PARADOX OF

PROGRESS
Re-imagining the Future of Work

And The Workforce

CONTENTS
04 Aon’s Leadership Survey Team 2025​

06 Intent Of The Survey​

08 Methodology Of The
Survey & Participant Profile​

11 SECTION 1:
Impact on Business Model​

26 SECTION 2:
Organization-wide Structural Shifts

51 SECTION 3:
Leadership Capabilities of the AI Era

67 SECTION 4:
What Does This Mean For Organizations?

79 Executive Summary​

83 Appendix​
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Preface
In an era defined by relentless technological advancement, artificial intelligence (AI) is no
longer a horizon event—it is an embedded force, actively reshaping the architecture of work,
the contours of leadership, and the very DNA of organizational value creation. Across
industries, AI has transitioned from experimentation to enterprise-wide integration, prompting a
fundamental question: Are traditional leadership models equipped to guide organizations
through the volatility and reinvention this era demands?

This report emerges at a critical inflection point. As business models evolve, organizational
hierarchies flatten, and AI-native roles proliferate, the behaviors and capabilities that once
defined effective leadership are being reexamined, reweighted, and, in some cases, rendered
obsolete. Against this backdrop, our research aims to move beyond surface-level assessments
of AI adoption. Instead, we explore the deeper, structural shifts underway—across organizational
design, workforce capability, and behavioral expectations.

Drawing on insights from over 200 senior leaders across Global Capability Centers, Technology
Product & Platform firms, and Technology Services & Consulting organizations, this report synthesizes
the realities facing leadership teams today. It demonstrates how AI is transforming decision-making,
redistributing internal power, and surfacing new fault lines around talent, productivity, and trust.

More importantly, it highlights where leadership is

evolving fast enough—and where it is not.

We hope this report equips you not just with answers, but with better questions. What kind of AI
organization are you building? Is your leadership framework wired for transformation—or optimized
for a world that no longer exists? And as human behaviors become the final differentiator in an AI-
saturated landscape, how will your leaders adapt, evolve, and lead differently?

03
Aon’s
Leadership
Survey Team​
2025
03
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Aon Leadership
Survey Team For
2025

ANIRBAN GUPTA PRANAV MAHAJAN

Partner, Aon​​ Associate Director, Aon​​

BHAVIKA JAIN SAUMYA SACHDEVA SAMPADA SONI

Consultant​, Aon​​ Consultant​, Aon​​ Consultant​, Aon​​

05
Intent Of
The Survey​
 Paradox of Progress 2025

What We Have Set

Out To Explore​
01 02
Understanding the Identifying Broad
Impact of AI on Shifts in the
Organizations​ Industry​
Explore how AI is transforming Highlight overarching changes in
organizational structures, leadership leadership expectations and behaviors
roles, and decision-making processes. driven by AI and technological
Uncover the ways AI influences how advancements. Understand trends that
organizations operate and lead in the cut across industries and redefine
current and future business landscape.​ leadership paradigms.​

03 04
Narrowing Down Understanding the
On Industry- Changing Relevance of
Specific Views​ Behavioral Capabilities​
Analyze how leadership perspectives and Examine which leadership behaviors
priorities differ across sectors such as are becoming more or less important
GCCs, Tech Consulting & Services, and as AI reshapes the workplace. Study
Tech Products & Platforms. Capture the how definitions and applications of key
unique challenges and opportunities each behavioral capabilities evolve to meet
industry faces in the AI age.​ future demands.​

07
Methodology
Of The Survey
and Participant
Profile​

07
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Methodology Of The Survey

Survey
Data
Design & Collection & Report
Planning Analysis​ Generation​
Questionnaire Development: Data Validation and Presents comprehensive
Identified key questions Quality Checks: insights that includes:​
specific to the impact of AI on
organizations focusing on Collected data Impact on
Impact on business
underwent Business Models ​
models and strategy validation to ensure
completeness and Shifts in Organizational
Changes in consistency. Structures and Impact
organizational Responses were on Jobs​
structures and roles​ reviewed to identify
Rise of AI CoEs and and address any Impact on Leadership
Capabilities​
shift in internal power anomalies or
structures​ incomplete
Subsequent shift in submissions​. Report serves as an
leadership behaviors​ insight for organizations to
Segmentation and gauge where they stand
Target Respondents: Comparative Analysis:​ against the market, and
Targeted organizations Segmented data by understanding broad
across the technology industry to identify trends industry trends with
industry with focus on senior and insights specific to relation to AI.​
business and HR leaders.​ each category.​

Survey Completion Time Key insights were Findings help

~20 minutes derived by comparing
stakeholders make
responses informed AI decisions​

Number of respondents
200+

09
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Participant Profile | Industry Cut,

Titles, And Functions​

24%
Global Capability Centres
Technology Product
& Platforms
Technology Services

& Consulting
47%
29% Total Organizations ( N=154)
29%

CTO CHRO Director

MD Country Head Head, Transformation

Vice President CPO COO CEO

Total Respondents

( N=204 )

10
SECTION 1

Impact on
Business Model​
 Paradox of Progress 2025

AI Adoption Differs By Industry-

AI At The Core Or At The Edge? ​
AI is central to our core AI is somewhat relevant AI is important but not central to
business strategy. to our business strategy. our business strategy.

( n=190) 68%

57%

52%

45%
42%
39%

34%

30%

12%

9% 9%

2%

Global Capability Technology Product & Technology Consulting Overall

Centre Platform & Services

*Values in the graph indicate the percentage of organizations

12
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 AI Has Reached Strategic Centrality for a Majority of Firms

52% of all respondents report that AI is central to their business strategy, signaling a shift from pilots
and experimentation to enterprise-wide integration.
AI is no longer being evaluated in isolation—it is This reflects growing confidence in AI’s impact on
now embedded into product roadmaps, delivery productivity, decision intelligence, automation, and innovation
models, and customer engagement strategies. across multiple functions.

02 Across Industries, AI Has Shifted from Experimentation to Execution

The high levels of AI centrality across all From AI-as-innovation to AI-as-infrastructure.​
industries underscore a systemic shift: ​ From isolated pilot projects to embedded business operations.​

03 Tech Consulting & Services Leads the Pack on AI Centrality

A dominant 68% of firms say AI is core to their strategy—the highest across all industry clusters.
This high AI centrality is likely driven by: Client Consulting and Services firms must walk the
expectations to deliver AI-infused transformation talk—AI cannot just be a capability, it must be a
projects; Increased competition from cloud-native and demonstrable consulting posture.​
platform-first players; Internal urgency to differentiate
via AI-led delivery models and intellectual property.​

04 Tech Product & Platform Firms Are Building AI into Product DNA
57% of Tech Product and Platform firms Use cases likely include: Personalization engines;
Predictive analytics; Intelligent automation within platforms​
report AI as core to strategy, indicating that AI
is no longer treated as a support function—it’s These firms are likely to lead in creating AI-native product
embedded in the core value proposition. architectures, not just automating back-end workflows.​

05 Global Capability Centres (GCCs) Show a Split Mindset—Waiting for

Direction or Playing Catch-Up
Only 42% of GCCs consider AI central, while an almost equal 45% say it’s important but not core. ​
This reflects a dual reality: Some GCCs are evolving into AI Centers of Excellence, leading internal innovation and
platforms. Others are still functioning as execution arms, waiting for AI mandates from global HQs. This ambiguity
may be slowing down talent development, investment, and accountability around AI in some GCCs.​
Compared to product and services firms, GCCs have the least consensus on AI’s strategic role. Reasons may
include: Lack of clear AI governance models at the offshore level; Fragmentation across business units supported
by the GCC; A talent mix skewed toward operations and legacy tech.​

06 AI is Peripheral for Very Few Firms—‘Somewhat Relevant’ Is Nearly Irrelevant

Just 9% of respondents overall classify AI as “somewhat relevant,” suggesting that
the market has largely moved past exploration.​
Firms in this segment may be: Smaller players with resource constraints; Early-stage AI adopters in highly regulated or
traditional sectors. This near disappearance of AI irrelevance shows a market tipping point toward adoption inevitability.​

07 Across Industries, AI Has Shifted from Experimentation to Execution

The high levels of AI centrality across all From AI-as-innovation to AI-as-infrastructure.​
industries underscore a systemic shift: ​ From isolated pilot projects to embedded business operations.​

13
 Paradox of Progress 2025

AI & Productivity: High

Expectations, Uneven Readiness​

In-Year Targeted
Productivity Uptick
Expectations
Global Capability Centers
Technology Product

& Platforms
Technology Consulting
and Services

Key Challenges to Productivity Increase Across Industries

( N=154 )

66%
63%
59%

45%

29% 29%

Lack of Repurposing Difficulties in Absence of Employee Inability to

sufficient existing talent integrating AI high-quality resistance to change the
skilled talent to future roles systems with data feeds to change and culture and
existing AI systems adoption shift from
workflows current ways
of working

*Values in the graph indicate the percentage of organizations

14
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 GCCs Have the Most Conservative Productivity Expectations

GCCs expect productivity gains of about 10-20%. This suggests that GCCs are likely focusing on
incremental efficiency improvements (e.g., automation of repetitive tasks) rather than enterprise-wide AI
transformation.​Their role as execution hubs under global HQs often limits their strategic autonomy, which
could explain this conservatism.​

02 Tech Product & Platform Firms Aim for Mid-Range Gains

Product firms expect moderate productivity improvements of about 20-30% from AI, reflecting a more
measured approach. Their gains are likely tied to AI embedded within product features, such as personalization,
predictive maintenance, or intelligent UX—not necessarily enterprise operations.​The caution may stem from
challenges in scaling AI across functions, such as customer success, sales ops, or finance.

03 Tech Consulting & Services Have the Boldest Expectations

These firms claim 30%+ gains, indicating aggressive productivity targets. This aligns with AI
value proposition to clients and a lever to optimize internal delivery models (e.g., automated testing,
virtual assistants, knowledge extraction).​

04 Talent Is the Top Productivity Bottleneck Across Industries

66 % cite repurposing existing talent and 63% cite lack of AI-skilled talent as ma or roadblocks—
j

making talent the most systemic constraint to productivity realization. This reveals a dual problem: They
can’t hire niche AI talent fast enough in a competitive market; And they can’t reskill internal talent at the
speed AI demands. This results in a "capability vacuum" even as the technology matures.
AI Talent is Specialized, Not Easily Transferable: M ismatch Between Organizational Learning Models and AI
Unlike generic tech roles, AI requires deep Speed: Most learning systems are still geared toward
fluency in areas like: Model interpretability; certification-based, one-time interventions, not continuous,
Prompt engineering; Data governance; ML Ops embedded learning. But AI evolves rapidly—making
and deployment workflows. yesterday’s training obsolete before it scales.​
It’s not just a volume problem—it’s a capability transformation issue.​

05 Repurposing Talent Is a Bigger Challenge Than Hiring

That repurposing ranks even higher than hiring suggests organizations already have people—but they're
stuck in roles, skills, and mindsets built for the pre-AI world.
Legacy teams often: Struggle to embrace AI-enabled workflows; Resist data-driven delegation; Lack foundational
familiarity with AI concepts.​Role Redesign Is Not Keeping Pace with AI Evolution: Even when talent is willing, many
roles are: Poorly redefined for the AI future; Missing new accountability frameworks; Lacking clear transition paths
(e.g., from reporting analyst to prompt curator or from operations lead to automation orchestrator). ​

06 Integration Challenges Undermine Scale

59 % of respondents report difficulty integrating AI with existing systems—pointing to technical debt and
fragmented architectures as key friction points. These challenges likely stem from: Outdated ERP/CRM
systems; Lack of modular APIs; Overly siloed data pipelines.​Integration gaps don’t just delay gains—they
risk breaking trust in AI’s promised ROI.

07 D ata Quality is a Silent Killer

45 % cite poor- uality data feeds as a barrier—underscoring that without good data, AI models
q

can’t perform well, regardless of algorithmic sophistication. Common issues include: Inconsistent tagging
or labelling; Missing or unstructured inputs; Low trust in the origin or accuracy of source systems.​ This
highlights the need for data readiness to precede model deployment.

15
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Talent Challenges Lag

Expected Productivity Uptick
in GCCs​
Criticality of Productivity in Strategy vs
Targeted Productivity Uptick​ ( n=76 )
TARGETED PRODUCTIVITY UPTICK

<10% 10-20% 20-30% 30-50% >50%

CRITICALLY OF AI TO PRODUCTIVITY STRATEGY

Very
Important 7% 30% 25% 7% 1%

Important 8% 5% 4% 0% 0%

Not
Important 2% 8% 3% 0% 0%

Key Challenges to Productivity Increase in GCCs​

( n=76 )

63% 63%
57%
46%

30%
25%

Lack of Repurposing Difficulties in Absence of Employee Inability to

sufficient AI existing talent integrating AI high-quality resistance to change the
skilled talent to future roles systems with data feeds to change and culture and
existing AI systems adoption shift from
workflows current ways
of working

*Values in the graph indicate the percentage of organizations

16
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 Most GCCs See Productivity as Strategically Important—But Aim for Modest Gains

70% of GCCs mark productivity as “Very Important” to their AI strategy. Yet, the majority aim for <20%
productivity improvement, showing a disconnect between strategic importance and achievable gains.

