—for example: heritage, contemporary, vision, or folklore stories.

They understand that brands today must be cool not for coolness’ sake, but because they reflect a vibrant organizational soul. Storytelling becomes a form of strategy—humanizing data, contextualizing mission, and mobilizing communities.

Executive Time-Out 6: Learning Log and Reflection

What story is your leadership telling—intentionally or unintentionally? Reflect on how you communicate your purpose and whether it resonates with your audience.

Lesson 7: Thinking Unbound: Reimagining Strategy Beyond the Plan

Perhaps most importantly, executive learners are reimagining what it means to strategize. The classical era prized stability and control. Today’s leaders must thrive in paradox, volatility, and disruption.

Planning, in the old sense, is obsolete. In its place comes strategizing: a continuous, proactive and adaptive process rooted in learning, disciplined creativity, critical thinking, and courageous choice-making. The boundaryless executive learner balances bold aspiration with agile execution, often working in focused sprints that test, learn, and pivot rapidly. Ultimately, they know that the best strategy is often the one that emerges—not the one that was drafted long ago.

Executive Time-Out 7: Learning Log and Reflection

Do you use a learning approach to strategy? Are your processes for strategy formation, execution, evaluation, and improvement deliberately designed as learning experiences? How agile is your strategic thinking? Revisit one area of your business where you’re still locked into outdated planning—and experiment with a more adaptive, learning-driven strategizing approach. Try exploring a key priority initiative using a sprint model to test assumptions and accelerate learning.

Always in Beta: The Executive Who Never Stops Learning

The executive learner is not defined by titles, certificates, or case studies. They are defined by curiosity, humility, and a deep commitment to learning and development—always striving to become better, so that their teams, their organizations, and the world can become better too.

They are integrative thinkers (and doers!) and soul-searchers. They are boundary-crossers and bridge-builders. Most importantly, they are relentless learners—because in the frontier age, continuous learning isn’t a phase. It’s a continuous discipline; it’s powerfully a way of leading (Tkaczyk, 2015).

To that end, they operate in perpetual prototype mode—always iterating, always evolving, never assuming the current version is the final one. To them, “done” is a dangerous illusion.

Fittingly, The New MBA Playbook makes clear this new leadership DNA isn’t a luxury—it’s a necessity. Clearly, the leaders of what’s next are already here. They don’t just hold MBAs or executive MBAs—they embody them: redefined, reimagined, and relentlessly human.

Make no mistake: this isn’t just a shift in theory; it calls for a bold rethinking of established executive human resource development and management practices—pushing boundaries to excel in a future shaped by breakneck change and radical innovation. That means breaking silos, updating mental models, and architecting knowledge-centric cultures where organizational learning and transformation are embedded—not episodic—and where learning and (self-)development opportunities and resources for all are normalized—not rationed.

Here’s the hard truth: yesterday’s expertise is tomorrow’s liability. In a world where change never clocks out, there’s simply no excuse for standing still. Standing still is not just risky—it’s irresponsible.

Let that sink in: the most effective leaders aren’t the ones with all the answers—they’re the ones who simply refuse to stop learning.

Because they are—and must remain—Always in Beta…

To Learn More

This article draws from The New MBA Playbook: An Updated Skills Mix for the Future Business World (Routledge, 2025). Extend your impact through these resources:

• Access the Book to explore a full strategic framework for reimagining MBA, executive learning, and future-fit leadership: routledge.com/9781032805559
• Watch the Micro-Learning Video to gain a fast-track executive briefing on the playbook’s essential insights: https://youtu.be/Xrq34Jj2NMQ?feature=shared
• Download the free Poster (sized for A1 printing) to energize your workplace and team spaces with a visible culture of continuous learning: https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3-euw1-ap-pe-ws4-cws-documents.ri-prod/9781003508274/The%20New%20MBA%20Playbook_Poster_Sized%20for%20A1%20Printing.pdf

About the Author

Bart Tkaczyk (DrBTkaczykMBA), Fulbright Scholar (UC Berkeley), Executive Member (AOM), and Managing Member of ENERGIZERS LLC, advises global executives on strategy, leadership, and transformation. An award-winning strategic HRD consultant, executive coach, and keynote speaker, he delivers impact where it matters most—boardrooms, executive classrooms, and transformation zones. His acclaimed books with Routledge include Leading Positive Organizational Change and The New MBA Playbook.

References

• Julian Birkinshaw, “Leadership Imperatives in an AI World,” Ivey Business Journal, July/August 2024.

• Jennifer Chatman, “A Celebration of Our Haas Culture: 15 Years and Counting!,” UC Berkeley Haas Dean’s Speaker Series, audio podcast, February 18, 2025, Podbean, https://berkeley-haas-deans-speaker-series.podbean.com/e/deans-speaker-series-a-celebration-of-our-haas-culture/ (accessed September 15, 2025).

• David Dunne and Roger Martin, “Design Thinking and How It Will Change Management Education: An Interview and Discussion,” Academy of Management Learning & Education, 2006, volume 5, issue 4, pp. 512–523.

• Ann Harrison, Michele de Nevers and Katherine Baird, “Transforming Business Education for Sustainability,” California Management Review, 2025, volume 67, issue 2, pp. 40–57.

• Andrew Hill, “Crisis Could Be the Mother of Reinvention for Business Schools,” Financial Times, May 6, 2021, www.ft.com/content/6e3cf7b8-f203-4568-a290-836eef41b515 (accessed September 15, 2025).

• Andrew Jack, “Balancing Theory and Application in Business School Research,” Financial Times, November 8, 2024, www.ft.com/content/8a354695-0ed9-44eb-bd22-b017a4f1cbbe (accessed September 15, 2025).

• Richard Lyons, “Economics of the Ed Tech Revolution,” California Management Review, 2017, volume 59, issue 4, pp. 49–55.

