Organisationsdesign
Eksperter der hjælper organisationer med at omforme strukturer, teams og forretningsmodeller for fremtiden
Speakers Associates represents 36 speakers on Organisationsdesign, including Nilofer Merchant, Wael Khoury, Jeff de Kleijn, Aubrey Blanche-Sarellano, Jeff Speck, Hollie Castro, Dr. Grace Lordan, Dr Susan Hetrick, Kimberly Bryant og Stephen Frost.
Most organisations were designed for a world that rewards efficiency, predictability, and long planning cycles. That world can no longer be relied upon. The pressure on leaders is not a shortage of technology; it is a management model built for certainty that is now operating in conditions of permanent disruption. Applying digital tools to an industrial-era structure does not fix the structure; it accelerates its contradictions.
Most organizations are running AI somewhere. Getting it to run everywhere, consistently, strategically, at scale, is where senior leadership investment consistently stalls. The gap between a working pilot and an embedded enterprise capability is not a technology gap. It is a strategic and structural one: the wrong organizational design, insufficient data foundations, and a leadership layer that cannot distinguish between AI as a point tool and AI as a new operating logic.
Most service programmes train the frontline and leave the culture behind them untouched. The result is scripted warmth that customers see through and staff stop believing in. The real problem sits further up: the values, behaviours and leadership decisions that decide what it actually feels like to work there, and therefore what it feels like to buy from there.
Most organisations can articulate their strategy. Very few can execute it at the required speed or scale. The gap is not a planning failure; it is a leadership failure rooted in how organisations are structured: too many initiatives running simultaneously, too little executive ownership of individual projects, and a persistent confusion between overseeing transformation and actually sponsoring it. Senior leaders who mistake activity for progress will keep launching programmes that consume resources and stall before they deliver.
Most large organisations know they need to change long before they do. The culture holds, the costs drift, the board stays polite, and the competitor moves. Leaders who have actually dismantled and rebuilt a listed business from the inside are scarce, and buyers know the difference between theory and the people who have lived it.
Most diversity programmes have stopped producing measurable change. Budgets stay flat or fall, while the political cost of running them rises. Leaders need someone who can rebuild equity as an operating practice inside talent processes, products, and AI tooling, not as a campaign that lives on the side.
Large incumbents know their operating model is the problem. They have scale, cash, and talent, and still cannot reliably produce new businesses from inside the existing structure. The harder question is organisational: what shape does a mature company need to take so that new ideas survive contact with the core, and who has actually built it.
Most sustainability strategies are built around sacrifice – and that is why they stall. Organisations routinely treat environmental and social goals as constraints to satisfy, not as design inputs. The result is buildings, workplaces, and cities that are technically compliant but commercially and experientially ordinary.
AI has moved faster than the institutions it is reshaping. Leaders now face a version of the problem that universities are confronting first: when the tools students, employees, and customers use can produce plausible work in seconds, the old boundaries around expertise, integrity, and credentialing stop holding. The question is no longer whether to adopt AI, but which parts of the institution it quietly dismantles if you do.
Most companies still recruit, fund and build the way they did twenty years ago, then wonder why they cannot attract the talent or absorb the risk that genuinely new ventures require. The capital is available. The people are available. The structures that connect them are not. Leaders trying to launch breakthrough products inside conventional organisations run into the same wall: the operating model was designed for predictable work, and predictable work is not what growth now depends on.
Most inclusion work in firms is built on good intentions and weak evidence. Leaders spend heavily on training, charters, and targets, then cannot show which actions moved hiring, promotion, or retention. The gap between stated commitment and measurable progression is where credibility, talent, and money quietly leak away.
Toxic culture is the highest-cost, lowest-tracked risk inside most large organisations. Boards see the symptoms in attrition, tribunal exposure and reputational damage, but rarely the system that produces them. The gap is between knowing a culture is unhealthy and knowing how to repair it without burning the leadership team that built it.