Innovation & Disruption
Speakers who examine how industries are reshaped — and how organisations can lead rather than follow change
Speakers Associates represents 390 speakers on Innovation & Disruption, including Kemal Apaydin, Michael Lyon, Peter Fisk, Neri Karra Sillaman, Mark Stevenson, Nilofer Merchant, Itai Green, Lucy Bullivant, Rita McGrath and Katja Schipperheijn.
Most large organisations are not built to find their next source of growth. They reward people for delivering the plan, not for spotting the opportunity that sits outside it. So the people closest to customers and markets stay quiet, the safe bets win, and the business defends its core while newer rivals take the ground it should have taken first.
The integration of brain data, AI, and consumer-grade neurotechnology is moving faster than most senior leaders realise. The organisations engaging with this territory now will set the terms others have to accept later. Most boards do not yet have a real position on it.
Connected products generate more value as data than as objects, and most organisations have not worked out who owns that data, who monetises it, or what their business looks like when a competitor figures it out first. Boards know the shift is happening. Few have a defensible position on what to do about it.
Most companies misread their own growth. They confuse activity with traction, mistake fundraising for value creation, and back founders on charisma rather than unit economics. The discipline of evaluating a business the way a serious investor does, where capital has a cost and every dollar is forced to defend itself, rarely survives contact with internal politics.
Most large organisations talk about innovation and reward predictability. Leaders end up sponsoring two operating systems that pull in opposite directions, and one quietly wins. The real problem is not generating ideas, it is building a company that can hold competing priorities (efficiency and experimentation, control and creativity) without collapsing one into the other.
Artificial intelligence is moving from pilot to protocol inside hospitals, space agencies, and infrastructure programmes, and most leadership teams are still arguing about what is real and what is theatre. The cost of getting this wrong is not slower innovation. It is patient harm, missed regulation, and capital deployed against the wrong assumptions. Boards want a translator who has actually built and deployed clinical AI, not a commentator describing it from the outside.
Most large organisations have run AI pilots. Few have turned them into operating advantage. The harder problem is cultural: senior teams know they need to move faster on AI, but the internal mechanics of how decisions get made, how creative work is commissioned, and how risk is held have not caught up. Without that translation, AI sits adjacent to the business rather than inside it.
Customers do not behave the way product, marketing and strategy decks assume they will. They misread information, default to inertia, and disengage at exactly the moments organisations most need them to act. Closing that gap between what behaviour the business model requires and what cognition actually delivers is the work.
Most Western boards make capital allocation and supply chain decisions about China using mental models that are a decade out of date. The country has moved from manufacturing replica to setting the innovation standard in whole categories, even as its political and economic logic remains opaque. The result is a steady stream of strategic misjudgements at the moment when getting China right matters most.
Senior teams rehearse for the predictable failure and freeze in front of the one no playbook covers. The gap between a confident strategy on paper and the team’s first moves when a live system fails is where reputations and balance sheets are made. Composure under that pressure is a trainable capability, not a temperament.
Most consumer technology ideas die in the gap between a working prototype and a business that can scale. The pressure comes from all sides at once: capital runs thin, distribution stalls, investors pass, and the founder has to decide what to keep building and what to cut. The organisations that want to back, buy, or learn from founders at that stage need an honest account of what the decisions actually look like from inside the company.
Most organisations understand that AI and digital transformation are not optional. The problem is the gap between acknowledging this and making irreversible decisions about infrastructure, talent, and operating models: particularly in industries built around physical assets and long capital cycles. Leaders in real estate, construction, financial services, and retail are being asked to future-proof portfolios before the technology landscape has stabilised. The consequence of moving too slowly and too fast look equally costly from a boardroom.