• Jonathan Moules, “The Art School MBA that Promotes Creative Innovation,” Financial Times, November 14, 2016, www.ft.com/content/3f956802-a4e8-11e6-8b69-02899e8bd9d1 (accessed September 15, 2025).

• Paul J. H. Schoemaker, “The Future Challenges of Business: Rethinking Management Education,” California Management Review, 2008, volume 50, issue 3, pp. 119–139.

• Bart Tkaczyk, “Leading as Constant Learning and Development: The Knowledge-Creative Enterprise,” Design Management Review, 2015, volume 26, issue 3, pp. 38–43. [Special issue on Organization Development and Design Management.] Related microlearning resource: www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZP00tpAQKw (accessed September 15, 2025).

• Bart Tkaczyk, Leading Positive Organizational Change: Energize – Redesign – Gel, Routledge, London and New York, 2021. Related microlearning resource: www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bOo1q2hYt4 (accessed September 15, 2025).

• Bart Tkaczyk, “Energizing, Redesigning, and Gelling: Super-Flexible Capabilities for Leading in the Face of Unanticipated Change,” California Management Review (Insights), September 6, 2022, cmr.berkeley.edu/2022/09/energizing-redesigning-and-gelling-super-flexible-capabilities-for-leading-in-the-face-of-unanticipated-change/ (accessed September 15, 2025).

• Bart Tkaczyk, “Positive Organization Development: Design-Inspired Strategizing for Co-Creating Positive Organizational Change,” Design Management Review, 2022, volume 33, issue 4, pp. 12–17. [Special issue on Barriers, Supports, & Celebration of Good Design.]

• Bart Tkaczyk, The New MBA Playbook: An Updated Skills Mix for the Future Business World, Routledge, London and New York, 2025. Related microlearning resource: www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xrq34Jj2NMQ (accessed September 15, 2025).

• Anita Walsh and Philip Powell, “Re-Imagining the MBA: An Arts-Based Approach,” Higher Education Pedagogies, 2020, volume 5, issue 1, pp. 148–164.

• Thomas Watson, “Hope Inspiring Leadership,” Ivey Business Journal, November/December 2024.

The post The Rise of the Executive Learner: No Growth. No Edge. No Excuse. appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Beatriz (Béa) Victoria Albina

Perfectionism among women leaders often looks like competence and control, but underneath lies stress physiology that erodes health, creativity, and connection. This piece explores how the nervous system under patriarchy wires women toward relentless self-monitoring, and how emotional intelligence paired with nervous system regulation offers a way to break the cycle.

Perfectionism has long been praised as the secret engine of women’s success in leadership. This is the leader who never misses a deadline, who manages every detail, who absorbs the late-night texts from colleagues without complaint, who sleeps with her phone under her pillow with the ringer turned all the way up.This is often who gets promoted, who is deemed “reliable,” who is praised for putting the company first – always. But what looks like strength on the outside often comes at great hidden cost. Behind the glossy mask of “having it all together” is often a nervous system in chronic overdrive, and a body paying for that vigilance.

The Biological Weight of Perfectionism

From a biological standpoint, perfectionism isn’t just a personality quirk. It is a survival strategy etched into the nervous system. Under patriarchy and late-stage capitalism, women are taught – implicitly and explicitly – that their worth is contingent on flawless performance. The nervous system adapts accordingly, shifting into chronic sympathetic activation: heart rate elevated, cortisol coursing, the body bracing as if failure were a threat to safety.

This isn’t a metaphor. Research shows that prolonged perfectionistic striving correlates with higher cortisol levels, impaired sleep, increased cardiovascular strain, and burnout syndromes. The prefrontal cortex – seat of executive function – gets hijacked by amygdala-driven stress responses, impairing creativity and flexibility. Leaders who outwardly appear calm may inwardly be locked in survival physiology.

The Emotional Intelligence Gap

While many leadership programs herald emotional intelligence as the essential remedy, this approach – however valuable – often remains incomplete. Self-awareness, empathy, and relational acuity matter profoundly, yet without addressing the nervous system’s deeper currents, emotional intelligence risks becoming a purely cognitive exercise, confined to the neocortex or executive function part of the brain, rather than supporting more presence overall. Leaders may possess intellectual clarity about their stress responses yet find themselves defaulting to perfectionist behaviors, their nervous systems convinced that hypervigilance remains the guardian of safety.

This reveals the need for a more integrated approach: emotional intelligence anchored in somatic wisdom. The leader who can not only recognize her stress but also attune to the constricted breath, the tension held in her jaw, the subtle electric current of anxiety coursing beneath her skin—and then consciously regulate these embodied signals—possesses access to profound resilience. She can remain present within difficult conversations, neither collapsing into self-recrimination nor spiraling into compulsive or default over-functioning.

How Perfectionism Shows Up in Women Leaders

Consider how perfectionism manifests in the everyday life of women leaders. The executive who maintains relentless control over every detail appears competent and thorough, yet her nervous system remains locked in sympathetic overdrive – fight-or-flight physiology that may express as hypertension, insomnia, or a reputation for micromanaging that undermines her team’s confidence. Her reluctance to delegate, born from hypervigilance and the fear of losing safety, leads to exhaustion and stalled team growth while inadvertently communicating that others cannot be trusted with important work.

The leader who over-prepares for every meeting, spending hours crafting perfect presentations, may actually be experiencing a freeze response disguised as thoroughness. This survival state reduces creativity, creates rigidity, and can make her appear unapproachable to colleagues who sense her underlying tension. Similarly, the woman who avoids feedback unless she feels perfectly prepared is often in dorsal vagal shutdown – a collapsed state triggered by perceived shame that leads to isolation, stalled professional development, and a reputation for being defensive.

