Artificial Intelligence & Generative AI
Speakers who decode the real-world impact of machine intelligence on industries, workforces and competitive advantage
Most marketing budgets are run as a performance machine that can be measured, with brand work tolerated as overhead. When growth slows, the brand half is cut first and the performance half stops working. Leaders need to defend why both layers exist, on grounds a CFO will accept.
Most large organisations are still optimised for the linear era: long planning cycles, hierarchical control, fixed assets, internal R&D. The companies eating their margins run on a different operating logic, smaller headcount, leveraged external resources, data feedback loops, community-driven distribution. The strategic question is not whether to adopt new technology. It is whether the organisation itself is structured to compound on it.
Innovation inside large organisations rarely fails for lack of ideas. It fails because there is no shared method for finding the right ones, no way to repeat the process, and no language that connects a creative breakthrough to the operating plan. Most companies still treat innovation as a personality trait of a few teams rather than a capability the whole business can build.
Boards are making capital decisions inside the most disordered macroeconomic environment in a generation. Inflation has not behaved as the textbooks said it would, monetary policy is fighting itself, and structural shocks from AI to Brexit to deglobalisation are landing on top of cyclical pressure. Leaders need a reading of the economy that connects rates, prices, productivity and policy into a single coherent view they can act on.
Most boards now have an AI strategy on paper and almost no honest read on which parts of it are real. The signals coming out of Silicon Valley are loud, contradictory, and shaped by people with money to raise. Leaders need someone who has watched this exact pattern repeat through the PC, the internet, the cloud, and now generative AI, and who will say plainly which bets are durable and which are theatre.
Most strategic plans assume next year will look like this year. They are built on linear assumptions about technology that has been advancing exponentially for decades. Investment cycles miss inflection points by years; budgets arrive late to capabilities already commoditising.
Most organisations are still running a work operating system designed for a labour market that no longer exists. Jobs are fixed, careers are linear, AI is bolted on at the edges, and the skills the business actually needs are nowhere on the org chart. The question senior leaders now face is structural, not cosmetic: how do you rewire how work gets done before competitors rewire it around you.
Most organisations cannot tell the difference between automation that works in a controlled environment and automation that transforms operations at scale. The gap between a proof of concept and a million deployed robots is a systems design problem, not a technology one. Leaders who understand that distinction make sharper decisions about where autonomous systems create genuine value – and where they create expensive distraction.
Most boards have approved an AI strategy and almost none have shipped one. Pilots multiply, vendor decks accumulate, and the operating model stays the same. The pressure now is not to talk about AI but to redesign teams around it before competitors do.
Most digital transformation programmes stall in the gap between strategy decks and operating reality. The harder question is sovereignty: who controls the code, the infrastructure, the talent pipeline, and the standards your business now depends on. Boards rarely have a credible internal voice that can speak to both the technology stack and the policy machinery around it.
Most strategic planning is a structured form of imitation. Organisations benchmark against competitors, adopt industry best practice, and optimise for positions that rivals are already occupying. The result is competitive intensity without competitive advantage. The question no strategy process forces a leadership team to answer is whether the thing they are building is genuinely new – or just expensive to copy.