Business Model Innovation
Speakers who challenge how organisations create, deliver, and capture value in shifting markets
Long-running sponsorship models are eroding faster than commercial teams can replace them. Boards want growth from partnerships that survive regulation, scrutiny and changing consumer politics, not deals that look impressive in a press release and quietly underperform. The harder question is how to rebuild a commercial book when the category that funded the business for a generation disappears.
Legacy businesses with strong brands and weakening unit economics keep asking the same question: how do you charge directly for what used to be paid for by advertisers, without losing reach. The answer is rarely a pricing tweak. It usually requires rebuilding the relationship with the customer, the product, and the data underneath, against an internal culture that was not designed for any of it.
Service organisations are being asked to deploy AI agents and intelligent automation faster than their operating models can absorb them. Leaders know the productivity case, but the harder question is what the customer relationship, the workforce, and the cost-to-serve actually look like once agents handle the work front-line teams used to own. Most transformation programmes underestimate that redesign and end up automating the old service blueprint instead of rebuilding it.
Leaders of banks, central banks and other regulated institutions know their organisations are being rewired by AI, platforms and new regulation. What they struggle with is translating that awareness into sequenced decisions about capability, talent and operating model. The gap is not vision. It is a practitioner view of which AI moves build durable advantage and which ones become stranded pilots.
Most organisations still market and price as if customers make rational decisions. The gap between how buyers actually think and how sales, marketing and pricing teams are built to sell is where revenue leaks out, where innovation stalls on launch, and where well-funded campaigns quietly underperform. Closing that gap is a psychology problem, not a channel problem.
Sales and revenue teams are being asked to apply AI without a clear theory of what it is for. Pilots accumulate, dashboards multiply, and the pipeline still depends on the same human effort it always did. The harder question is what a commercial organisation actually looks like when autonomous agents do the work that headcount used to do.
Most organisations have a net zero commitment and a capital plan that does not match it. The gap between the climate narrative on the cover of the annual report and the cost, land, infrastructure and operational decisions inside the business is now visible to investors, regulators and employees. Closing it requires a working understanding of how cities, supply chains and the built environment are actually being rebuilt, not a refreshed slide on ambition.
Founder-led brands collapse in the same places they get built: at the seam between creative authorship and capital. Most creative founders sign away control they do not understand, and discover the cost only after the work has scaled. The hard part is not making the thing. It is keeping the rights, the team, and the conviction intact long enough to do it twice.
Consumer brands keep buying reach and getting compliments. The harder problem is converting attention into shelves, repeat orders and category credibility before the moment passes. Most marketing teams can describe what worked on TikTok last week; few can explain how to build a product business that survives the spike.
Most enterprises now have AI on the agenda but no method for getting it into the operating model. Pilots stall, design teams default to features instead of customer problems, and the organisation cannot tell the difference between a real innovation portfolio and a list of experiments. The gap is not ambition. It is discipline.
Most consumer-facing businesses can describe their product. Far fewer can describe what their brand actually stands for, or defend it when growth pressure pulls the offer in five directions at once. Leaders running creative, design-led or founder-led companies need a clear-eyed view of how a distinctive aesthetic becomes a durable commercial asset, and where it stops being one.
Most consumer brands die in the gap between a founder’s instinct and the operational scale needed to compete. Building something distinctive is hard. Building it again, after selling, walking away, and starting from a kitchen table for the second time, is a different problem entirely. Senior teams want to know what survives that journey, and what gets left behind.