Productivity is a board-level goal, but capability constraints are holding back aggressive targets.

02 A Conservative Productivity Ambition Is Evident

30% of respondents with high strategic alignment still target just 10–20% uplift.

Only 1% of all respondents expect >50% improvement, reflecting realistic or risk-averse posturing.​

Only 7% of the entire sample falls into the >30% targeted productivity band—suggesting that AI is seen more as a
lever for incremental optimization than exponential performance in GCCs.​

GCCs are focusing on steady efficiency improvements rather than breakthrough transformation in the short term.​

03 GCCs May Be Waiting on AI Maturity or Global Mandates

The alignment to strategy is clear, but ambitions are low, indicating that many GCCs are awaiting

clarity from headquarters or central strategy teams before setting bold goals.

04 Talent Is the #1 Constraint in GCCs

Both “lack of AI-skilled talent” and “repurposing existing talent” are tied as top challenges at 63% each.
This dual talent gap signals that GCCs are not just under-equipped in AI capabilities —
’
they re also struggling to unlock the full potential of their current workforce.​

New AI-native roles (e.g., model trainers, prompt engineers, AI ops leads) require capabilities
’
that don t exist in traditional IT or ops-heavy teams.​

Simultaneously, the inability to reskill existing teams means that AI investments remain siloed in
E
innovation labs or Co s, unable to scale across mainstream delivery.​

05 System Integration Issues Are a Close Third Challenge

57% fi
of respondents cite dif culties integrating AI with existing systems.

GCCs typically operate as execution arms supporting multiple geographies and business units, which

means they often inherit a patchwork of legacy systems, inconsistent APIs, and varying data standards.​

Even when AI models exist, they often can’t plug into core operational systems like claims
engines, supply chain platforms, or CRM databases.​

In some cases, security, compliance, or architecture rigidity prevents AI modules from being

embedded into workflows at scale.​

06 Data Infrastructure Is Still Immature

46% cite the absence of high-quality data feeds as a key constraint.
Many GCCs are still working with fragmented, siloed, or manually curated data pipelines, which
hampers real-time AI deployment.​

For GCCs, this is not just a data engineering problem—it’s a strategic readiness gap. Until the data fabric
z
is moderni ed, AI ambitions will outpace execution.​

AI systems need continuous access to clean, contextual, and current data —but most organizational
data flows are still stuck in batch-driven, point-in-time reporting formats.​

1 7
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Product Firms Know AI Will Drive

The Future But Most Are Still
Shipping Features, Not Platforms​

Criticality of Productivity in Strategy vs

Targeted Productivity Uptick​ ( n=38 )

TARGETED PRODUCTIVITY UPTICK

< 10 % 1 0-20% 2 0-30% 3 0-50% >50%

CRITICALLY OF AI TO PRODUCTIVITY STRATEGY

Very 3% 26% 29% 11% 3%

Important

Important 3% 7% 10% 0% 0%

Not
3% 5% 0% 0% 0%
Important

Key Challenges to Productivity Increase

in Tech Product Firms​

( n=38 )

71%
66%
61%
47%

24% 34%

Lack of Repurposing Difficulties in Absence of Employee Inability to

sufficient AI existing talent integrating AI high-quality resistance to change the
skilled talent to future roles systems with data feeds to change and culture and
existing AI systems adoption shift from
workflows current ways
of working

*Values in the graph indicate the percentage of organizations

1 8
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 AI Productivity is Strategically Critical—But Execution is Cautious

92% of product firms rate productivity as either “very important” or “important” to their AI strategy.
However, the bulk of them are concentrated in the 10–30% productivity uptick range, indicating
a measured or incremental approach, not a transformation agenda.

02 The Majority Are Aiming for 10–30% Gains, Not 50%+ Disruption
72% fall in the 10–30% zone—suggesting firms are treating AI as a performance amplifier,
not yet as a radical reinvention tool.
O nly 3% are targeting >50% improvement, W hile AI is on the roadmap, it's being used to
implying that AI is still feature-led (small efficiencies) optimize existing workflows, not rebuild business
rather than platform-led (structural impact).​ logic or client value from the ground up.​

03 Less Than 15% Expect Step-Change Gains (>30%)

Despite the hype around generative AI and product-led transformation, only a small fraction aim for
breakthrough productivity outcomes.
This is likely due to organizational complexity, This indicates that product firms are shipping AI as an
limited AI fluency at scale, or lack of monetizable add-on, not embedding it into core product architecture
platform-level use cases.​ or commercial models.​

04 Talent Remains a Real but Lower-Intensity Constraint

66% cite lack of AI talent, and 61% cite repurposing challenges, lower than in GCCs or Services firms.
This likely reflects that product firms have greater access to digital-native or technically skilled talent pools.
However, even with access to skilled engineers, transitioning to AI-native product thinking (e.g., probabilistic
outputs, model explainability, feedback loops) remains hard.​
These firms are likely to lead in creating AI-native product architectures, not just automating back-end workflows.​

05 System Integration is a Growing Pain Point—71% Flag It

Integration challenges are disproportionately high relative to firm size and maturity—
suggesting that AI features are being built in silos or added post-hoc.
M any product firms are still wrestling with legacy APIs, infrastructure rigidity, or monolithic
architectures, which slow real-time deployment.​

06 Data Quality and Pipeline Maturity Remain a Foundational Gap

47% cite lack of high-quality data feeds. This is critical, especially in AI-based personalization
predictions, or adaptive systems.
This reflects that data readiness is still a bottleneck in realizing dynamic AI capabilities like real-time inference or
customer-driven insights.​

19
 Paradox of Progress 2025

07 Challenges Are Spread Thin, But Together They Show Readiness Gaps
No single challenge dominates, but the distribution across six barriers shows that product firms are
hitting multiple friction points simultaneously in talent, data, systems, and adoption. The cumulative
effect of “many medium barriers” may be as severe as one dominant constraint..​
This reflects that data readiness is still a bottleneck in realizing dynamic AI capabilities like
real-time inference or customer-driven insights.​

08 Data Quality and Pipeline Maturity Remain a Foundational Gap

The lack of firms targeting >30% productivity gains, combined with moderate barrier intensity,
suggests TPP firms are: Adding AI to roadmaps as enhancements, not as core differentiators; Experimenting
in silos, not restructuring product teams or experiences around AI capabilities.

20
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Tech Consulting Firms Expect

Higher Productivity Upticks Despite
Talent Challenges​
Criticality of Productivity in Strategy vs
Targeted Productivity Uptick​ ( n=40 )
TARGETED PRODUCTIVITY UPTICK

<10% 10-20% 20-30% 30-50% >50%

CRITICALLY OF AI TO PRODUCTIVITY STRATEGY

Very
Important 3% 30% 20% 15% 3%

Important 5% 10% 10% 0% 0%

Not
Important 2% 2% 0% 0% 0%

Key Challenges to Productivity Increase

in Tech Consulting Firms​
( n=40 )

78%
60% 53%
40%
30% 33%

Lack of Repurposing Difficulties in Absence of Employee Inability to

sufficient AI existing talent integrating AI high-quality resistance to change the
skilled talent to future roles systems with data feeds to change and culture and
existing AI systems adoption shift from
workflows current ways
of working

*Values in the graph indicate the percentage of organizations

21
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 Technology Consulting and Services Firms Set the Highest Productivity

Expectations Across All Clusters
Nearly 18% of respondents from TCS firms target >30% productivity improvement
(15% target 30–50%, 3% target >50%).
This is the most ambitious among the three These firms are not just using AI to
industries and reflects a strong belief in AI’s optimize internal processes—they view
transformative potential to automate, it as a competitive differentiator in
augment, and streamline client delivery.​ client engagements.​

02 ​M ja ority of High Ambition Firms Also Say Productivity Is “Very Important”

Those aiming for >30% gains overwhelmingly rate AI-led productivity as “very important” to their
business strategy. This indicates strong alignment between aspiration and strategic intent, a crucial foundation
for successful execution.

03 Even Lower-Ambition Firms Still Consider AI Productivity Strategic

30% of firms targeting only 10–20% improvement still label productivity as “very important.” This shows that
even modestly ambitious firms see AI as essential, but may be held back by execution constraints, not belief.

04 N O o ne Says AI-Led Productivity Is “Not Important”

Not a single respondent targeting >20% gains marks AI productivity as unimportant. This underlines
an AI-led productivity is no longer optional—it's central to relevance and margin growth.

05 R epurposing Talent Is the #1 Barrier

D espite being a knowledge industry, firms struggle to transition existing workforce into AI-enabled roles.
Client-facing delivery models are often built on This suggests that even in consulting, reskilling
deep functional silos, and these silos resist for new mental models and AI fluency is lagging
adaptation to AI-disrupted workflows.​ behind technology deployment.​

06 AI Talent Shortage Still Holds Weight

Firms face hiring bottlenecks in sourcing niche AI With demand outpacing supply, consulting
roles—especially those combining technical firms are competing with product companies
knowledge and domain/consulting fluency (e.g., and startups for the same AI talent pool.​
data scientists who can communicate with clients).

07 Integration Challenges Are Less Severe But Still Matter

Fewer firms cite AI integration as the top issue, possibly because firms often work with modular, cloud-
based architectures or greenfield client environments.
However, integration can still become a problem The ability to work across “AI + legacy”
when AI must coexist with legacy client systems environments will define consulting productivity
during deployment.​ in hybrid client settings.​

08 B arriers Are Manageable—But Will Require Orchestration

Unlike GCCs, where challenges cluster around foundational capability gaps, Services firms face distributed,
medium-intensity challenges. This means there’s no single point of failure—but also no single fix.
22
 Paradox of Progress 2025

W hat are the CEO's People

AI Agendas?​
Global Capability Centre Technology Consulting & Services
Technology Product & Overall
Platform

Critical Components in CEO’s AI People Strategy​

( n=190 )

8.93
8.52 8.53
8.36 8.26
8.07 8.18 8.11 8.11
7.75 8.03 7.93 8.03 7.70
8.67 7.49
7.14 7.11
6.91 8.03
6.80 7.82 7.89

6.27

Managing Investing in Determining Leading Determining the Building a new

workforce reskilling and how the jobs cultural impact of AI on organization
displacement upskilling of today will change to people structure that
and addressing current change in an adopt AI ways productivity and accelerates AI
job security employees to AI led world of working workforce size led innovation
concerns ensure AI ready
talent supply

CEO’s People Agenda

*Values in the graph indicate scores on a scale of 1 to 10

23
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 Investing in Reskilling and Upskilling Current Employees is the Top

Priority Across All Segments:
With scores ranging from 8.36 to 8.93 , Services firms rate this the highest (8.93), which aligns
this is the highest-rated component of the with their people-led service models where reskilling has
CEO AI people agenda. CEOs across direct impact on revenue and delivery credibility.​
industries recognize that AI-readiness isn’t Even in product firms, which often have strong tech DNA, the
just about hiring—it’s about transforming focus on upskilling (8.52) reflects the need to evolve product
the current workforce. managers, engineers, and sales teams for AI-native roles.​

02 Determining the Impact of AI on People Productivity and Workforce

Size Is Also Rated Highly
Across the board, this scores 7.93 to 8.18 , with tech consulting and services firms again rating it highest.
This reflects a growing CEO push to quantify AI’s effect on performance, not just costs. ​
It also suggests that headcount transformation (not just reduction) is firmly on the radar—
especially as AI impacts billability models in consulting and FTE capacity in GCCs.​
This reflects that organizations want to avoid the productivity paradox—investing in AI but
failing to extract measurable workforce impact.​

03 Leading Cultural Change to Adopt AI Ways of Working is a Silent but

Rising Priority:
Rated 7.82–8.67, this dimension reflects This suggests that CEOs are increasingly realizing that
the harder, slower layer of transformation technical adoption without cultural rewiring leads to rejection,
underutilization, or fear-driven resistance.​
—mindset and behavioral adaptation.
This reflects that leaders are focused not just on
It includes: Moving from deterministic to reskilling, but reframing the future job architecture—
probabilistic thinking; Embracing experimentation including roles that don’t exist yet (e.g., prompt
over certainty; Trusting data over hierarchy.​ engineers, model verifiers, AI interaction designers).​

04 Determining How Today ’s Jobs Will Change in an AI-led World Shows Strong Concern
This receives 7.75 to 8.26 , indicating a Tech consulting and services rate this highest (8.26),
forward-looking awareness that jobs will not reflecting concern that as delivery models shift, role clarity
disappear overnight—but will evolve. and career paths must be redefined—especially for
operations-heavy teams.​

05 Managing Workforce Displacement and Addressing Job Security

Concerns is a Moderate Concern
While this may seem counterintuitive, it likely reflects: The low visibility of short-term layoffs directly
linked to AI; A belief that AI will augment, not replace—at least initially; A possible underestimation of
employee fear and uncertainty.