Working late becomes normalized, praised even, yet represents chronic stress activation that depletes the adrenal system while modeling unhealthy boundaries for her entire team. The inability to say no to requests – appearing as dedication – actually signals a collapse into compliance mode that erodes personal boundaries and can paradoxically damage her reputation as others begin to see her as a pushover rather than a leader.

Even conflict avoidance, which may look like diplomacy, often stems from nervous system shutdown designed to prevent perceived threats. This creates team dysfunction and builds a reputation for being conflict-avoidant precisely when decisive leadership is needed. The compulsion to be the smartest person in every room – driven by competitive stress responses – feeds imposter syndrome while alienating both peers and direct reports who sense the underlying anxiety.

What appears as professional competence often masks somatic survival strategies. Without addressing these nervous system roots, even the most sophisticated leadership interventions remain surface-level, leaving the underlying physiology unchanged.

The Gendered Landscape of Perfectionism

It matters that this perfectionism is not equally distributed. Patriarchal systems reward women who suppress needs, who manage their teams like invisible mothers – anticipating, soothing, fixing. The cultural script tells women leaders: your safety lies in being beyond reproach. That script is especially acute for women of color, queer women, and women with disabilities, whose every misstep is even more heavily scrutinized.

What looks like an “individual failing” is really the body’s adaptation to systemic threat. Recognizing this shifts the narrative from self-blame – “I should relax, I should be more confident” – to an understanding that the nervous system is doing its best to protect under unequal conditions. This reframing is essential for sustainable leadership.

Breaking the Cycle: From Overdrive to Regulation

So how do women leaders step out of the perfectionism loop? Not by just thinking their way out. The nervous system does not relax just because the mind instructs it to. The path forward is through practices that bring the body into safety, paired with the self-awareness of emotional intelligence. The path forward starts with presence.

Some starting points include:

• Interoceptive awareness: Noticing early signals of stress physiology – tight shoulders, shallow breath – before they spiral.
• Micro-regulation breaks: Briefly orienting to the room, lengthening the exhale, standing to shake out tension. Small interventions shift state more effectively than occasional vacations.
• Boundaried leadership: Naming when a request exceeds capacity, and staying regulated through the discomfort of holding that line.
• Relational co-regulation: Seeking supportive peers who can offer grounding presence, instead of isolating in hyper-independence.
• Contextual reframing: Recognizing when perfectionism is a survival habit shaped by systemic inequities, not a personal flaw.

These are not abstract strategies. They reshape physiology over time, widening the “window of tolerance” in which leaders can respond flexibly instead of reactively. Neuroscience shows that vagal tone improves with repeated practice, increasing the body’s ability to downshift from threat states into connection.

The Future of Leadership

The leaders who will thrive in the decades ahead are not those who sacrifice health at the altar of perfection. They are those who integrate emotional and nervous system intelligence, who model resilience not as endless stamina but as the ability to recover, recalibrate, and stay present in relationship to others and most importantly, themselves.

When women leaders free themselves from the nervous system cycle of perfectionism, they reclaim energy not only for themselves but for their organizations. Creativity flourishes. Teams are trusted to grow. Decisions emerge from clarity rather than fear. And perhaps most importantly, leadership becomes sustainable – not another site of bodily depletion, but a place where women’s intelligence, authority, and vitality can flourish.

About the Author

Beatriz (Béa) Victoria Albina, NP, MPH, SEP is a Family Nurse Practitioner trained in integrative and holistic medicine, a Master Certified Somatic Life Coach, and a certified Somatic Experiencing Practitioner. She writes and teaches about perfectionism, people-pleasing, codependent habits, and nervous system science through a feminist lens and coined the term End Emotional Outsourcing. She is the host of the acclaimed Feminist Wellness Podcast and author of End Emotional Outsourcing: How to Overcome Your Codependent, Perfectionist & People-Pleasing Habits (Hachette Balance NYC). You can learn more at BeatrizAlbina.com

The post The Hidden Toll of Perfectionism on Women Leaders – And How Emotional Intelligence and Nervous System Regulation Can Break the Cycle appeared first on The European Business Review.

Fear has been and is being used by governments, religions, and businesses to divide us. But if we listen to it, we have the opportunity to reframe it—rather than react to fear, we can respond with choice, letting fear become a tool for our individual and collective growth.

Throughout history, governments, religions, and businesses have used fear to divide and control women in particular, shaping not only their opportunities but also their sense of worth. Today, those dynamics still show up in more subtle ways, like imposter syndrome—where fear keeps women from going after a promotion, sharing an idea, or stepping into leadership because they don’t feel “good enough.” We have the opportunity to rethink what success really means by adopting new, simple practices to help us move from reacting in fear to responding with choice—so that fear becomes a tool for growth rather than a barrier to it.

Fear is free. Fear can be monetized. And it can be used to target one’s lack of worth. It’s one of the most abused powers throughout history. People in fear give away their power, moving out of choice and into conformity with a narrative that may not be true for them or in their or humanity’s best interest.

A way this fear manifests in the professional world is the very common imposter syndrome. In psychology, the imposter syndrome is defined as a psychological pattern in which people doubt their accomplishments and have a persistent, often internalized fear of being exposed as a fraud. Generally, imposter syndrome means we find ourselves in a new circumstance, one that might be inviting us out of our comfort zone: a definite playground for fear and a perfect example of what is calling for our attention.

The truth is, imposter syndrome in the workplace is a lot more common than people realize–probably because we’re too scared to talk about it. And it’s not evenly experienced by populations. In fact, one 2025 study found that: More than half of women (54%) feel they have experienced imposter syndrome, compared with just 38% of men.

Without understanding why imposter syndrome is showing up, we can make the assumption it’s about our being found out, exposed, discovered, that we are less than what we presented ourselves to be or what we are capable of.

