AI is already reshaping how decisions are made, how work is structured, and what organisations need from their leaders. And yet, in conversations with Boards and executive teams, I’m continually struck by how widely opinions diverge.
Some leaders are leaning in, asking the uncomfortable questions, testing the limits of the technology, and preparing their organisations for what comes next. Others seem to be standing back, avoiding the conversation entirely.
Whether this stems from discomfort, disbelief, or a hope that the disruption will prove slower and more manageable than it currently appears, I cannot say.
In our work with CEOs and Chief People Officers, we see a common challenge. While most leaders recognise the commercial and organisational benefits of effective succession planning, it still slips down the priority list. It’s often treated reactively, triggered by a resignation, buy-out or restructure, rather than as part of their long-term talent strategy.
But, when done well, strategically embedded succession planning does far more than simply prepare for leadership transitions. It strengthens the entire talent lifecycle, from attraction and development through to retention, whilst safeguarding institutional knowledge, ensuring continuity, increased productivity and long-term strategic success.
Why so many leaders are avoiding the real conversation
Most leadership teams now accept the value of AI in driving efficiency: Automating the repeatable. Accelerating the measurable. Analysing vast datasets at speeds no human could match. These applications are well-understood, and largely uncontested.
But the real hesitation begins when AI moves beyond automation and into cognition:
reasoning, decision-making, creativity, design.
This is where conversations become more delicate. Leaders are willing to talk about productivity tools. Fewer are willing to address intelligent systems that might challenge the boundaries of human work and leadership.
Some leaders avoid the topic because the implications feel existential. Others are uneasy about the ethics behind how AI is trained. Many underestimate the sheer pace of advancement. And a surprising number fall into the “AI rabbit hole” and decide they preferred life before they started asking difficult questions.
I understand all of this.
But avoidance will not protect any organisation from the reality unfolding
AI is far more consequential than back-office automation
AI will reshape organisational design faster than expected
We have never had a technology capable of amplifying, and in some cases surpassing, human cognitive capability. Industrialisation mechanised physical labour; the internet transformed global communication. AI has the potential to augment thinking.
The truth is that AI adoption does not behave like previous technological shifts.
The industrial revolution took a century.
The internet took decades.
AI scaled globally in days.
And it is already demonstrating capability far beyond automation: generating ideas, challenging assumptions, testing scenarios, supporting scientific discovery, and accelerating decision-making at a pace traditional structures were never built to absorb.
The implications for organisational design are significant. Roles built around process will shift toward roles built around judgement. Technical expertise will matter less than adaptability and learning agility. Career paths will become less linear and more capability-driven. Leadership expectations will change almost beyond recognition.
This shift has already begun.
Organisations that choose to redesign their structures now will be better positioned for the future. Those that wait will find themselves restructuring under pressure – a scenario that rarely leads to good decisions.
The talent agenda – where this becomes real
For decades, leadership capability was defined by functional expertise and tenure. The leaders who thrive in the AI-driven world will be those who:
interpret complexity rather than simply execute expertise
understand how to collaborate with AI rather than compete with it
draw ethical boundaries when data alone cannot
lead through ambiguity and accelerated change
ask better questions, not simply provide answers
Thankfully, many boards are recognising this, reassessing succession plans, capability frameworks, and role expectations.
What Redgrave is seeing across the market
We do not claim to be AI specialists. That’s not our role.
But our proximity to Boards, investors and leadership teams gives us a clear perspective on how organisations are adapting, and where they are not adapting fast enough.
We are seeing:
- executive roles being redesigned to incorporate AI fluency
- boards reassessing what “future-ready leadership” truly means
- capability gaps appearing at senior levels, often unexpectedly
- organisations reviewing structure, governance, and accountability
- talent strategies shifting from experience-based to capability-led
We’re helping clients rethink their leadership agendas, clarifying what capabilities matter most, how organisations must adapt, and what kind of leaders can guide them through this transformation.
This is not about predicting the future.
It is about preparing for a future that is already here.
AI will not wait for leaders to feel comfortable
If your organisation is beginning to explore how AI will affect its leadership, structure, and talent strategy, I would welcome the conversation.
If your organisation is beginning to explore how AI will affect its leadership, structure, and talent strategy, I would welcome the conversation.