06 Redesigning Org Structures to Accelerate AI Innovation is

Currently a Lower Priority
Rated between 7.11 to 8.11 GCCs rate this lowest (7.11), possibly because they still
this is lower than skilling or productivity. operate under globally determined org structures,
making structural change less locally actionable.​
Product and Services firms rate it relatively While org redesign is essential for AI scale-up, it
higher, likely because product and consulting
appears to lag in visibility behind more “urgent” people
orgs are already experimenting with: Cross-
topics like skills and productivity.​
functional AI squads; Centralized CoEs vs.
federated AI champions.​

24
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Key Takeaways​
01 AI Is Central—But Not Yet Fully Mobilized
Across industries, a majority of organizations say AI is now central to business strategy—especially in

Tech Consulting 68% Product Firms 57%

Yet many Global Capability Centres (GCCs) remain in a reactive posture, with 45% saying AI is “important but not central.” ​

This reveals two camps: AI-as-core growth engine AI-as-operational optimizer (cost,
(platform thinking, new business models). ​ quality, speed).​

Organizations must decide—are they building for growth or just chasing efficiency? Both are valid—but clarity is critical.​

02 Productivity Targets Are High—But Capabilities Lag

Many firms—especially services firms—are targeting 30–50% productivity gains, but barriers like talent gaps, integration
issues, and data quality persist.

Product firms are ambitious in vision but GCCs are the most cautious, with most firms
conservative in execution—often still shipping AI targeting 10–20% uplifts, despite rating productivity
features, not designing AI platforms.​ as highly important.​

Without capability modernization, firms risk over-promising and under-delivering on AI ROI.​

03 Talent is the Most Systemic Bottleneck Across Industries

Reskilling internal teams ranks higher than hiring new talent, especially in Services and GCC.

Existing teams are struggling to adapt to AI-enabled Product firms face a different issue—they have tech
workflows, and most firms lack the learning agility talent, but not AI product thinkers who can drive
or infrastructure to evolve fast enough.​ platform-level transformation.​

The war for AI success will be won or lost on the inside—in the speed and depth of workforce reinvention.​

04 Behavioral and Structural Shifts Are Being Underestimated

Not many cite culture and change management as top barriers—suggesting a blind spot around organizational readiness. ​

CEOs agree that leading cultural change and determining the future of roles are critical
—but organizational structure redesign remains a low priority, especially in GCCs.​

AI doesn’t just need new tools—it demands new mindsets, new workflows, and new operating
models. Without those, transformation will stall.​

05 The CEO’s People AI Agenda Is Focused—But Incomplete

CEOs across sectors are aligned on the need to: Reskill at scale; Quantify productivity impact; Lead cultural transformation​

Yet workforce displacement, job architecture change, and org design are rated lower,
despite being critical enablers of sustainable AI adoption.​

There's a risk of solving for the near-term (skills and impact) but missing the structural scaffolding for long-term AI success.​

06 What Kind of AI Company Are You Building?

If AI is central, then you must invest in growth levers—new products, business models, client outcomes, and innovation structures.

If AI is central, then you must invest in growth levers—new products, business models, client outcomes, and innovation structures.​
Both are valid—but both require different behavioral playbooks, investment postures, and organizational shifts.​
The clock is ticking. The AI narrative has moved from "why" to "how deeply and how fast." Those who delay structural
readiness will not only miss the productivity upside—they ’ll risk irrelevance.​

25
SECTION 2

Organization-
wide Structural
Shifts
 Paradox of Progress 2025

New AI Roles And AI COEs

Emerge As Major
Organizational Shifts​

Global Capability Centre Technology Consulting & Services

Technology Product & Overall

Platform

( n=190 )

A shift toward flatter organizational

structures is occurring as
information and expertise become
more accessible.

The emergence of
Traditional AI Centers of
functions are being Excellence
consolidated into (COEs), vertical
fewer roles or teams that foster
teams because of innovation through
AI automation, a horizontal
streamlining structure.
operations and
reducing
redundancy.

Emergence of new
Blurring of
leadership roles that
boundaries
are focused on
between
accelerating the
traditional job
organization’s AI
roles, leading to
adoption and
a boundaryless
identifying new
organization.
opportunities.

The creation of dual

team structures—
traditional
teams for Proliferation of
stability and cross-functional and
AI-first teams Emergence of self-
agile teams in a bid
for innovation. managed teams that
to foster innovation
do not require task
and faster value
management,
delivery.
traditional supervision
and management.

27
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Institutionalizing AI Balancing Innovation

through Leadership and with Stability through
Centres of Excellence Team Structures
Across all industries, the strongest and most Organizations are actively fostering cross-
consistent trend is the establishment of functional and agile teams to accelerate innovation
dedicated AI leadership roles and AI Centres and value delivery, indicating growing adoption of
of Excellence (COEs), reflecting a strategic flexible collaboration models. However, the
shift where organizations recognize that AI relatively lower scores for dual team structures and
adoption requires specialized leadership and self-managed teams indicate a cautious approach.
centralized innovation hubs. AI is no longer Firms are experimenting with balancing traditional,
experimental but a core priority. ​ stable teams alongside AI-first innovation units but
remain hesitant to fully centralize management or
embrace team autonomy. ​

Evolving but Not Streamlining Operations

Overhauling through Role Consolidation
Organizational Hierarchies and Automation
The moderate scores (~5.5) for shifts toward There is moderate recognition that AI is driving
flatter organizational structures and the blurring consolidation of traditional functions by automating
of traditional job boundaries (~5.4 to 6.3) routine tasks and reducing redundancies. This trend
suggest that while AI is prompting some role is more pronounced in consulting firms, which may
fluidity and democratization of information, be leveraging AI to optimize operational efficiency.
most organizations retain established However, the moderate level of this effect suggests
hierarchies and clear role definitions. This that many roles still require human expertise and
indicates a pragmatic evolution rather than a judgment, particularly in complex IT and product
radical overhaul, as firms balance the benefits of development environments.​
agility and boundarylessness with the need for
clarity, accountability, and control.​

Global Technology Technology

Capability Consulting & Product &
Centres (GCCs) Services Platform firms
Emphasize formal AI show the most dynamic lead in adopting agile and
leadership and COEs, organizational shifts, with self-managed teams, aligning
reflecting their role as higher scores for role with a culture of autonomy
innovation enablers within boundary blurring and and rapid iteration essential
stable operational frameworks. function consolidation, for product innovation. They
Their cautious adoption of reflecting their need to also prioritize AI leadership
flatter structures and rapidly adapt roles and and COEs but maintain
autonomous teams indicates a streamline operations to moderate structural clarity to
preference for controlled meet diverse client balance innovation with
evolution over disruption.​ demands. product stability.​

28
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Junior And Middle Layers Shrink

While Senior Layers Expand​

Perception of AI 47%
Integration’s Impact 42%
on workforce trends 39%
across management 34% 34%
36%

levels​
( n=154 ) 25% 25%

19%
Expanding Layer
Shrinking Layer
No Net Change

Junior Middle Senior

Management​ Management​ Management​

*Values in the graph indicate the percentage of organizations

0.6

Level-Wise Junior Middle

Expected Impact Management​ Management​

on Headcount Senior
Pyramids​ Management​

( n=154 ) -0.4

-1.4

29
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 Junior Management Is Expected to Shrink the Most

47% of respondents believe junior layers will shrink due to AI integration. Only 19% expect
expansion— the lowest across all layers.
This reflects the belief that AI will automate repetitive, rule-based tasks, many of which are traditionally owned
by entry-level roles in operations, reporting, coordination, or basic analysis.​
AI is directly challenging the foundational work traditionally given to junior talent, raising long-term questions about
talent pipelines, onboarding value, and early-career development.​
If junior talent is not reskilled and redeployed (e.g., as prompt engineers, data taggers, AI trainers),
organizations risk losing their next generation of leaders before they’re built.​

02 Middle Management Also Faces Contraction Pressure

42% expect shrinking, while only 34% foresee expansion.
Middle managers may be caught in a dual squeeze: AI tools replacing information aggregation and monitoring
tasks; Senior leaders gaining more visibility and decision-support via analytics, reducing dependency on
middle layers for reporting escalation or tactical planning.​
The “manager as translator ” role is under threat. Middle managers will need to evolve from supervisory roles to
strategy-driving or integration-focused positions.​
Organizations that redesign, not remove, middle management roles will better handle the cultural and
workflow shifts needed to scale AI adoption.​

03 Senior Management Is the Only Layer Where Expansion > Shrinkage

39% expect senior layers to expand, compared to 25% expecting shrinkage.
This may reflect the increasing strategic complexity of leading AI transformation—requiring more senior
bandwidth in areas like:Data governance; AI risk and ethics; Cross-functional transformation leadership​
As AI blurs boundaries between functions, senior roles are expected to absorb more
responsibility for orchestration, narrative, and risk oversight.​
As senior layers expand to manage AI disruption, there's a risk of top-heavy decision-making that slows agility.​

04 There Is No “No-Change” Zone—Everyone Is Impacted

A sizeable percentage (25–38%) see no net change, reflecting uncertainty or a “wait-and-watch” attitude.
But even if headcounts don't shift dramatically, the nature of work, decision rights, and
value contribution is already changing.​
Stability in structure does not mean stability in expectations. Roles may remain, but responsibilities will transform.​
This is less about collapse and more about rebalancing—organizations recalibrating toward high-
value orchestration and oversight roles.​
The real challenge seems not about reducing cost—it’s redistributing capability and rethinking how value
gets created across the structure.​

30
 Paradox of Progress 2025

GCCs Hone A Cautious Approach

To Middle And Senior Layers​

53%
Perception of AI
Integration’s Impact
on workforce trends 39% 39%
across management 34% 33%
levels​ 29%
28%
( n=76 ) 26%

Expanding Layer 18%

Shrinking Layer
No Net Change

Junior Middle Senior

Management​ Management​ Management​
*Values in the graph indicate the percentage of organizations

0.5

Level-Wise Junior Middle

Expected Impact Management​ Management​

on Headcount Senior
Pyramids​ Management​

( n=76 ) -0.3

*Calculated by codifying and

averaging the responses to gauge
the average headcount shift for a
particular management layer.​

-1.7

31
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 GCCs Expect a Significant Contraction at the Junior Layer

A striking 53% of respondents predict a shrinkage in junior management layers— the highest
contraction rate across all clusters analyzed.
Only 18% see this layer expanding, The junior layer in GCCs may become thinner
underscoring that entry-level, process-heavy and more specialized, demanding immediate
roles are most vulnerable to automation in AI- action on reskilling or redeployment paths to
integrated environments.​ avoid structural imbalance.​
Given that GCCs often house transactional, This could signal a tipping point where automation
high-volume processes, this trend is expected outpaces workforce absorption, leading to stagnant
as RPA, chatbots, and predictive analytics career starts and talent leakage.​
displace repetitive junior roles.​

02 Middle Management Faces Mild Contraction—But Remains Ambiguous

Only 34% expect expansion, while 39% foresee shrinkage, indicating a cautious stance.
The -0.3 average impact on middle management (per headcount index) is marginal, suggesting leaders
aren’t sure whether to shrink, shift, or transform this layer.​
Many middle managers in GCCs operate as operational coordinators and escalators—roles that AI
may increasingly absorb.​
Redefining the middle layer as AI-integrators and digital team enablers is key to maintaining execution
agility as the structure morphs.​

03 Senior Management is the Only Layer Expected to Grow—But Conservatively

39% foresee expansion, but only a +0.5 average shift, signaling modest growth.
This reflects GCCs’ evolving aspiration to transition from support functions to transformation drivers—a shift
that will need more senior bandwidth to manage AI, cross-function alignment, and innovation governance.​
GCCs are not inflating the top—but selectively strengthening strategic roles needed to manage AI-led complexity.​

04 GCCs Are Not Flattening the Org—They ’re Thinning the Base
The pyramid isn’t being compressed evenly—the data shows asymmetrical shrinkage at the
bottom and slight growth at the top.
This creates a risk of top-heavy decision making without a robust talent funnel or delivery engine underneath.​