What if there’s a different reason imposter syndrome is showing up? What if fear is actually showing up to guide us in the right direction and to look at things we aren’t currently looking at? To pose questions we’re too scared to ask because we’re scared we don’t already have it figured out (with the assumption we should).

What if fear isn’t to be feared at all? What if it’s actually pointing us towards exactly where we would benefit from looking at? Fear has more information for us than anything – and if we can begin to understand the insights it’s connecting us to, we can use fear to our advantage rather than allow it to stifle our success.

So, if fear isn’t the enemy, if it’s actually working for us, when you sense its presence, what can you do about it?

First, notice it. Naming it is really important. When you’re experiencing imposter syndrome. Pause. Turn towards it.  Get curious… What’s the growth opportunity? For instance, if you’re running the imposter syndrome of “I’m out of my league, I’m not smart enough,” get curious as to what’s beneath that story? Is it an invitation to conduct more research on the product specifications, or connect with a teammate and run through a few scenarios? Or, maybe it’s asking you to stand in your confidence.

Whenever a client tells me they have a fear or they feel the imposter syndrome, I ask them to share with me the language their fear is using. What exact verbiage and stories are fear telling you? That’s important information to help us decode the truth. What’s beneath the (generally) cruel story is information wanting to guide you to your growth.

Second, make an honest assessment of what is happening. I often see clients who tell me they have imposter syndrome while simultaneously taking risks and leading teams. Or, they tell me they’re scared to have an honest conversation when they just shared the three most recent examples of how they practiced their vulnerability. The previous story they had about being an imposter or scared to expose themselves isn’t congruent with their current identity. We’ve run the stories in our heads so many times, we have to replace those stories with new ones that reflect the current version of ourselves.

Third, notice if your fear is using humility to keep you small. Fear is trying to protect us. And it has an ironic sense of humor. Even though it’s showing us exactly where we want to grow – the whole reason it’s making us scared is because when we do grow into the next version of ourselves, it has to do work to figure out who we are then so it can protect the newest form. And fear doesn’t like to do extra work. So notice… is fear using a value of yours to keep you from stepping into your confidence? The worst thing for a humble person to practice is humility – as it may be fear using your value to keep you safe (the current version of yourself). Try to find the irony. Own your strengths and see how the situation might benefit from them. Take the emphasis off of yourself and in service of what you’re trying to accomplish or inspire or create.

Once we make room for our fear, even welcome it, then we begin to be in conversation with it. What if when we felt our fear, instead of turning away from it, we stared right at it, asked, “What are you here to show me?” and engaged it in a conversation? It’s a little uncomfortable at first, but the more we understand the process, the less uncomfortable it becomes. Your fear knows more about you than anyone. It knows what you really want (what you’re scared of), what you desire (where you want to grow), and what steps you need to take to get there (the very place where you may feel like an imposter). If we grow curious about fear’s language, there’s rich meaning to be had for our own self-discovery.

About the Author

Guryan Tighe is an experienced leadership coach, workshop facilitator, and communications strategist whose clients describe her as a “Fear Technician.” She is the founder of FOURAGE, built on the belief that understanding and working with our fears, rather than trying to conquer them, yields more professional success and personal fulfillment. She is also the author of Unmasking Fear: How Fears Are Our Gateways to Freedom.

The post Fear as a Tool for Growth and Success appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Matthew Egan

In today’s AI-driven economy, mastering failure is becoming as critical as mastering success. Matthew Egan highlights how embracing setbacks accelerates learning and drives innovation. He explains why leaders who cultivate resilience, adaptability, and iterative thinking will transform challenges into strategic advantages, positioning themselves to thrive in the age of AI.

Everyone is asking what it takes to succeed in the age of AI. The better question is: what does it take to fail? With more ideas generated at a lightning pace, and feedback being instant and relentless, the ability to embrace and learn from failure may be the most valuable human skill of all.

Get Used to Being Wrong

I recently prepared a brief for senior leaders on a promising market opportunity. It was well-structured, filled with facts, and persuasive. Or so I thought. Before submitting it, I decided to ask Microsoft Copilot to act as my reviewer:

“Identify any errors in logical reasoning, assertions missing support, weak arguments, counter perspectives, or other problems with this brief.”

The result? Three pages explaining why I was wrong. My grammar, my evidence, my thesis – everything was questioned, and convincingly so.

This simple experience shows both the power of AI as well as an important challenge we will all need to face. On the plus side, I had received in a matter of seconds what would otherwise have taken weeks or never surfaced at all. Had I asked colleagues to review my brief it would have taken time, they wouldn’t have done the same depth of research, and then they may have been too polite to point out weaknesses.

The challenge however was that I now had reams of feedback I hadn’t expected. My initial response: co-pilot is wrong! However, after accepting my first attempt as a setback and going through a few iterations, the result was sharper and more persuasive than I could have achieved alone.

But to get this result two things needed to come together: the power of AI to rapidly reason over my content, and my willingness to receive feedback and iterate. To adapt.

Iteration: The Gift and the Curse

Iteration and persistence have long been the sources of true innovation. Look behind most major achievements and you will find multiple earlier versions, failures if you will, that delivered the feedback needed to make the next version better. Edison’s lightbulb famously took thousands of failed attempts. WD40, the universal lubricant, got its name by being the successful formula after 39 previous attempts.

AI is supercharging this process. I am seeing customers test multiple product variations a day, a process that previously would have taken weeks. Executives are modelling new strategies in minutes.

But an overlooked effect of this increase in speed and volume of iteration is that the reject pile is much bigger. We are suddenly exposed to endless and instant feedback about what doesn’t work and why but our ability to accept feedback and adapt is not developing at the same pace. A recent MIT study^[1] found that resistance to adopting new tools was the top barrier to realising the benefits of AI in the enterprise.

