Gestion du changement
Des experts qui aident les organisations à naviguer la transformation, l’incertitude et l’aspect humain du changement
Speakers Associates represents 326 speakers on Gestion du changement, including Joy Poole, Steven D'Souza, Thimon de Jong, Itai Green, Andy Bass, Marina Ibrahim, Sue Mitchell, Rita McGrath, Jennifer Willey, et Jeremy Blain.
Most organisations manage their brand as a communications output rather than a commercial asset – which means brand decisions get delegated to agencies while strategic questions about trust, market positioning, and identity remain unresolved at the leadership level. When a merger, market shift, or reputational event forces a rebrand, few executive teams have the analytical tools to distinguish what is worth keeping, what needs to change, and what the exercise will actually cost in customer equity. The result is expensive, slow, and often wrong.
Most large organisations say they want creativity and then build every process to suppress it. Standard operating procedure rewards predictability, and the people inside learn to stop offering the ideas that would move the business forward. The result is a leadership team that talks about innovation in strategy decks and sees very little of it in the work.
The middle ground that organisations were built around is thinning out, and the rate at which it thins is itself accelerating. Intermediaries lose their role, the nation state loses its monopoly on power, and customers and employees move to the edges. Senior teams have to decide which structures still pay back, which have quietly stopped working, and how to plan when the cycle of change is shortening.
Running a legacy consumer brand through a platform shift is a test of nerve, not only strategy. The leaders who hold a brand’s authority while rebuilding its audience are making uncomfortable calls on talent, product and tone, usually with less budget and a shrinking category. Few have done it across three titles and then walked into the platform replacing them.
Most organisations have announced AI strategies that their non-technical employees cannot act on. Adoption stalls not because the tools are inadequate but because the majority of the workforce has no framework for integrating AI into the work they actually do. Leaders are caught between a small group of early adopters running unsupervised and a larger group that has quietly opted out, and neither is being served by communications built for engineers.
Global organisations keep treating cultural difference as a communication problem to be smoothed over. The harder reality is that values themselves collide: short-term results against long-term loyalty, individual accountability against collective harmony, rules against relationships. Leaders who try to pick a side lose half the organisation; leaders who learn to reconcile both sides build companies that work across borders.
Most organisations treat innovation as a priority but cannot describe how they actually produce new ideas. Creative output is attributed to talented individuals rather than to any system or practice that can be replicated across teams. When demand for competitive differentiation intensifies, companies find they have no reliable mechanism for generating the ideas they need.
Most companies do not fail because they ignored the rulebook. They fail because they followed it. Industries quietly inherit practices that once worked, stop working, and then keep getting copied because everyone else still does them. Leaders need a way to tell which of their own habits are creating value and which are slowly killing the business.
Most large organisations still run on a set of assumptions that stopped being reliable somewhere between the financial crisis and the collapse of globalisation as a default setting. Leadership teams know the old playbook is failing, but the boards, incentive systems, and time horizons that shaped them are still in the room. The question senior leaders are stuck on is not whether to change, but how to change at the pace of disruption without losing the discipline that built the company in the first place.
Culture doesn’t survive a run of poor results unless it was built on something more durable than success. Most organisations find this out only after confidence has collapsed and values they believed were shared prove contingent on winning. The real problem is not motivation. It is whether a leader can hold a team’s identity together through failure, under full public scrutiny, and still produce performance.
Boards and executive teams keep hitting the same wall: the strategy is sound on paper, and it still does not survive contact with the organisation. The friction is rarely about capability. It sits in the space between board conviction, executive nerve and the discipline to execute through a merger, a downturn or a public markets cycle without losing the thread.
Executive teams know the rules of the game have changed and still default to the playbook that built the last decade. Automation is eating predictable work, and the human capabilities that matter most, empathy, judgement, persuasion, are the ones leadership pipelines were never designed to develop. The question is no longer whether to adapt, it is which parts of the business to rebuild first and how to develop the people who will lead that rebuild.