05 No Layer is Immune—But Pace of Change Varies

The spread of responses shows that while all layers are impacted, GCCs are pacing change
cautiously, especially for middle and senior levels.
This caution could either reflect:Uncertainty around global mandates; Limited local decision authority to
restructure; Or a deliberate step-by-step transition strategy.​

32
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Tech Product & Platform Firms

Show More Uncertainty ​

Perception of AI 47%
Integration’s Impact 45%
on workforce trends
37% 37%
across management 34% 34%
levels​ 29%
( n=38 )
Expanding Layer
18% 18%
Shrinking Layer
No Net Change

Junior Middle Senior

Management​ Management​ Management​

*Values in the graph indicate the percentage of organizations

0.3
Level-Wise Junior Middle
Expected Impact Management​ Management​

on Headcount Senior
Pyramids​ Management​

( n=38 )
-0.6
*Calculated by codifying and
averaging the responses to gauge
the average headcount shift for a
particular management layer.​

-1.4

33
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 Junior Management Is Facing the Sharpest Contraction Across Layers

47% of respondents expect shrinkage in junior layers, while only 18% expect expansion—yielding
a net impact of –1.4 , the most dramatic shift across any level.
Junior roles in product firms often handle Product firms are clearly signaling that AI
testing, support ops, L1 engineering, and ticket is hollowing out foundational layers, and
resolution—functions that AI, LLMs, and without new early-career roles, talent
automated pipelines are rapidly absorbing.​ pipelines risk collapse.​

02 Middle Management Also Sees More Shrinkage Than Growth

45% expect contraction, while only 37% expect expansion, with a net impact of –0.6 . These
middle-layer roles (e.g., program coordinators, delivery managers, release leads) are becoming less
relevant as AI-enhanced product tooling and cross-functional pods reduce the need for manual oversight.
The middle layer is being “managed out” by automation, but the real need is to recast it as AI-enablement and
product orchestration roles.​

03 Senior Management Sees Modest Growth—but Not Across the Board

O nly 37% expect expansion of senior roles, The +0.3 senior net impact is more a response
and 29% expect shrinkage—resulting in to increased complexity than a proactive
reshaping of leadership.​
a modest net increase of +0.3 .
Leaders are being pulled into issues like:
This muted growth reflects the cautious elevation Navigating AI vendor ecosystems; Managing
of AI leadership roles, like: AI product governance; regulatory exposure; Aligning AI deployment
Ethical use strategy; AI monetization​
with UX and brand narratives​

04 The High ‘No Net Change’ Response Indicates Ambiguity in Role Redesign
W ith 18-34% current role structures across all layers reporting no change, Tech Product and Platform firms
appear unsure whether to shrink, shift or stabilize.
This may reflect: Agile pod models buffering against hierarchy shifts; Lack of clarity on AI’s impact beyond
engineering and data teams; A product culture that values “experimentation” over structural overhauls.​

05 The Pyramid is Hollowing, Not Flattening

Shrinkage at junior and middle levels, paired with only marginal senior expansion, suggests
a hollowed-out pyramid.
This creates operational risk: Decision bottlenecks at the top; Burnout for remaining middle players; Loss
of learning infrastructure at the bottom​

3 4
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Tech Consulting & Services

Firms Take A Bolder Approach​

Perception of AI
Integration’s Impact 43% 43% 43%
on workforce trends 38%
40%
across management
levels​ 30%
28%
( n=40 )

20%
Expanding Layer 18%
Shrinking Layer
No Net Change

Junior Middle Senior

Management​ Management​ Management​
*Values in the graph indicate the percentage of organizations

0.9

Level-Wise Junior Middle

Expected Impact Management​ Management​

on Headcount Senior
Pyramids​ Management​

( n=40 )
-0.7
*Calculated by codifying and -0.9
averaging the responses to gauge
the average headcount shift for a
particular management layer.​

35
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 Junior Management is Poised for Sharp Contraction

38% of respondents believe the junior layer will shrink, compared to only 20% expecting expansion.
The resulting net headcount impact of −0.9 is significant—signaling that repetitive, billable roles such as
analysts, report writers, and transactional delivery support are at risk of automation or displacement.​
Firms are acknowledging that entry-level tasks can be fully or partially replaced by AI agents, RPA bots, or auto-
reporting solutions, especially in managed services and shared delivery environments.​

02 Middle Management is Also Set to Shrink, But More Strategically

With 43% predicting shrinkage and only 30% expecting expansion, the net impact is −0.7.
This reflects a deliberate pruning of coordination-heavy, supervision-based roles that add latency rather than
value in agile, AI-enabled delivery models.​
Middle managers will need to transition from task oversight to roles focused on consultative integration,
client value articulation, and AI governance.​

03 Senior Management Is Expanding to Absorb Complexity

40% expect the senior layer to expand, while only 18% predict contraction, resulting in a +0.9
shift— the highest among all layers.
Firms anticipate that AI will elevate the complexity of service orchestration, client consulting, and
risk mitigation, requiring stronger strategic leadership capacity​
As AI moves from labs to clients, senior leaders will take ownership of AI commercialization, client transformation,
and multi-market delivery governance.​

04 Clearer Structural Shifts Compared to Other Industries

The distribution of “No Net Change” responses is much lower than in Tech Product and Platform firms or
GCCs at only 28%–43% across layers.
This suggests that services firms are more decisive and aligned on how AI will reshape their operating models.​
Organizations are not waiting for disruption—they are architecting it with a clearer lens on structural
impact and role evolution.​

05 AI is Flattening Delivery, but Expanding Leadership Scope

As delivery teams automate bottom-layer work, leadership becomes more involved in: Ethical oversight;
Client trust-building, and Transformation design.
The pyramid is not just flattening—it’s broadening at the top, with greater emphasis on horizontal
integration across clients, tech, and geographies.​

36
 Paradox of Progress 2025

As Headcount Pyramids
Shift, So Will The Internal
Power Structures ​
Empowerment of Middle Redistribution of Power to
Management Data-Native Roles
Shift to Self-
Organizing Teams

Shift in Internal Power Structures (Average)​

( n=190 )

7.46 7.34
7.36 7.14
6.64 6.55 6.57 6.60
6.27 6.37 6.25
6.07

Global Capability Technology Technology Overall

Centre Product & Platform Consulting &
Services

AI is redistributing organizational influence​

*Values in the graph indicate scores on a scale of 1 to 10

37
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 Middle Management is 02 Data Fluency Is Emerging as

not shrinking, it is shifting a Core Source of Influence
“Empowerment of Middle Management” ranks #1 across Across all four segments, the Redistribution to Data-
all sectors, with relatively close scores. This indicates that Native Roles is ranked #2. This marks a foundational
middle managers are not being phased out, but rather shift: AI-literate roles—those who interpret and deploy
repositioned as integration points—guiding human-AI models—are now seen as critical power nodes.
workflows, driving team alignment, and acting as trust Organizations are building internal authority not
anchors in increasingly automated environments. around span of control, but around span of insight.

03 Self-Organizing 04 Dual Power Centers

Teams Are Aspirational, Are Emerging-Experts and
Not Yet Institutional Executors
The idea of self-organizing teams scored The chart suggests a split power base forming: data-native
lowest (avg. 6.25), indicating it’s still more roles who shape decisions through models, and middle
rhetoric than reality. conceptually embraced, managers who execute and translate AI-driven directives.
structural inertia and legacy performance This may signal a move from a single chain of command to
systems are slowing actual adoption​ a two-track structure: one technical, one operational.​

05 Most Organizations Still 06 Tech Product Firms

Favor Hierarchical are most reliant on middle
Accountability Over Autonomy management
The weak endorsement for self-managed teams Among the 3 industries, Tech Product Firms rate
signals a preference for managed transformation middle management empowerment the highest.
over radical flattening. While AI may enable This suggest that despite their lean models, they
decision automation, most firms still prefer rely on managers to scale AI across product
accountable, manager-led structures—at least teams, resolve ambiguity, and link engineering to
until models prove consistently reliable​ business value​

07 GCCs show the most 08 Tech Consulting is most

dramatic power reordering open to self organizing teams
The weak endorsement for self-managed teams The weak endorsement for self-managed teams
signals a preference for managed transformation signals a preference for managed transformation
over radical flattening. While AI may enable over radical flattening. While AI may enable
decision automation, most firms still prefer decision automation, most firms still prefer
accountable, manager-led structures—at least accountable, manager-led structures—at least
until models prove consistently reliable​ until models prove consistently reliable​

38
 Paradox of Progress 2025

The Shape Of Work Is Changing

Faster Than The Org Chart​

What impact does AI have on how jobs evolve?​

Global Capability Centre Technology Consulting & Services

Technology Product & Overall

Platform

( n=190 )

8.71

8.34
8.27
8.11

7.22
6.94 6.98
6.85
6.64 6.55
6.61 6.61
6.52 6.52 6.53
6.37 6.36
6.25
6.10

5.50

Job roles AI simplifies AI drives Work focus AI contributes

increasingly complex tasks, emergence of shifts from to job

blend skills making skill entirely new process polarization:

across acquisition AI-native job mastery to growth in high-

traditional easier and roles. orchestrating and low-skill

functional faster. interconnected roles.

boundaries. systems.

*Values in the graph indicate scores on a scale of 1 to 10

39
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 New AI-Native Job 02 Tech Product 03 Product Firms

Roles Are the Most Firms Are Driving a Report the Most

Widely Recognized Shift Full-Spectrum Role Intense Blurring of

Transformation Functional Boundaries

This reflects how firms are

anticipating roles that never

Tech Product firms score In these environments,

existed before—like LLM trainers,

highest across all five options, engineers are expected to

prompt engineers, synthetic data

indicating they see AI as a understand product, PMs need

specialists, and AI auditors. The

systemic rewiring of job roles— to grasp data, and domain silos

shift is not just upskilling—it’s full

not a single-dimensional are breaking down. Role

role reinvention.
change. From new role modularity and domain-fluid

creation to orchestration and teams are emerging as the new

cross-functional fluidity, operating model.​

product firms anticipate every

aspect of the job evolving.​

04 Orchestration Is 05 AI-Driven 06 GCCs Are Least

Overtaking Process Simplification of Convinced by Task

Mastery—Especially in Complex Tasks Is Seen Simplification and

Product Settings as an Enabler, Not a Role Fluidity

Game Changer
“Work focus shifts from process GCCs assign consistently

mastery to orchestrating lower scores to all five options,

While firms acknowledge that
interconnected systems” is particularly on task
AI makes skill acquisition
strongly endorsed by Tech simplification and blurring of
faster, this statement is ranked
Product firms. This reflects a roles. This suggests a more
mid to low across most
shift from role depth to role incremental view of change—
industries, with Tech Product
connectivity, where employees GCCs may still see AI as
leading. This indicates that
must manage across AI augmenting specific tasks,
while simplification is
workflows, APIs, data feeds, and rather than restructuring job
happening, it’s not seen as the
integrated tooling stacks.​ archetypes.​
core strategic shift—it’s the

effect, not the headline.​

07 Job Polarization 08 Tech Consulting 09 The Future Job

Is the Least Endorsed Sees Role Evolution Model Will Be Fluid,

Transformation Through the Lens of Modular, and Data-

The idea that AI will create a

New Job Creation Augmented

hollowed-out workforce with

While not leading across all The combined weight of support for
mostly high- and low-skill roles
options, Tech Consulting firms new role emergence, functional
receives the lowest scores
closely trail Tech Product on blending, and systems orchestration
across all sectors. This could
the emergence of AI-native suggests that organizations are
reflect early optimism or a belief
jobs. This likely reflects their moving toward a modular job
that mid-skill roles will evolve,
client exposure to AI architecture—where each role is a
not vanish. However, this may
transformation—consulting node in a larger, AI-augmented
underestimate long-term
leaders are helping clients system. This has significant
structural risks.​
define these roles, even before implications for job families, training,

embedding them internally.​ and workforce planning.​

40
 Parado x of Progress 2025

Even In A Single
Organization, The Impact
on Jobs Will Differ​

Impact of AI across Functions and Industry Clusters ​ ( n=190 )

Category/ Global Capability Technology Product & Technology Consulting

Industry Centers​ Platform​ & Services​

Sales Low Impact Low Impact Low Impact

Customer Service High Impact High Impact High Impact

Engineering and
High Impact High Impact High Impact
Technology

Data and Analytics High Impact High Impact High Impact

Product Management Medium Impact Medium Impact Medium Impact

Finance Medium Impact Medium Impact Low Impact

Marketing Medium Impact High Impact Medium Impact

Operations Medium Impact High Impact Medium Impact

Human
Low Impact Medium Impact Low Impact
Resources

AI-DRIVEN TRANSFORMATION: FUNCTIONAL IMPACT ACROSS INDUSTRIES

41
 Paradox of Progress 2025

02
01 Customer Service is
the First Frontline of AI
03
Data and Engineering Execution Product Management is
Are Ground Zero for AI With high impact across all sectors, Caught in the Crosshairs of
Transformation AI in Customer Service is moving AI and Ambiguity
beyond chatbots into predictive
Unsurprisingly, Data & Analytics service resolution, emotion analysis, Product roles see medium impact—
and Engineering & Tech emerged and hyper-personalized not because they’re insulated, but
as the top-impacted functions. interventions. This is where ROI is because they’re still figuring out how
These teams are both the being realized fastest—especially in to productize AI meaningfully. The
builders and users of AI, creating consumer-facing product firms. shift is less about adding AI features
a dual mandate of delivery and and more about rethinking product
internal enablement. roadmaps to become data-native.