The Real Challenge: Managing Fear, Not Technology

So, in an AI-driven era where information is available to all, your ideas can be instantly tested, and feedback is fast-flowing, the true differentiator will be how you respond to failure. Common human responses are:

• Avoidance – dodging challenges to avoid failure.
• Paralysis – getting stuck in endless analysis chasing perfection.
• Defensiveness – blaming others to protect ego.
• Catastrophising – treating setbacks as final defeat.

These responses are not new, but just as AI aids in triggering these responses, it will also magnify the impact. You will experience more setbacks and feel more inadequate which will only strengthen the fear response. Add to this mix the general air of uncertainty and doubt that AI is generating in the workplace and you have the perfect recipe for inertia and stagnation. And with exponential gains available to those embracing and working with the technology, the gap between the top and bottom performers will be unprecedented.

Turning Setbacks into Strategic Advantage

Nobody can predict the precise direction of the technology, know the technical skills required for the next 10 years or even choose a job that is “AI proof”. But what you can do is arm yourself with the mindset and behaviours to make the most of whatever comes.

Put simply, the faster you accept failure, the faster you will learn.

From my experience advising executives, and researching my recent book, four practices will be key to success in the age of AI:

• Expect the mess – things will go wrong, at first. If you plan for perfection, you leave no room for learning. Treat early setbacks as part of the process, not proof of inadequacy. This mindset is critical in both your personal use of AI but also in putting it to work for your business.
• Embrace failure as feedback – there is a learning in every setback. With AI accelerating the loop you can learn much more, much faster. Leaders who embrace this in their processes and their attitude will progress faster.
• Focus on momentum, not just outcomes – measure progress by the distance travelled, the experiments run, the insights gained, not just the end outcome. In a fast-moving world expect the goal posts to change.
• Create the right team conditions – teams thrive when they feel stretched but not paralysed. Creating a space where setbacks are expected but standards are not lowered requires open dialogue and empathy. Everyone is learning to adapt and acknowledging that can make all the difference.

Fail faster, learn smarter

As we pursue the potential of AI, failure is inevitable. The leaders who will thrive aren’t those who avoid it, but those who learn from it at speed. The question is: will you let failure stop you—or make it your advantage?

About the Author

Matthew Egan is a Transformation Director at Microsoft and a recognised voice on leadership in business transformation. Drawing on experience as both a senior executive and management consultant to global organisations, he helps leaders navigate complex change. His book, The Failure Advantage, shows how setbacks can fuel strategic growth.

Reference

^[1] MIT NANDA (July2025) The GenAI Divide: State of AI in Business 2025

The post Fail Faster, Learn Smarter: Why Mastering Failure is the Key to Thriving in the Age of AI appeared first on The European Business Review.

If people don’t feel like they have a purpose, they tend to drift. I believe that our primary purpose needs to be to look after ourselves. This is selfless because we can’t give from an empty cup.  If you commit to recharging your battery every day, you will always be on purpose.

Having run wellbeing workshops all over the world, I know that the culture, country, psychographic or demographic I’m presenting to doesn’t matter. Wherever I am, less than half of my audience would say they have a strong purpose —that is, a distinct purpose that they wake up with every morning, knowing what they want to do with their life and, most importantly, why.

What I’ve seen through coaching is that if people don’t feel like they have a purpose, they tend to drift. If they don’t have a strong enough why, they don’t have the motivation to prioritise their own wellbeing. Typically, most of us think about purpose as outward-looking, with a focus on helping others, which is a good thing. However, I believe that our primary purpose needs to be to look after ourselves. This is selfless —rather than selfish —because we can’t give from an empty cup. You can’t be the best version of yourself with an empty battery —and you surely don’t want to be the one to end up needing help because you pushed yourself to breaking point.

If you commit to recharging your battery every day, then no matter what you’re doing, no matter what path you’re on, you will always be on purpose. As you recharge, you become the best version of yourself and start to thrive sustainably. This, in turn, inspires and encourages others, and has a positive impact on all your relationships. Once you are thriving sustainably, you will have the energy to uncover your strengths, passions and beliefs, and how you can use these to help others. You can then combine them to formulate a more defined purpose. My personal purpose is ‘to inspire others to reconnect to self and others through nature’.

I do this through many pathways, whether it’s speaking, coaching, consulting or just being there for someone. Rather than asking yourself, ‘What can I do?’, consider first asking yourself, ‘What kind of person do I want to be? What qualities, values, strengths and passions do I appreciate in myself and others?’ When you can find the things that are important to you —and not just what others expect of you —you can contribute to making those things happen. You become part of a greater community and feel you are contributing to something outside of yourself. This helps you feel connected and valued, and improves your self-worth. To help find your purpose, ask yourself these important life questions:

• Why do I want to be the best version of myself?
• What or who am I really doing it for?
• What kind of person do I want to be?

Prioritising yourself —and then others

When we talk about wellbeing and wellness, we are talking about two different things. Wellbeing means ‘to be in a comfortable state —mentally, emotionally, physically and

spiritually’. Wellness means ‘to make the deliberate effort to nurture your wellbeing’.

You really do have to prioritise yourself first to make sure you can continue to thrive sustainably and give the best version of yourself to others. I’m sure you are aware of the two versions of yourself —the one where you are full of energy and life, nothing seems to bother you and everyone enjoys being around you, and the one where you feel like you are just surviving and everything seems to get on your nerves. This version of you gets frustrated easily, and even the simplest roadblocks feel like you’re trying to move heaven and earth —and that’s just trying to open the strawberry jam jar!

Being kind to yourself isn’t just a nicety; it’s your birthright and, if you’re not already, you need to get good at it. If you don’t have enough self-worth or self-love, you won’t have the motivation to make that deliberate effort to want to look after yourself. Next time you’re looking in the bathroom mirror, look at yourself —really look at yourself —deep into your eyes as if you’re admiring a beautiful work of art. When you’ve connected with yourself, say, ‘I see you’. And keep saying it until it registers, until you feel it deep in your heart and you truly believe it. You’re worthy.

