Innovation och omvälvning
Talare som undersöker hur industrier omformas och hur organisationer kan leda förändring i stället för att följa den
Speakers Associates represents 390 speakers on Innovation och omvälvning, including Kemal Apaydin, Michael Lyon, Peter Fisk, Neri Karra Sillaman, Mark Stevenson, Nilofer Merchant, Itai Green, Lucy Bullivant, Rita McGrath och Katja Schipperheijn.
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 leadership teams now have an AI policy, a metaverse deck and a digital roadmap, and still cannot tell which of these will move revenue inside twelve months. The gap is rarely technical. It sits between the C-suite and the teams running marketing, product and customer experience, where theory has to become a shipped campaign, a working interface, a measurable result.
Most organisations talk about innovation and ship incremental product. The gap shows up in how invention is governed: which problems get resourced, how patents become products, and how a founder or intrapreneur converts a research prototype into a funded, regulated, commercial business. Boards want operators who have done both sides, scaled invention inside a multinational and built a venture from nothing.
Established firms are organised to defend what they already do well. The same discipline that protects today’s margin makes the search for the next business feel slow, indulgent, and easy to defund. Leaders need a way to run both at once, without the exploration agenda quietly losing every internal argument.
Sport and motorsport organisations face hard sustainability questions from regulators, sponsors, and broadcasters, but most still treat ESG as a communications exercise. The gap between net zero pledges, FIA accreditation requirements, and real operating change is widening. Boards now need someone who can take a sustainability strategy and convert it into engineering decisions, supplier choices, and disclosed numbers.
Technology moves faster than the institutions trying to explain it. Public bodies, regulators, and corporates end up with digital channels that look active but say very little, while the audiences they need to reach lose patience. The gap between what an organisation does on emerging tech and what it manages to communicate has become its own strategic risk.
Most growth plans assume the same playbook that built the business will scale it. It rarely does. Leaders inherit revenue targets that demand a different sales motion, a sharper customer thesis, and a willingness to rebuild commercial functions while the quarter is already running.
Most large organisations were designed for predictability and control. They are now being asked to operate in conditions where neither holds. Senior leaders need a model of leadership that takes uncertainty, meaning and human motivation as starting points, not soft additions to a hard machine.
Retail leadership teams are running two organisations at once: a legacy operation built around store footprint, seasonal buying and broadcast marketing, and an emerging one shaped by AI personalisation, gamified loyalty and immersive commerce. The capital is flowing into the second, the revenue still sits in the first, and most boards cannot tell which experiments are worth scaling and which are theatre. The question is not whether AI changes retail. It is which bets pay back inside the planning cycle.
Most strategy processes treat the future as uncertain and respond by hedging. That posture costs time and investment while competitors move on signals that were knowable in advance. Leadership teams need a disciplined way to separate the parts of the future that are already decided from the parts that are still open, and to act on each differently.
Most large organisations have run AI pilots. Few have moved AI into operating reality at scale, with clear lines on governance, accountability and where it is allowed to make decisions. Boards now need a sharper read on what AI can actually do for their business, what it should not do, and how to deploy it without inheriting risks they cannot defend in front of regulators or customers.
Most innovation programmes generate decks, not formats that survive contact with a paying customer. The harder question for commercial leaders is what to do when an idea has been rejected nineteen times and the team has lost faith in it. That gap, between creative ambition and the commercial discipline to push an idea into market against repeated no, is where transformation actually stalls.