05
04 Sales and HR Remain
the Most Insulated—
06
Marketing and Ops for Now Finance Impact
Show High Variability Both Sales and HR show Is Real but Slow-
Across Industries relatively lower perceived AI Burning
impact. However, this likely
In Tech Products, Marketing is reflects current use-case Finance and Accounting functions
undergoing a major reinvention via maturity, not future immunity. As are already seeing AI-led
generative AI and programmatic AI-powered talent intelligence automation in reconciliation, risk
automation. In GCCs and Services, and customer targeting mature, scoring, and anomaly detection.
the impact is muted—suggesting these functions will see delayed The reason impact scores are
that AI’s role in operations/ but inevitable disruption. lower is because firms are still in
marketing depends heavily on pilot or compliance-check phases
maturity and data readiness. rather than full deployment.

07
AI Impact Is Not
Uniform—It Is Use
Case Specific
Even within a function, AI’s impact
differs by process. For instance, in HR,
candidate sourcing may be fully AI-
powered, while performance
management remains untouched. This
nuance explains the moderate scores.

42
 Paradox of Progress 2025

The AI Workforce Revolution

Starts With Your Own People​

Approaches to Address AI Skill Gaps in the Workforce​ ( n=190 )

Hiring from Leveraging gig or Partnerships

Internal Acquiring niche part-time employees with Apprenticeship Any Other
niche and
Industry training and boutique and boutique through open-source academic programs​ (please
development organizations​ platforms​ institutions​ specify)​
organizations​

Global
Capability 88%​ 56%​ 23%​ 15%​ 37%​ 22%​ 8%​
Centre

Technology
Consulting & 100%​ 55%​ 30%​ 20%​ 52%​ 41%​ 9%​
Services

Technology
Product & 83%​ 57%​ 40%​ 15%​ 36%​ 23%​ 13%​
Platform

Overall 89%​ 57%​ 29%​ 16%​ 41%​ 27%​ 9%​

*Values in the graph indicate the percentage of organizations

Internal Interventions for AI Upskilling and Reskilling of the Workforce​ ( n=190 )

Classroom Self-paced learning Job rotation Any Other

Industry learning​ modules​ assignments​ (please specify)​

Global
Capability 59%​ 87%​ 36%​ 12%​
Centre

Technology
Consulting & 57%​ 98%​ 55%​ 16%​
Services

Technology
Product & 53%​ 81%​ 34%​ 26%​
Platform

Overall 57%​ 88%​ 40%​ 16%​

*Values in the graph indicate the percentage of organizations

43
 Paradox of Progress 2025

02
Self-Paced Learning is
01 03
the Dominant Upskilling
Internal Training is the Format Consulting Firms Are
Cornerstone of AI Talent Across all industries, Building the Deepest
Strategy asynchronous, self-paced Internal Pipelines
modules lead the pack. This
With ~90% adoption, Services firms show the widest
reflects the need for flexibility—
organizations are clearly betting spread of interventions, from
but also hints at risk: without
on build over buy. This is a long- academic partnerships to
reinforcement through application
tail strategy aligned with apprenticeships. This is likely driven
or feedback loops, learning may
sustainability, IP protection, and by two pressures: a) market-facing AI
remain surface-level.
cultural integration—but it hinges credibility, and b) internal workforce

on robust L&D infrastructure. repurposing for client co-creation.

0 5
0 4 q H
Ac ui- iring Is
Gaining Momentum in 0 6
Gig and Platform Product Firms Apprenticeship
Talent Is Still a Programs Are Resurging
Marginal Channel —With a Twist
Product companies show a

q
higher inclination to ac uire

q
bouti ue AI firms, allowing them
Despite platform buzz, only ~15% While low in absolute numbers,
to fast-track capability building
of firms use gig-based sourcing, apprenticeships are being
and cultural assimilation. This is
suggesting ongoing challenges in
j
not ust a hiring tactic—it’s an
reimagined as AI immersion

IP sensitivity, compliance, and programs, particularly in

organizational learning shortcut.
coordination complexity. This is an services firms where traditional

under-leveraged model that could bench strength is being

be unlocked with better converted into AI-literate

governance structures. consulting capacity.

07
Classroom
Learning Is Losing
Steam

With less than 60% adoption,

instructor-led learning is no longer

the dominant skilling model. It’s seen

as inflexible and expensive—better

suited for deep domain or ethics

training than broad AI literacy.​

44
 Paradox of Progress 2025

( n=30 )

Working
Partnerships
with

start-ups with AI
AI Project
companies
Initiatives

Learning on
the job

Enterprise
AI Tool
Access
AI
Prototyping

Assignments

The AI
Workforce External
Mentors &

Revolution Starts Coaches

Building

With Your Own AI Learning

Academy

People​

Further Exploration of Organizational

Strategies to Ensure Availability of Skills

45
 Paradox of Progress 2025

( n=18 )

Hackathons
Linkedin
Learning
AI-based
Assessment Courses
Contests

Sandbox for
Experimentation
AI Project
Initiatives AI Tools
Usage
and
Knowledge Development
Sharing
and
Collaboration
Performance
Management Building
And Adoption proof of
concepts

Further Exploration of Learning

on the job
Upskilling/Reskilling
Initiatives Learning
Academy on
AI and Data
Science

46
 Paradox of Progress 2025

A Revolution in AI
Learning and Mastery
Organizations are igniting a powerful surge in AI
capability-building—combining rigorous formal training
with immersive, hands-on experiences. AI is no longer
optional; it’s a performance imperative, woven into the
very fabric of employee goals and fuelled by
competitions that spark relentless innovation.​

From Experimentation to
Enterprise Transformation
The era of isolated AI pilots is ending. Custom-built
GPTs, agentic AI, and integrated tools are revolutionizing
core workflows, turning AI from a futuristic concept into
a daily operational force.

Strategic Alliances: The

Power of Partnership
Partnerships with AI startups, product companies,
and training institutes provide access to specialized
expertise, complementing internal capability-building
efforts. Some organizations emphasize in-house
leadership as a core competency, balancing external
collaboration with proprietary development.​

The Strategic Crossroads:

From Vision to Victory
While some organizations wrestle with nascent AI
strategies, the relentless experimentation through
prototyping and pilots signals a brewing transformation.
The time to crystallize vision into scalable, enterprise-
wide AI dominance is now.​

47
 Paradox of Progress 2025

From Pilots To Payoffs: What

Really Drives AI Innovation​

Top Organizational Interventions To Accelerate Innovation​

Global Capability Centre Technology Product & Platform
Technology Consulting Overall
& Services

( n=154 )
40% 39%

32%
32%
30% 31%
29%
26% 26%

22%

16%
15%
13%

10% 10%
8%

5% 5% 5% 5%

Encouraging a Driving more Shifting Through Through

culture of rapid collaborative innovation continuous dedicated
experimentation innovation by from bottom- training and innovation
by lowering the breaking down up initiatives development teams.
cost of failure. functional silos. to top-down,
AI- driven
strategies.

Future of AI innovation depends less on big bets, and more enabling fast, frictionless action

*Values in the graph indicate the percentage of organizations

48
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 Rapid Experimentation is the New Gold Standard

Across industries, lowering the cost of failure emerged as the top-ranked intervention.
Firms are realizing that the velocity of iteration trumps initial idea quality in AI deployment
—especially in uncertain or unexplored domains.

02 Functional Silos Are the Enemy of Innovation

Breaking down silos is the second most-cited lever. AI use cases live at the intersection
of tech, business, and design—making cross-functional collaboration not just nice-to-
have, but essential for deployment and scaling.

03 Top-Down AI Strategy Needs Complementary Enablement

While top-down strategies are still ranked high, they are effective only when paired with
bottom-up literacy and empowerment. The “CEO mandate” helps prioritize—but not
deliver—AI adoption without grassroots buy-in.

04 Continuous Learning is a Necessary but Not Sufficient Condition

Training and development rank moderately. Leaders recognize that innovation doesn’t
come just from knowing about AI—it comes from using AI to do the job differently.
Learning must be embedded in job design, not decoupled.

05 Innovation teams need integration, not isolation

Dedicated Innovation teams rank lowest among interventions-implying that innovation
separated from delivery no longer works. The new mandate is to embed innovation within
business teams, not in standalone labs or COEs

06 Tech Consulting Firms Are the Experimentation Leaders

Among all industries, Tech Consulting & Services firms most strongly prioritize “lowering the cost of
failure”. This reflects their client-driven need to prototype fast, de-risk delivery, and iterate in real time—
especially when AI-led pilots need to show early wins

07 Platform Companies Double Down on Cross-Functional Innovation

Tech Product & Platform firms rate “breaking down silos” significantly higher than other sectors.
In product-centric cultures, AI development often happens at the intersection of engineering,
data, and business making seamless collaboration a non-negotiable advantage.

49
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Key Takeaways​
AI Is Rewriting the Org Playbook—But Through Evolution, Not Revolution
01
Most firms are not flattening hierarchies wholesale or dissolving traditional teams. Instead, they’re

layering AI structures—like COEs and agile pods—on top of existing scaffolds. This reflects a strategic

hedging: embrace change without destabilizing delivery.

The Leadership Pyramid Is Inverting at the Edges

02
AI is hollowing out the junior and middle layers, while selectively expanding senior roles. This asymmetry isn’t just a cost play—

it’s a shift toward orchestration over execution. But without reskilling junior talent, the pipeline for future leaders risks collapse.

GCCs Prefer Orderly Rebalancing—Not AI-Led Disruption

03
Unlike product or consulting firms, GCCs are thinning the base while keeping hierarchical control intact. The structural

posture is one of controlled adoption: build AI capability, but preserve operational stability and decision centralization.

Power Is Shifting from Span of Control to Span of Insight

04
The true flattening is cognitive, not hierarchical. Data-native roles—AI trainers, prompt engineers, analytics leads—are now

the most influential nodes. Authority is no longer about title, but about ability to interpret and act on machine-led intelligence.

05
M iddle Management Isn’t Dying—It ’s Morphing

‘
The translator layer’ is evolving into an integrator layer. Middle managers are being repositioned as human-

AI orchestrators, ensuring trust, alignment, and workflow integrity across semi-autonomous teams.

0 6 Self- Managed Teams Are a Mirage for Most Firms

Despite the hype, true decentralization is rare. Most firms still rely on clear accountability chains and managed

workflows—suggesting that autonomy is aspirational, but hierarchy remains the operating default.

07 The Shape of Work Is Outpacing the Shape of Org Charts

Functional boundaries are blurring faster than formal structures can adapt. Employees are expected to span domains
(e.g., product + data + design), even as official roles lag behind. Role fluidity is happening within rigid skeletons.

08
F unctional AI Impact Is Uneven—and Deeply Contextual

AI’s structural impact varies by function and industry. While Customer Service and Engineering face
immediate transformation, functions like HR and Sales remain insulated—for now. The org shift is both
horizontal (across functions) and vertical (across levels)​

0 9 Build Over Buy Is the Dominant Skilling Model—

But Risks Surface-Level Adoption

Firms are investing heavily in internal training and self-paced learning. Yet without embedded application,
this risks becoming performative. Learning infrastructure must keep pace with role transformation.

10
Innovation Re quires Structural Integration, Not Just Strategy
Innovation teams alone won’t deliver AI ROI. The real accelerator is embedding innovation
capabilities into cross-functional delivery teams—with lowered failure costs, broken silos, and

continuous iteration baked into the operating model.