Edited extract from Energised: The Daily Practice of Connected Leadership and Sustainable Wellbeing (Wiley $32.95) by Tim Jack Adams. 

About the Author 

Tim Jack Adams is a global speaker and a pioneering thought leader in human sustainability and performance and has spent over a decade guiding leaders and teams to reconnect with themselves and others through nature. Join The Great Reconnect movement at http://www.greenx7.com.

The post Why Finding Your Purpose is More Important than Ever appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Jonathan Armstrong

AI is transforming business, but the understanding of AI is not universal. Jonathan Armstrong, Partner at Punter Southall Law, outlines the new legal requirements under the EU AI Act and explores how companies will need to adapt, explaining that organisations that fail to train staff properly risk compliance headaches, liability, and reputational damage.

Getting ahead of EU AI literacy requirements – how businesses can stay compliant and competitive

In most companies, AI is being used in business functions from HR and marketing to customer service. Figures reveal 78% of global companies use AI, with 71% deploying GenAI in at least one function^[i]. However, often employees don’t fully understand how these tools work, and this gap can no longer be ignored.

The EU AI Act, particularly Article 4, addresses this by making AI literacy a legal requirement. Since February 2025, any organisation operating in the EU, or offering AI-enabled services to EU markets, must ensure their employees, contractors, and suppliers have a sufficient understanding of the AI tools they use. It is not enough to deploy technology responsibly; organisations must demonstrate that their workforce knows what they are doing.

What’s more, AI literacy isn’t just for developers or data scientists. HR teams using AI in recruitment, marketing teams using Generative AI for campaigns, and customer service staff managing chatbots are all included. Third-party contractors and vendors fall under the same obligations.

The European Commission defines AI literacy as the skills, knowledge, and understanding required to interact with AI responsibly. This includes:

• Knowing how AI systems function and the data they use
• Recognising risks such as bias, hallucinations, or discrimination
• Understanding when and how human oversight is needed.
• Being aware of legal obligations under the EU AI Act and other relevant frameworks

Why businesses can’t afford to ignore it.

Some organisations may assume AI literacy does not apply to them because they are not in tech. But if you deploy AI systems, you are in scope. Even seemingly low-risk applications, like a customer service chatbot can create legal and reputational exposure if misused.

The risks extend to Shadow AI, too. AI bans rarely work; employees often turn to personal devices, creating hidden risks. This means that universal staff training and clear policies are not just sensible, they are essential.

There is also a generational aspect. Digital natives often find the tools they need via social media or search. Without proper guidance, this can increase organisational risk. A well-planned AI literacy programme mitigates misuse and strengthens compliance.

Who do the rules apply to?

Article 4 covers any organisation using AI in the EU, even if based elsewhere, including UK businesses deploying AI tools in EU operations or offering AI-enabled services to EU customers.

Non-compliance is not limited to the IT team. Misleading chatbots or biased hiring algorithms can create liability for the whole business. Regulators are paying attention, and complaints could be lodged with national authorities or even GDPR regulators if personal data is misused. Examples already exist, from social media firms to UK dating apps that used AI-generated icebreakers.

Consequences of non-compliance

While AI literacy obligations came into effect on 2 February 2025, enforcement by national authorities begins on 3 August 2026. Each EU Member State will determine enforcement approach and penalties, considering factors like severity, intent, and negligence.

The European AI Office provides guidance, expertise, and coordination but does not enforce Article 4 directly. For now, the primary risks for organisations are civil action, pressure groups, and reputational damage.

As a result, businesses can’t wait until 2026 as regulators are already planning audits and enforcement and litigation risks exist already. Preparation means addressing both governance and culture.

Here are five steps for legal and compliance teams:

1. Map your AI estate
   Audit all AI systems, whether in-house or third-party, covering decision-making, customer interactions, and content generation.
2. Develop targeted AI literacy training
   Training must be role specific. HR teams using AI in hiring, for instance, need to understand bias, data protection, and explainability.
3. Review contracts and third-party relationships
   Ensure vendors meet AI literacy standards and reflect these obligations in contracts.
4. Create internal AI policies
   Set clear rules for AI use, approval processes, and human review. Treat this with the same rigor as data protection or anti-bribery frameworks.
5. Engage the board and embed a responsible AI culture
   AI is now a board-level issue. Leadership must set expectations around responsible innovation, transparency, and compliance.

Article 4 signals a regulatory shift: businesses must now prove that their people understand AI, not just deploy it responsibly. Like GDPR reshaped data handling, the EU AI Act is transforming how AI is implemented, monitored, and explained across the workforce. What was once best practice is now a legal requirement, and getting ahead of it is the smartest move any organisation can make.

About the Author

Jonathan Armstrong is a lawyer at Punter Southall Law working on compliance & technology. He is also a Professor at Fordham Law School. Jonathan is an acknowledged expert on AI and he serves on the NYSBA’s AI Task Force looking at the impact of AI on law & regulation.

Reference

^[i] https://explodingtopics.com/blog/companies-using-ai

The post Getting Ahead of EU AI Literacy Requirements – How Businesses Can Stay Compliant and Competitive appeared first on The European Business Review.

By Louisa Loran

Leaders often face the challenge of navigating constant change, where the instinct is to signal involvement, substituting activity for progress and leading only to busyness. True progress comes from composure and intentional focus. By aligning actions with long-term direction, fostering collaboration, and embracing calculated risks, leaders can drive meaningful transformation amid uncertainty and rapid technological change.

