On strategy as decision under constraint—and its frequent collapse into platitude.
38 essays
The demand to measure the return on our ethics is not a problem to be solved but a symptom to be read. On why pricing virtue corrupts it—and why a firm that can measure the return on its integrity has already begun to spend it.
Generative AI has made plausible ideas nearly free, and a fashionable argument says this changes everything. It doesn't. Ideas were never scarce—judgement was, and remains so. On Grub Street at industrial scale, AI slop, and the only mile that was ever hard.
Part IV of a IV part series. The organisations capturing real value from AI are not better at AI; they are better at running organisations. The specific moves boards and executives can make to join them—and why nine years of evidence says most will not.
In this episode of On the Subject of Leadership, I speak with Clare Kitching, founder of Cambiq Consulting—formerly of McKinsey, QuantumBlack, and Treasury Wine Estates where she served as
Part II of a IV part series: twenty-five per cent of organisations have moved AI experiments into production after nine years of trying. Fifty-four per cent expect to within three to six months—a prediction that has appeared in every major survey for nearly a decade.
Part I of a IV part series: for nine years surveys have produced a remarkably similar finding: a small minority of organisations capture real financial value from AI; the great majority spend, signal, and pilot.
The disruption industry treats breaking things as proof of seriousness. Edmund Burke—reformer, not reactionary—offered a corrective two centuries ago: most transformation programmes destroy more than they build. The best leaders renovate, not demolish.
What happens when the people charged with fixing an organisation are, in important respects, the architects of its current condition? In this episode of On the Subject of Leadership, I
Standardisation and innovation are not competing choices but a polarity. In article four of this series I show how over-rotating to either creates failure, and how leaders can design systems, signals, and guardrails that allow both to coexist and scale.
Polarity mapping turns vague “both/and” thinking into a disciplined method. When leaders can map the upsides and downsides of competing poles, identify early warning signs, and design actions that sustain the benefits of each without tipping into failure, they build stronger organisations.
In an age of cheap text and AI-generated plausibility, leaders are not misled by too little information but by too much of the wrong kind. In this piece I explore why attention has become a governance risk—and why learning what to ignore now matters as much as what to know.
Most companies use AI, but few achieve real impact. In part I of this series I explore why people—not tools—determine AI maturity, and why the next serious organisations will dominate the space between pilots and profit.
Data does not persuade; trust does. Kahneman, Haidt, and Wittgenstein explain why credibility carries claims that evidence alone cannot—and why 'data-driven' decision-making is often the fiction organisations tell themselves to avoid naming who they actually trust.
In their fear of missing the AI bandwagon, many boards are blindly investing in tech they barely understand—driven more by hype than strategy. Mimicry, not discernment, has become the default. The result? Strategic incoherence, wasted billions, and millions of people thrown unnecessarily out of work
Most organisations obsess over 10-year business strategies but forget to plan for the people who'll deliver them. Strategic people architecture fixes that. It institutionalises structured chance-giving, succession scaffolding, and developmental stretch—ensuring talent is grown, not guessed at. Done