50
SECTION 3

Leadership

Capabilities of

the AI Era
 Paradox of Progress 2025

The AI Era Belongs To

Adaptive Thinkers, Translators,
Not Just Technologists​
Capabilities Ranked By Priority Per Industry
N=190

Global Capability
Tech Product &
Tech Consulting
Overall
Centre (GCC) Platforms & Services
Rank 1
Application of Application of Human skills such as Application of
Cross-Domain &
Cross-Domain &
creativity, empathy Cross-Domain &

Functional Skills Functional Skills and critical thinking​ Functional Skills

Rank 2
Human skills such as Human skills such as Application of Human skills such as
creativity, empathy creativity, empathy and Cross-Domain &
creativity, empathy
and critical thinking​ critical thinking​ Functional Skills and critical thinking​

Rank 3
Ability to switch
Ability to identify Ability to identify between different Ability to identify
patterns and patterns and mental frameworks patterns and
connections ​ connections ​ and adapt to new connections ​
technologies​
Rank 4
Ability to switch Ability to switch Ability to switch
between different between different Ability to identify between different
mental frameworks mental frameworks patterns and mental frameworks
and adapt to new and adapt to new connections ​ and adapt to new
technologies​ technologies​ technologies​
Rank 5

Deep functional Deep functional Deep functional Deep functional

expertise​ expertise​ expertise​ expertise​

Rank 6
Ability to Ability to Ability to Ability to
communicate communicate communicate communicate
through compelling through compelling through compelling through compelling
stories​ stories​ stories​ stories​
Rank 7
Proficiency in Proficiency in Proficiency in Proficiency in
programming programming programming programming
languages​ languages​ languages​ languages​

52
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Versatility Through The Enduring

Cross-Domain and Importance of
Functional Skills Human Skills
At the forefront of capability priorities is the This underscores the irreplaceable value of
application of cross-domain and functional skills. This uniquely human cognitive and emotional abilities in
highlights a strategic shift toward workforce an AI-augmented workplace. Creativity fuels
versatility, where employees are expected to integrate innovation, empathy drives client engagement and
knowledge from multiple disciplines to solve complex, ethical AI use, and critical thinking supports sound
interconnected challenges. In AI-driven environments, decision-making amid increasing data complexity.
such integrative skills enable teams to collaborate The prominence of these skills signals that despite
effectively across silos, accelerating innovation and automation, human-centred capabilities remain
enhancing problem-solving agility.​ foundational to organizational success.​

Capabilities related to pattern Storytelling is essential for Programming is increasingly

recognition and the ability to switch translating complex AI concepts into viewed as a baseline or
between mental frameworks and accessible narratives that foster specialized skill, often
adapt to new technologies stakeholder alignment and drive concentrated within
consistently rank in the top four change. However, it ranks lower dedicated technical teams.
across industries. These reflect the because it is often seen as a Furthermore, the rise of AI-
growing demand for analytical supporting skill—critical in leadership powered development tools
thinking and cognitive agility and change management contexts and automation platforms
necessary to interpret AI-generated but less foundational than cross- reduces the need for broad
insights, navigate rapid technological domain or human skills for day-to- programming expertise
change, and continuously learn.​ day AI adoption and innovation.​ across all roles. ​

Global Capability Centres Technology Product & Technology Consulting & Services
emphasize integrative cross- Platform firms prioritize place the highest value on human
domain skills and human skills, versatility and adaptability, skills, highlighting the sector’s
reflecting their role as innovation aligning with fast-paced reliance on creativity, empathy, and
hubs that require both operational product innovation cycles critical thinking to solve diverse
stability and adaptability to that demand rapid learning client challenges and foster trusted
complex global demands.​ and flexible thinking.​ relationships.​

53
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Rise Of Human Flexibility:

Resilience & Adaptability Are
Behaviors Of The Future
( n=190 )
5

Influence and
Persuasion
Accountability

Customer Focus
Team Building and
Collaboration
Results Orientation

Conflict Decision Making

Management and and Strategic
Importance to the Current World

Negotiation Planning
Learning and Innovation
0
Communication
Skills Change Management

Trust and
Interpersonal Emotional Intelligence
Skills
Resilience
Analytical
Thinking
Valuing
Diversity
Risk Taking
Adaptability

-5

Importance to the Future World

-5 0 5

54
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 Adaptability Is the Undisputed Behavior of the Future

Among all 17 leadership capabilities, Adaptability sits farthest to the right, showing the strongest future pull.
This suggests a clear, cross-industry realization: in an AI-led world, the ability to pivot thinking, navigate
uncertainty, and absorb continuous change will be more important than established expertise.

02 Resilience Is Emerging as the Second Pillar of Future Readiness

Resilience is gaining in intensity compared to its current relevance. It reflects a growing recognition that AI-induced
transformation isn’t a one-time shift—it’s a series of ongoing disruptions. Leaders will need to sustain momentum and
morale through repeated upheavals.

03 Learning and Innovation Is No Longer a Nice-to-Have—It’s Core

This capability is pulling significantly toward future relevance. With AI shortening product and process lifecycles, continuous
learning and iterative thinking are becoming survival traits. Static knowledge is being replaced by dynamic capability-building.

04 Communication and Collaboration Are Becoming Hygiene Factors

Capabilities like Communication Skills, Team Building, and Conflict Management lean toward the present. They are still
necessary—but no longer differentiators. In structured, AI-assisted workflows, interpersonal effectiveness is increasingly
embedded in systems, not leaders.

05 Influence, Strategic Thinking, and Accountability Remain Stable Anchors

These capabilities cluster around the center—suggesting they will continue to matter, but won’t dramatically evolve
in what they demand from leaders. Influence and accountability remain table stakes in navigating AI decisions, but
they are not undergoing a paradigm shift.

06 Risk Taking and Decision-Making Are Undervalued for the Future

While one would expect bolder decision-making and greater risk appetite in an AI-driven, ambiguous environment,
these behaviors show minimal movement toward future relevance. This suggests a leadership gap—organizations are
not yet internalizing that AI fluency requires experimental judgment.

07 Trust and Diversity Are Deprioritized—Rightly or Wrongly

Capabilities like Trust and Interpersonal Skills and Valuing Diversity are rated low in both current and future
relevance. This may reflect overconfidence in AI’s neutrality—or a blind spot in recognizing that bias and ethics in
AI still require strong human stewardship.

08 Adaptability, Resilience, and Learning form the Future-Ready Trinity

These three sit firmly in the future zone and represent a reinforcing loop. Leaders who adapt rapidly must also recover from
change shocks (resilience) and rewire their knowledge base continuously (learning). Together, they form the behavioral muscle
needed for AI-era volatility.

55
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Manifestations Of These
Behaviors Will Change As We
Move Into The Future​
Across industries, leadership language broadly shifts from individual-centric, process-driven behaviors to systemic,
visionary, and ethically grounded leadership. Future definitions emphasize embedding accountability and inclusivity
into organizational DNA, leveraging data for decision-making, and reframing conflict and resilience as sources of
innovation and collective strength.​

RELATIVE FUTURE RELEVANCE

The future definition focuses

Leaders maintain Leaders foster a on resilience as a cultural
composure under work environment
Resilience high-pressure that embraces
and collective aspect, while
the current definition is more
conditions.​ challenges.​ individual-focused. ​

Future is anticipatory and

strategic, focusing on
Leaders drive an Leaders preparation for change.
environment of anticipate change
Adaptability ongoing learning and prepare
Current is reactive and
developmental, emphasizing
and evolution.​ accordingly.​ continuous learning.​

The future embraces

Decision Leaders ensure Leaders remain iterative, data-informed
Making & decisions reinforce flexible, adjusting decision-making for strategic
flexibility, while the current
Strategic long-term decisions as new assumes more certainty in
Planning​ organizational goals.​ data emerges.​ organizational goals.​

Leaders pivot Future definition

Leaders establish recognizes uncertainty
Results strategies in
measurable, time- and volatility, while the
response to
Orientation​ bound targets for
evolving
current definition
success.​ assumes stability.​
conditions.​

Future reframes conflict

Leaders leverage as a creative source for
Conflict Leaders encourage
disagreements as innovation and learning,
win-win solutions
Management through dialogue
opportunities for moving beyond mere
learning and resolution to productive
& Negotiation​ and cooperation.​ tension. ​
innovation.​

M oves from passive

Leaders foster Leaders facilitate language of inclusivity to
Team inclusivity by open, transparent active implementation of
Building & valuing different exchanges to psychological safety
viewpoints and enhance practices to enable
Collaboration​ collaboration in teams.​
experiences.​ collaboration.​

RELATIVE CURRENT RELEVANCE

56
 Paradox of Progress 2025

GCCs Show A Polarity Between

Legacy Relational Strengths And
Emerging Future Grit​
( n=99 )
5

Influence and
Persuasion

Decision Making
Team Building and and Strategic
Collaboration Planning

Accountability
Trust and
Importance to the Current World

Interpersonal
Conflict Management Skills Results Emotional Intelligence
and Negotiation Orientation
0
Learning and Innovation
Change Management
Customer Focus

Valuing Analytical Thinking

Diversity Resilience

Communication Adaptability
Skills
Risk Taking

-5

Importance to the Future World

-5 0 5

57
 Paradox of rogress
P 2025

01 A new leadership archetype is emerging in GCCs

The future forward trio of resilience, adaptability, and risk-taking indicates that the GCC leadership model is
shifting from compliance-heavy and operational to one that demands recovery and reinvention. AI disruption is
pushing leaders toward mental agility, not procedural excellence.

02 A large cluster of ‘enduring capabilities’ will stay, but not transform

Capabilities like Accountability, Strategic Decision-Making, Customer Focus, and Results Orientation are centrally positioned,
suggesting they are still valued, but not evolving. They are the cost of entry, not drivers of advantage

03 Learning and Innovation Does Not Lead the Future Shift

Interestingly, Learning and Innovation sits behind the Adaptability/Resilience cluster, implying that GCCs may be more
focused on survival behaviors (coping with AI disruption) than growth behaviors (reimagining solutions). Continuous learning
is seen as important, but not urgent.

04 Interpersonal Conflict and Collaboration Skills Are Being Systematized

The low future weighting for Conflict Management and Team Collaboration shows that structured alignment tools, digital
interfaces, and clear governance models are replacing the need for leaders to resolve friction manually.

05 People-centric behaviors are losing strategic relevance

Behaviors like team building, conflict management, influence, and trust indicate high current but low future relevance. They
are being absorbed into systems, rituals or AI-augmented workflows, making them hygiene, not hero behaviors

0 6 Diversity and motional Intelligence are present but not priority behaviors
E

W hile not declining, these sit away from the future-weighted corner, indicating that they respected cultural elements, but
not seen as strategic accelerators in a fast-transforming environment.​

0 7 Analytical hinking is not viewed as a future differentiator

T

Despite AI s technical competency, Analytical thinking sits close to the center, not pulled into the future uadrant
’ q

suggesting that data analysis may be delegated to tools, while human leadership shifts to orchestrations.

0 8 Future- eady GCC leaders must be battle-tested, not ust process-savvy

R j

The shift away from behaviors like Trust, Inclusion, and Interpersonal Skills suggests that technical delivery, not relational
capital, will de ne leadership value in AI-era GCCs. The three behaviors leaning hardest into the future-adaptability, resilience,
fi

and risk-taking, signal that tomorrow s leaders in GCCs will be valued more for their ability to handle chaos and ambiguity, rather
’

than ust scale delivery or manage performance

j

58
 Paradox of Progress 2025

How Do These Behaviors

Manifest For GCCs? ​
In GCCs, leadership language transitions from data-backed, logic-based narratives and well-
defined roles to visionary, globally ethical leadership that embeds accountability and inclusivity
deeply within organizational practices. The future focus highlights transformational impact,
proactive change advocacy, and emotionally intelligent environments, marking a shift from
reactive operational management to strategic, culturally attuned leadership.​

RELATIVE FUTURE RELEVANCE

Leaders challenge The future definition marks a

Leaders balance risk
industry norms by shift from safe, data-backed
with data-backed
Risk-Taking​ insights to make
making moves to more bold and
groundbreaking sharp moves which lead the
informed choices.​ industry instead of following.​
strategic moves.​

Future leaders influence

Leaders maintain Leaders foster a culture and encourage
composure under work environment others to embrace
Resilience​ high-pressure that embraces challenges, while current
conditions.​ challenges.​ leaders focus on maintaining
composure under pressure.​

Leaders develop Leaders identify Recognizes volatility in

change, which means that
structured change inefficiencies and
Change roadmaps for advocate for
change management
Management​ cannot be a structured
seamless necessary roadmap and must shift to
transitions.​ improvements.​ a broader exercise. ​

Future leaders are expected to

Leaders identify Leaders use data- apply data-driven insights
Analytical trends and insights driven insights to which AI generates whereas
Thinking​ from complex enhance current leaders are meant to
datasets.​ processes.​ identify trends and patterns
themselves.​

Leaders leverage Shift from working towards a

Conflict Leaders encourage
disagreements as win-win solution to viewing
win-win solutions
Management through dialogue
opportunities for disagreements as a learning
learning and and teaching opportunity for
& Negotiation​ and cooperation.​ everyone involved. ​
innovation.​

Emphasizes more ambitious

Leaders construct
Leaders champion persuasion based on
compelling, logic-
Influence & based narratives to
visionary ideas that visionary ideas while the
current definition focuses on
Persuasion​ gain stakeholder
challenge existing
strategic justification and
paradigms.​
buy-in.​ logical persuasion.​

RELATIVE CURRENT RELEVANCE

59
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Tech Product Firms Calibrate

Leadership Without Overcorrecting​

( n=47 )
5

Communication
Skills Customer Focus

Influence and Persuasion

Conflict Management
and Negotiation

Change Management

Accountability
Risk Taking
Importance to the Current World

Emotional Intelligence

0
Valuing
Diversity Learning and Innovation
Analytical Thinking
Team Building and Resilience
Collaboration
Results
Orientation Adaptability

Trust and
Interpersonal Decision Making
Skills and Strategic
Planning

-5

Importance to the Future World

-5 0 5

60
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 Flexibility Trumps Foresight in the Product Leadership Playbook

Adaptability sits farthest to the right, reinforcing that in product firms, leadership value lies not in fixed vision, but in
the ability to pivot with data, user feedback, and evolving tech. Static leadership frameworks are being replaced by
agile, market-sensitive responsiveness.