Leaders find themselves caught in a whirlwind of activity, balancing geopolitical pressures, anticipating the trajectory of AI, and reacting to constant shifts in markets, technology, and regulation. Yet in the noise of relentless change – and in some cases, the quest to appear busy – real progress comes from composure paired with strong intent and seeing one’s proposition clearly enough to focus on the few signals that will truly shape the future. The first step is self-reflection on these four pivotal questions:

• Am I using disruption as a tool to uncover vulnerabilities, so we can focus our efforts where they’ll make the most impact?
• In this fast-moving environment, am I aligning every immediate action to our long-term priorities, ensuring we aren’t just moving fast but moving wisely?
• Rather than simply assigning tasks, do I help teams connect and understand how their contributions resonate within a collective effort to reshape the business?
• Am I attuning ourselves to identify the essential signals in the noise, acting on what holds the most opportunity and positions us to respond effectively in any circumstance?

The Pitfalls of Busyness

Having worked with many partners across my executive career at Google, Maersk, and Diageo, and most recently leading strategic business transformation for Google’s largest customers across multiple continents, I have unfortunately seen too often how activity, when not aligned with strategic purpose, can detract from progress, no matter how ambitious the goals may be. When leaders chase every new trend, whether a “transformation project” or the latest initiative, organizations risk being overwhelmed by disconnected actions. Life and business are in constant change, but without clear direction, this motion becomes a cycle that drains valuable resources instead of driving progress.

This issue is exacerbated by technological advancements—not just through the pressure to adopt the latest tools but by the need to stay ahead of disruptions to business models. Too often, it is forgotten that it is not the quantity of initiatives that counts; it’s the quality of the decisions that matters: knowing which opportunities align with long-term goals and investing in them wisely.

From Reacting to Instigating

To resist the trap of busyness means not focusing on the quest for perfection but instead making intentional moves in the midst of uncertainty—building for optionality not through risk charts but through ongoing dialogue with market reactions. Leaders who focus on a clear direction and show the courage to navigate ambiguity can also bring their wavering teams with them.

A key aspect of this shift is fostering a culture comfortable with change and uncertainty. In such environments, disruption isn’t feared but welcomed as a catalyst for innovation and growth. A readiness to challenge the status quo and test new approaches becomes the foundation for agile decision-making and an opportunity for learning, not simply a way to generate quick wins.

Clarity of Direction

Without a clear direction, organizations are like ships adrift at sea—moving fast but going nowhere. In times of so much change, the urge to show activity and to control the uncontrollable can drive leaders to cling even more tightly to outdated practices and assumptions. Pushing hard on everyone, losing momentum in key places, or failing to let go of the wrong things wastes energy just as surely as moving without direction.

It is essential for leaders to articulate a compelling vision that provides direction—not rigid targets, but a forward-looking proposition that everyone can contribute to. A shared vision enables leaders and teams to imagine their roles in the future business strategy, aligning efforts toward common ambitions. Instead of reacting to external pressures, leaders with clarity of direction empower their teams to stay aligned with long-term objectives and navigate the market together.

From Busy Teams to Connected Teams

As teams unite by a shared ambition, team structures become only reference points and collaboration becomes a multiplier for growth. When work is done in silos, even the best intentions can spiral into busy-work for others, making it essential-especially as AI becomes a colleague and partners change continuously -to foster a mindset where silos don’t exist.

Creating line of sight into how contributions tie into the broader organizational effort, and maintaining accountability for each contribution, encourages cross-functional collaboration that unlocks unseen potential across the business. Just as strong infrastructure depends on the best available materials, organizational growth thrives on collective intelligence.

Connecting across teams should not be incidental, it should be a core expectation. Cultures that reward shared gains and prioritizing efforts together ensure that activity serves impact, not just appearance. When leaders recognize and reinforce these behaviors, collaboration stops being an extra task and becomes the way meaningful work gets done.

Acknowledging Risk to Turn Uncertainty into Opportunity

The most successful leaders are not those who avoid risk, but those who embrace it. Curiosity, fueled by a willingness to experiment, is a key driver of innovation. Experimentation isn’t about random trial and error, but about fostering purposeful exploration, becoming a pathway for learning and growth, iteration, and quick adaptation without falling into the trap of experimenting for its own sake.

Leaders who embed a culture of continuous improvement, where new ideas are looked at with curiosity and strategic sharpness, avoid loss of focus and drains on resources while also being willing to let go of initiatives that no longer serve the organization’s evolving goals.

The Strategic Value of a Clear Mind

The increased need for sound judgment, distinguishing between what is valuable information and what is simply noise becomes even more urgent in the age of AI and rapid technological change. Neuroscience shows that when under stress, our brains prioritize speed over accuracy, activating the amygdala—the area responsible for emotional responses, while suppressing the brain’s broader capacity for strategic thinking. In a leadership context, this is most often seen in the rush to appear busy and important, triggering reactive behaviors instead of thoughtful, strategic decision-making.

Leaders who manage their own stress responses and maintain mental clarity create strategic value for their organizations. By resisting the urge to chase every new trend, they can prioritize initiatives that align with their vision and long-term goals. Rather than getting swept up in the noise, they provide a clear path forward, enabling their teams to focus on meaningful, impactful work.

True transformation begins with the courage to step out of the busyness and focus on what truly drives value. By filtering information critically and being conscious of our natural tendency to prioritize speed over accuracy, one of the most essential steps in a changing world is to calm ourselves, see clearer, move wiser, and accelerate faster.

About the Author

Louisa Loran has led transformative growth across some of the world’s most respected companies—DIAGEO, MAERSK, and Google. For more than two decades, Louisa has bridged commercial impact with human-centered change, driving success in B2C, B2B, and global tech markets worldwide. She serves on the boards of Copenhagen Business School and CataCap Private Equity and is also the author of Leadership Anatomy in Motion, published globally by Fast Company.

The post From Frustration to Focus: The Leadership Shift Required to Succeed in a World Overrun by Turmoil appeared first on The European Business Review.

