Futuro do Trabalho speakers
Vozes que moldam como as organizações se adaptam à automação, modelos híbridos e novas expectativas de trabalho
Speakers Associates represents 224 speakers on Futuro do Trabalho, including Zavier Coyne, Thimon de Jong, Rahaf Harfoush, Nilofer Merchant, Russell Beck, Jeremy Blain, Katja Schipperheijn, Graeme Codrington, Lauren Ducrey e Kayleigh Fazan.
Engagement scores have been tracked for twenty years and most managers still cannot say what drives them up or down inside their own teams. The problem is not measurement. It is that organisations have built performance and engagement as processes, when employees experience work as a relationship, and act accordingly when that relationship fails.
Senior leaders are being asked to make better decisions, faster, with less recovery time between them. The reflex under that pressure is to compress; to skip the pause, override the doubt, push the team harder. The cost shows up later, in eroded trust, fatigued judgement, and cultures that perform on adrenaline rather than capacity.
Most organisations say they want to innovate, then quietly punish the people who try. The radical idea, the awkward question, the employee who refuses to follow the herd; these are exactly what gets filtered out by the systems built to keep things stable. Leaders end up running a culture that rewards conformity and wonders why nothing new survives.
Most transformation programmes fail before the technology becomes the problem. Leaders invest in AI tools and change programmes, then stall because people are still holding on to a stable world that no longer exists. The gap between what organisations know they must do and what their leaders are equipped to do keeps widening, and it shows up in market value, talent, and relevance.
Most senior teams know their organisations cannot scale decision-making fast enough to match the pace of change. Authority sits too high, accountability sits too low, and the layer in between is asked to execute strategy without the licence to lead. The question is not whether to distribute leadership, but how to make it operate without losing coherence, control, or commercial discipline.
Boards have signed climate commitments and capital plans that depend on infrastructure that does not yet exist at scale. The gap between net zero ambition, regional grid reality, and shareholder return is widening, and most leadership teams have no economic framework that connects energy, digital, and mobility decisions into a single capital story. The question is no longer whether to decarbonise. It is what to build, in what order, with whom, and on whose roadmap.
Boards are being asked to make consequential bets on generative AI without a stable read on what the technology can actually do, what it cannot, and what its deployment will mean for the workforce. Most executive briefings collapse into either hype or alarm. Leaders need a sober technical interpreter who can separate marketing from mechanism, and tell them which decisions matter now.
Most commercial advantage decays the moment competitors copy it. Leaders are told to innovate, then watched as their best ideas are replicated by larger rivals with deeper pockets within a year. The harder question is how an organisation builds something competitors cannot copy even when they try, and why that requires a stack of decisions, not a single clever idea.
Inclusion policies rarely change daily behaviour. Statements are published, training is delivered, and yet many employees still feel they cannot bring difficult parts of themselves to work. Leaders need a way to move from compliance language to lived practice, particularly around trans and LGBTQ+ inclusion, where uncertainty and fear of getting it wrong often produce silence rather than support.
Discretionary effort is collapsing faster than headcount. Employees are quieter, more transactional and more willing to leave, and the manager layer is the variable that decides whether a workplace earns commitment or simply rents attendance. Engagement budgets keep rising while the underlying contract between people and employers keeps fraying.
Boards are signing off on AI deployments faster than their organisations can govern them. Privacy, consent, and data lineage have moved from compliance topics to live commercial risks tied to model training, customer trust, and regulatory exposure. Most leadership teams have no shared language for deciding which uses of data are defensible and which are not.
The workforce has been reset by remote work, AI, generational change, and contested politics inside the workplace. Boards now expect HR and the executive team to deliver culture, engagement, and skills as commercial outcomes, not as soft functions. Most leadership teams are still working from talent assumptions that no longer hold.