02 Endurance Under Uncertainty Is a Core Leadership Expectation

Resilience is sharply future-leaning, indicating a shift in expectations: product leaders must sustain creativity, pressure, and
speed across multiple failed experiments, ambiguous bets, and volatile scaling environments.​

03 Learning Is a Leadership Act, Not Just a Team Expectation

Learning & Innovation is placed firmly in the future zone—unlike in GCCs. This suggests product leaders are expected to be
first movers in acquiring new skills, adopting new tech, and redesigning solutions, not just enabling their teams to do so.

04 Classic “People Leadership” Behaviors Are Losing Strategic Weight

Communication and Team Collaboration appear top-left—strong current relevance, low future relevance. As tech stacks and
documentation culture scale, relationship-centered leadership is being de-emphasized in favor of system-driven coordination.

05 The Judgment Layer Is Flattening

Decision-Making, Strategic Planning, and Risk-Taking are clustered around the center. Despite AI’s disruptive pace, product
leaders aren’t being asked to boldly bet or rethink strategy they’re expected to execute decisions through frameworks, not gut
instinct. This reflects product’s overreliance on agile & experimentation rituals.

06 The Emotional Load of Leadership Isn’t a Priority Here

Emotional Intelligence is positioned near the origin, signaling it’s seen as a baseline expectation, not a differentiator. This
may reflect cultural detachment in scale-focused product orgs, where EQ is implicit, not operationalized.

07 Execution Still Matters—But Only When It Evolves

Results Orientation leans slightly toward the future. Product firms want outcomes—but increasingly in the form of iterative
release success, user adoption metrics, and platform resilience rather than old-school KPIs. Leaders must reframe what
“results” mean in AI-native ecosystems.

08 Analytical Thinking Is Not a Leadership Differentiator—It’s Embedded in the Org

Despite the data-driven DNA of product firms, Analytical Thinking sits flat—neither future-leaning nor uniquely valued. The
implication: leaders aren’t expected to crunch numbers, because insight generation is now automated or distributed across teams.

09 Influence Remains Consistent, But Its Channels Have Changed

Influence & Persuasion is near the center, reflecting stable importance. However, in product orgs, this is less about charisma or
storytelling, and more about clarity in documentation, stakeholder alignment, and system navigation. Influence is asynchronous and
structural, not personality-based.

61
 Paradox of Progress 2025

How Do These Behaviors Manifest

For Tech Product Firms? ​
Leadership language in this industry evolves from emphasizing individual integrity, clarity, and incremental
improvements to championing visionary, paradigm-challenging leadership. The future focus highlights agility
and bold risk-taking, reflecting a shift towards dynamic, innovation-driven cultures that embrace challenges
collectively rather than relying solely on individual resilience.​

RELATIVE FUTURE RELEVANCE

Leaders drive an Leaders The future adds a proactive

environment of anticipate change anticipatory dimension,
Adaptability​ ongoing learning and prepare moving beyond retroactive
learning and reflection from
and evolution.​ accordingly.​ reacting to situations. ​

Leaders Leaders integrate Elevates innovation from

incremental refinement to
Learning & continuously refine
products or services
innovation into core
strategies, driving strategic transformation on a
Innovation​ based on feedback industry-wide larger, systemic scale,
signalling a shift to proactive
and market trends.​ transformation.​ industry leadership.​

Decision Leaders think

beyond immediate Leaders remain Future leaders are
expected to shift towards
Making & concerns to drive flexible, adjusting balancing organizational
Strategic transformational decisions as new
data emerges.​
vision with adaptability in a
Planning​ impact.​ dynamic environment. ​

Leaders evaluate Leaders challenge The future definition moves

and anticipate industry norms by from anticipating risk and
Risk-Taking​ risks before taking making taking measured action to
taking risks to enable bold
decisive action.​ groundbreaking innovation and disruption. ​
strategic moves.​

Leaders encourage Leaders leverage Reframes conflicts and

Conflict win-win solutions disagreements as disagreements as
Management & through dialogue and opportunities for opportunities to produce
innovative solutions and to
Negotiation​ cooperation.​ learning and
innovation.​ think out-of-the-box. ​

Both definitions are within the

Leaders tailor Leaders same vein, with a focus on
Communication communication articulate ideas individual communication style.
With acceptance of volatility, it
Skills​ styles to different
stakeholders.​
clearly and
succinctly.​ is more important for leaders to
communicate clearly.​

RELATIVE CURRENT RELEVANCE

62
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Tech Services Takes A More

Future-Oriented Approach​

( n=44 )
5

Team Building and

Collaboration

Communication
Skills
Decision Making
Trust and and Strategic
Interpersonal Planning
Skills
Influence and Persuasion

Accountability
Importance to the Current World

Results Orientation Learning and Innovation

0
Conflict Management Customer Focus
and Negotiation

Change Management

Analytical
Thinking
Resilience

Valuing
Diversity Emotional
Intelligence Adaptability

Risk Taking

-5

Importance to the Future World

-5 0 5

63
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 Leading Through Flux: Adaptability Tops the Chart

In Tech Consulting, Adaptability is the single most future-oriented capability, reflecting that leaders must
increasingly shift across client contexts, AI tools, and delivery models in real time. The ability to pivot isn’t just
operational — it’s the primary leadership value driver.

02 Resilience Is No Longer Optional—It’s a Performance Expectation

Resilience ranks among the top three future-critical behaviors, signaling that consulting leaders are expected to sustain
momentum despite ambiguity, client churn, or iterative failures in AI projects. This marks a cultural shift from expertise-based
authority to grit-based delivery.

03 The Rise of the Calculated Risk-Taker

Risk-Taking is pulled forward more than in product views, indicating that tech consultants must become bolder in
client recommendations, AI experimentation, and future bets. This runs counter to the industry’s historical playbook
of risk mitigation and SLA-based assurance.

04 Soft Power Is Losing Relevance in AI-Led Engagements

Communication, Trust, and Team Building all crowd the top-left quadrant-suggesting that relationship-building is being
deprioritized in favor of AI-backed delivery, insights, and measurable impact. Leaders are expected to influence through outcomes

05 Strategy Skills Stay Flat in a Fast-Moving Market

D ecision-Making and Strategic Planning sit near the center, suggesting they’re seen as stable capabilities, not ones to
evolve dramatically. Consulting firms seem to be baking strategy into frameworks and playbooks, rather than expecting
leaders to improvise new strategic models.

06 Analytical Thinking Isn’t a Differentiator Anymore

Despite its technical complexity, the consulting world sees Analytical Thinking as a commodity, not a leadership edge. Positioned
centrally, it indicates that data fluency is expected across all levels, but not rewarded as a distinguishing trait for leaders.

07 Learning Matters But Only if It Drives Commercial Relevance

Learning & Innovation leans modestly into the future but doesn’t dominate. This signals a practical mindset: leaders are
rewarded for learning only when it translates to billable AI fluency, client solutioning, or revenue-generation capabilities —
not learning for learning’s sake.

08 Inclusion and Interpersonal Warmth Are Being Sidelined

Valuing Diversity and Trust & Interpersonal Skills rank low in future orientation, signaling that Tech Consulting firms are defaulting
to technical credibility and delivery capacity over culture-building. While risky, it reflects a pragmatic AI-first prioritization.

09 R​ esults Orientation Is Evolving into Value Orientation

W hile Results rientation is still moderately future-weighted, the definition of results is changing. Leaders are expected to deliver
O “ ”

transformation, not just outputs — shifting from SLA adherence to strategic enablement, especially in AI-led engagements.

64
 Paradox of Progress 2025

How Do These Behaviors Manifest

For Tech Services Firms? ​
Tech Services leadership language shifts from logic-driven, structured frameworks and interdisciplinary
collaboration to visionary, ethical stewardship with deep cultural embedding of accountability. The future
narrative prioritizes transformational foresight, people-centric change management, and embedding
inclusivity into organizational DNA, signaling a move from tactical execution to purpose-driven leadership
that fosters ownership and emotional intelligence.​

RELATIVE FUTURE RELEVANCE

The future definition

Leaders drive an Leaders acknowledges the uncertainty
environment of anticipate change in the industry, and
Adaptability​ ongoing learning and prepare emphasizes a need for leaders
and evolution.​ accordingly.​ to be able to anticipate and get
ahead of disruption.​

Future shifts from individual

Leaders recognize Leaders create emotional regulation to creating
Emotional their emotions and emotionally emotionally intelligent cultures,
regulate responses intelligent work emphasizing leadership’s role
Intelligence​ in shaping organizational
accordingly.​ environments.​
emotional climates.​

Leaders push for Future leaders are expected to

Leaders evolve shift from continuous
ongoing
Customer enhancements to
offerings based on improvement of service delivery
Focus​ customer demands to market-driven evolution of
exceed customer centricity, balancing
and market trends.​
expectations.​ stability and innovation.​

Leaders implement The future definition includes

Leaders establish
frameworks that a much more collective and
well-defined roles
Accountability​ and performance
institutionalize systemic view of
ownership and accountability, shifting focus
standards.​ from self to everyone together.
responsibility.​

Leaders cultivate Leaders foster The future definition

indicates a shift towards
partnerships that inclusivity by
Team Building strengthen valuing different
internal culture-building as a
& Collaboration​ hallmark of effective team
organizational viewpoints and building, with a narrow focus
effectiveness​. experiences.​ on internal inclusivity.​

Emphasizes the use of

Leaders align Leaders encourage communication to ensure
Communication communication open dialogue and transparency and two-sided
Skills​ with broader constructive conversations, rather than
company goals.​ feedback.​ being used to inspire
individuals towards goals. ​

RELATIVE CURRENT RELEVANCE

65
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Key Takeaways​
01 The Leadership Edge Is Behavioral, Not Technical
While programming and analytics are table stakes, true leadership differentiation lies in cognitive agility, cross-
domain fluency, and storytelling. The AI era demands boundary-spanning generalists with deep learning
mindsets—not just deep tech specialists.

02 Adaptability, Resilience, and Learning Are the New Power Trio

These three behaviors consistently dominate future relevance. They’re not soft skills—they’re survival strategies
in an AI-disrupted world. Leaders must continuously pivot, recover, and relearn in real time.

03 Classic Leadership Skills Are Becoming Hygiene Factors

Behaviors like communication, collaboration, and emotional intelligence are still valued—but they’re now considered
operational baselines. AI-augmented systems are absorbing these functions, reducing their strategic weight.

04 Risk Appetite Is the Missing Muscle in AI Leadership

Across firms, risk-taking shows surprisingly low future pull. This highlights a gap: leaders are preparing for disruption but
not proactively betting on it. Courageous, informed experimentation must become a core behavior—not an exception.

05 Relational Capital Is Losing Ground to Strategic Grit

Traits like trust-building, interpersonal warmth, and diversity are deprioritized in future maps—especially in
GCCs and consulting firms. The leadership focus is shifting from social cohesion to disruption endurance.

06 GCCs Are Pivoting From Compliance to Chaos Readiness

In GCCs, leadership language is undergoing the sharpest shift. Future value is pegged to resilience, adaptability,
and risk-handling—signaling a break from legacy stability-oriented models toward transformation-first mindsets.

07 Product Firms Want Agile Navigators, Not Visionary Strategists

In tech product companies, leadership agility trumps foresight. Leaders are rewarded not for bold bets
or emotional resonance—but for data-driven iteration, fast pivots, and systemized execution.

08 Consulting Firms Are Rewarding Delivery Over Diplomacy

In services, leadership success hinges on adaptability and results—not EQ or inclusion. Influence flows from value
creation, not relationships. The soft power era is fading; measurable AI impact is now the leadership currency.