Compliance is no longer a checkbox. It is a catalyst for ethical innovation andstrategic growth. Asha Palmer, SVP of Compliance Solutions at Skillsoft, shares howtoday’s leaders can stay ahead of regulation, shape company culture, and build AI-ready organizations rooted in trust, transparency, and real-world accountability 

What originally drew you to the field of compliance, and how has your personal mission evolved alongside the changing landscape of regulation and ethics? 

I’m a lawyer & litigator by background, so my role was to help people and companies after they were in trouble. But I always felt there was an opportunity to help people before they got into trouble and deter and prevent problems from arising. That is the core of ethics and compliance – the opportunity to empower individuals and companies to protect themselves and their organisation against risk and harm before things go wrong.  

As for my personal mission, that has never changed. The profession of ethics and compliance has an extreme opportunity to impact the lives of individuals and the cultures of companies by positively influencing behaviour and empowering people to take the right actions that keep themselves and their companies safe. Regardless of how regulations shift, my mission remains the same: to empower individuals to understand and comply with these changes and to meaningfully act in accordance with them.  

As a leader in compliance, how do you personally stay inspired and resilient when navigating complex, high-stakes regulatory environments?  

I stay inspired and resilient by embracing the fact that truly effective and efficient compliance is hard. There is a powerful concept called “relentless incrementalism” that keeps me motivated to make small changes and small improvements every day in my job, profession and the people and cultures I impact through my work. 

When we empower people to apply the insight they learn and put it into practice in safe environments, they’re better equipped to navigate the complex, high-stakes regulatory environment around them.

Getting a little bit better, a little bit more empowered and a little bit more confident to make the right decisions in the right way is all we can do. When we empower people to apply the insight they learn and put it into practice in safe environments, they’re better equipped to navigate the complex, high-stakes regulatory environment around them. They understand the risks, what’s at stake and how to mitigate and manage those risks. 

In your role at Skillsoft, how have you seen the compliance function shift from a back-office obligation to a strategic driver of organisational culture?  

This shift occurs once a company sees compliance as a necessity to drive business strategy and culture. It involves understanding the nature of the business, its operations, markets and stakeholders, alongside the potential risks it may encounter or generate. Managing these risks effectively becomes essential to conducting business responsibly. The integration of compliance into areas like AI development demonstrates how it can play a strategic role in guiding organisational decisions while also protecting against potential risks. 

Can you share a career-defining moment where you realised the true power of aligning compliance with business purpose? 

During my time as an Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA), albeit brief, I quickly and truly saw the impact of failing to align compliance with business purpose, and the impact it can have on people, culture, and organisations. When ethics and compliance are disconnected from business purpose, objectives and performance or outcomes, it will lead to failure. It will fail to manifest itself in the actions of the individuals who act on behalf of the organisation, in its leadership and in its organisational culture. Compliance can only succeed when it is aligned with business purpose, objectives, and outcomes. 

With the EU moving toward regulatory simplification, why is internal engagement and upskilling more critical than ever—even when the rules are ‘simplified’? 

As the EU AI Act seeks to simplify regulatory requirements, internal engagement and upskilling are more important than ever. While simplification may streamline external reporting, it doesn’t reduce the complexity of applying these rules in real-world contexts. In fact, in many cases, it shifts the burden inward, placing greater responsibility on employees to understand and apply evolving standards. 

That’s why compliance must be woven into the fabric of the organisation through tailored, risk-based training that reflects the realities of different roles, regions and generations. AI literacy should be treated as a foundational skill, with training that goes beyond theory – using simulations, scenario-based learning and knowledge checks to help employees build confidence and real-world capabilities. 

Equally important is organisations investing in their employees and building a culture where compliance is a shared responsibility, understood and embraced across the business. Ultimately, simplified laws don’t eliminate complexity – they just shift the focus inward. 

How can compliance leaders help ensure ethical innovation, especially in emerging technologies like AI, without slowing down progress? 

Compliance leaders can drive ethical innovation by integrating governance directly into the innovation process rather than treating it as a barrier. This begins with asking the right questions early, particularly around data privacy, algorithmic bias and transparency. 

Rather than slowing progress, this integrated approach builds trust, reduces risk and accelerates the safe and responsible deployment of emerging technologies. 

It also means developing agile, adaptable policies that evolve alongside technology. When legal, IT, product and compliance teams work together from the outset, they build a shared understanding of both the risks and the opportunities AI presents. Open dialogue, establishing ethics boards and creating a culture of continuous learning help ensure innovation stays aligned with organisational values.

Rather than slowing progress, this integrated approach builds trust, reduces risk and accelerates the safe and responsible deployment of emerging technologies. 

What should the next generation of compliance leaders focus on to build transparent, AI-ready frameworks that work both locally and globally? 

The next generation of compliance leaders must focus on building frameworks that are transparent, resilient and globally adaptable. This means aligning compliance with innovation, ensuring AI systems are explainable, fair and ethically designed throughout every stage of development. 

It also calls for targeted investment in role-specific training and fostering a culture of continuous learning, so teams are equipped with the skills to navigate emerging risks and shifting regulations with confidence.  

Transparency should be reinforced through regular audits and open communication with stakeholders. At the same time, collaboration with internal and external experts ensures governance models remain responsive to diverse regulatory demands and scalable across global operations.  

Executive Profile

Bringing more than 15 years of experience in Compliance, Asha joined Skillsoft as Senior Vice President of Compliance Solutions in July of 2022.  

Asha is an experienced ethics & compliance professional and attorney with a demonstrated history of success at multinational corporations, in private practice, and in government.  She creates practical ethics & compliance solutions with her unique approach to improving culture and implementing business-friendly controls that create sustainable ethics and responsible compliance.

The post Empowering Organisations Through Strategic and Transparent Compliance Leadership appeared first on The European Business Review.