09 Storytelling and Sense-Making Are Underrated Levers

Despite ranking lower, storytelling remains critical for translating AI complexity into strategic clarity.
Leaders must become narrative architects—making the invisible visible, and the technical tangible

10 Leadership Is Shifting from the Individual to the Organizational Layer

Many future-ready behaviors involve embedding capabilities—like systemic accountability, collective learning, and
culturally embedded inclusion. Leadership is no longer about the hero individual—it’s about shaping the system.

66
SECTION 4

What does this

mean for
organizations?
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Basis All Responses, 6 Personas

Of Organizations Emerge​
Clusters Brief Description​ Pros/Cons​
Senior-focused High investment in AI​

workforce excelling in PROS

customer functions Strong impact on customer functions​
People-First with strong AI talent
and agile, cross- CONS Low investment limits scalability.
Strategists​ functional culture.​ Innovation vs. efficiency challenge​

Balanced workforce Strong technical expertise

with strong engineering PROS
focus, AI-driven balanced talent & innovation.​
Tech-Driven innovation, and flatter,
agile structures.​ CONS Weaker emphasis on HR & sales​
Transformers​ Risk of tech-over-strategy

Stable workforce Functional strength across

structure with broad PROS
functional strength, finance, operations, & analytics​
Enterprise focused on AI
optimization and agile CONS Automation-focused, flat structure slows
Optimizers​ teamwork​ innovation, may face change resistance​

Stable workforce with PROS High investment in AI​

strengths in engineering & Strong impact on customer functions​

customer service,
Digital cautiously adopting AI & CONS Limited sales and junior investment,
digital enablement without cautious culture, risking slowed
Integrators​ major org changes​ growth and digital stagnation

Workforce shifting with PROS Balanced AI focus with talent growth

more juniors & seniors, & strong customer/data roles​
balanced functional impact,
Balanced and cautious AI adoption CONS Weak core function impact &
focusing stability & cross- low AI investment risk falling
Builders​ functional teams.​ behind competitors​

Reduced junior/mid roles PROS Strong enterprise AI alignment with agile

with stable seniors, teams & broad functional excellence
strong in engineering and
Strategic AI innovation, driving CONS Reduced junior roles and intense
agile, digital-first transformation risk talent and require
Transformers​ transformation​ strong governance​

68
 Paradox of Progress 2025

How Do These Clusters Differ On The

Impact to Their Business Models?​
Impact on Business Models
CEO’s PEOPLE AI AGENDA
People Cultural Innovation Productivity Job Security
Investment Change Structures Focus Redesign Concerns

People First Very Very Very

High High High High High Medium
Strategiest

Tech-Driven High High Medium High High Medium

Transformers

Enterprise High Medium High High High Medium

Transformers

Digital Very
Low Low Low Medium Low Low
Integrators

Balanced Very
Medium Low Low Medium Medium Low
Builders

Strategic Very
High High High High High Medium
Transformers

PRODUCTIVITY CHALLENGES
Lack of Repurposing Workflow Data Feed Employee Cultural
Skilled Talent Talent Integration Gaps Resistance Inertia
Challenges

People First High High Medium Low High High

Strategiest

Tech-Driven Very Very

Medium High High Medium Low Low
Transformers

Enterprise Very Very

Medium Medium High Low Low Low
Transformers

Digital Very Very

Medium Low Low Low Low Low
Integrators

Balanced Medium High High High Medium Low

Builders

Strategic Very Very Very

High High High Medium High High
Transformers

69
 Paradox of Progress 2025

How Do These Clusters Differ

On Their Org-Wide Shifts?​
Organization-wide Structural Shifts
ORG STRUCTURE

Flattening Agile Dual AI Roles Function COEs

Teams Structures Blending

People First Very Very Very Very

Medium High High High High High
Strategiest

Tech-Driven Very
High High High High High High
Transformers

Enterprise Very Very

High High High High High High
Transformers

Digital Very Very

Low Low Low Medium Low Low
Integrators

Balanced Very
Low Low Low Medium Low Medium
Builders

Strategic Medium Medium Low High Medium High

Transformers

VALUE CHAIN SEGREGATION

Multi-
Disciplinary Simplification Emergence of Shift to Job Job
of Niche Roles AI-Native Jobs Polarization
Orchestration Polarization
Roles

People First High High High High Medium

Strategiest

Tech-Driven Very
Medium High High High High
Transformers

Enterprise Very Very Very

High High High High Medium
Transformers

Digital Low Low Medium Low Low

Integrators

Balanced Medium Medium Medium Medium High

Builders

Strategic Very
Medium Medium High High Medium
Transformers

70
 Paradox of Progress 2025

How Do These Clusters Differ On

Their Perspective of Leadership

Capabilities in the Age of AI?​

Leadership Capabilities in the New World

IMPORTANT CAPABILITIES

Adjacent Switching
Human Functional Coding Pattern
Domain Storytelling Mental
Skills Expertise Fluency Recognition
Skills Frameworks

People First

Strategiest
Medium Medium Medium Low Medium Low Medium

Tech-Driven

Transformers
High Medium Medium Low Medium Low Medium

Enterprise

Transformers
High High Low Low Medium Medium Low

Digital

Integrators
High High Medium Low Medium Low Low

Balanced

Builders
Medium High High Low Medium Medium Medium

Strategic

Transformers
High High High Medium High Medium High

Behavioral Shifts

RELEVANT TODAY RELEVANT IN THE FUTURE

HIGH LOW HIGH LOW

Result Orientation , Risk Taking, ,

Resilience Learning & Collaboration​
People First Communication , Analytical Innovation, Emotional

Strategiest Emotional Intelligence , Thinking, Intelligence​

,
Trust Collaboration​ Resilience​

Learning & Innovation, Communication , fluence, Adaptability,

In Other dimensions
Tech-Driven Emotional Intelligence, Customer Focus , Emotional Intelligence, remained stable
Accountability, Analytical Adaptabilit ​ y Learning & Innovation​ in ratings​
Transformers​
Thinking​

Accountabilit y, Results Collaboration , Signi ficant increases in __

Enterprise Orientation , y
Anal tical all 17 behaviors, notably
Thinking, fluence, Result
z
Optimi ers​ Communication​ In
Emotional Orientation, Analytical
Intelligence​ Thinking, Emotional
Intelligence​

fluence, Accountability,
In Adaptabilit y, Influence, Emotional Other dimensions
Collaboration, Trust​ Intelligence, Learning &
Digital
Emotional remained stable
Integrators​ Intelligence​ Innovation, Adaptability​ in ratings​

fluence, Accountability,
In Moderate on other Learning & Innovation, Other dimensions
Analytical Thinking, Resilience, Emotional
Balanced
behaviors​ remained stable
Builders​ Collaboration​ Intelligence​ in ratings​

Result Orientation , Con flict Change Management , Adaptabilit y,

Accountabilit y, Management , y
Anal tical Thin king, Communication​
Strategic
Communication , Diversit y, Learning & Innovation,
Transformers​ ,
Collaboration Trust​ Adaptabilit ​ y Strategic Planning,
Accountability​

71
 Paradox of Progress 2025

These Defining Characteristics

Emerge For All Clusters​
How Do These Clusters Differ In Their Approach to AI?
SUMMARY
Behavioral Behavioral
CEO’s Productivity Org Value Chain Important Shifts- Shifts-
People AI Challenges​ Structure​ Segregation Capabilities​ Relevant Relevant in
Agenda​ Skills Today​ the Future​

Result Resilience,
Orientation, Learning &
People First Very High Very High Medium
Communication, Innovation,
Emotional Emotional
Strategiest High High Intelligence, Intelligence​
Trust,
Collaboration​

Learning & Influence,

Innovation, Adaptability,
Emotional Emotional
Tech-Driven Medium High High Medium Intelligence, Intelligence,
Transformers High Accountability, Learning &
Analytical Innovation​
Thinking​

Accountability, Influence,
Results Result
Enterprise Medium High Very Low
Orientation, Orientation,
High Communication​ Analytical
Transformers High Thinking,
Emotional
Intelligence​

Influence, Influence,
Accountability, Emotional
Collaboration, Intelligence,
Digital Low Low Low Low Low Trust​ Learning &
Integrators Innovation,
Adaptability​

Influence, Learning &

Accountability, Innovation,
Analytical Resilience,
Balanced Medium High Low Medium Medium Thinking, Emotional
Builders Collaboration​ Intelligence​

Result Change
Orientation, Management,
Accountability, Analytical
Strategic Very Medium Medium High
Communication, Thinking,
High Collaboration, Learning &
Transformers High Trust​ Innovation,
Strategic
Planning,
Accountability​

72
 Paradox of Progress 2025

01 People-First Strategists are the most future-ready—but scaling risks loom: With “Very
High” scores on CEO’s People AI Agenda, Org Structure, and Value Chain Segregation,
they’ve built an agile, people-centric model. However, medium scores on capability
depth suggest a potential bottleneck in technical or domain scalability.

02 Strategic Transformers are betting big on transformation—but require strong governance:

They top the charts on productivity challenges and capabilities but only score “Medium” on
structure and value chain segregation shifts. This suggests transformation without
foundational redesign could strain execution unless mitigated with robust operating models.​

03 Digital Integrators are in danger of falling off the curve: Scoring “Low” across all six
sections, this cluster represents organizations that are lagging in both strategy and
execution. Unless corrective action is taken, they risk stagnation and competitive
irrelevance in AI-led markets.​

04 Enterprise Optimizers are structurally advanced but underpowered on leadership and

capabilities: They lead on job architecture but score “Low” on capabilities and future-facing
behaviors. Their operational strength risks being under-leveraged due to limited behavioral
evolution and talent transformation.​

05 Tech-Driven Transformers are caught in a capability–culture split: With strong scores on

structure, value chain segregation, and leadership evolution, this cluster is investing
well in the “what.” However, “Medium” productivity challenge scores and only “Medium”
behavioral capability scores hint at a possible disconnect in execution culture.​

06 Balanced Builders are strong on resilience, but weak on systemic shifts: Despite high
scores in addressing productivity issues and moderate future behavior readiness, they lag
in structural reconfiguration and strategic AI investments—suggesting they may weather
shocks but not capitalize on growth opportunities.​

73
 Paradox of Progress 2025

The Variables Are Interlinked With

Responses On A Behavioral Level​
These Variables…​ …Require Emphasis on …Leading to This
These Behaviors…​ Final Competency​

Flatter Hierarchies​
Dual Team Structures​ Adaptability​
Blurred Boundaries Change Management​ Driving Adaptive
Between Functions​ Orchestration​
Emergence of AI COEs​ Team Building &
Collaboration​
Empowerment of
Middle Management​

Teams Operating without

Traditional Supervision​ Analytical Thinking​
AI Central to Communication​
Business Strategy​ Sensemaking
Decision Making & Amid Flux​
Supporting AI Innovation​ Strategic Planning​
Importance of Switching Risk-Taking​
Mental Frameworks​

Managing Job
Security Concerns​
Emotional Intelligence​
Investing in AI- Trust &
Ready Talent​ Interpersonal Skills​ Leading Into The
Promised Land
Leading AI Cultural Change Management​
Transformation​
Influence & Persuasion​
Managing Change in
Nature of Jobs​

Focus on Different
Training Approaches​
Learning & Innovation​
Managing AI Adaptability​ Leading With A
Talent Supply​ ‘Beta’ Mindset
Resilience​
Increased Focus on
Reskilling & Upskilling​

Productivity Focus
in Strategy​ Results Orientation​
Lack of Skilled AI Talent​ Analytical Thinking​ Commanding The
Outcome Curve
Valuing Domain & Accountability​
Functional Skills​

74
 Paradox of Progress 2025

These Capabilities Remain

Common Across Clusters…​

Driving Adaptive Orchestration​

The ability to lead in fluid, fast-changing environments by balancing structure with flexibility.
Leaders with this competency coordinate across people, systems, and priorities—enabling
core operations and innovation to coexist without friction.​

Sensemaking Amid Flux​

The ability to interpret and integrate fragmented, fast-evolving signals—such as pilot
outcomes, shifting priorities, and cultural feedback—into a coherent strategic narrative that
guides both forward-thinking and cautious stakeholders.​

Leading Into The Promised Land

The ability to lead people through change by demonstrating emotional intelligence,
empathy, and trust-building. This involves recognizing and validating human concerns,
adapting communication styles, and fostering psychological safety to support
engagement and resilience during transitions.​

Leading With A ‘Beta’ Mindset

The ability to model and promote continuous learning, adaptability, and reinvention in
response to evolving challenges. Leaders with this competency foster a culture of curiosity,
experimentation, and growth—transforming new insights into strategic advantage.​

Commanding The Outcome Curve

The ability to translate initiatives into measurable impact by setting clear goals, tracking
progress consistently, and making timely decisions based on results. This ensures that
experimentation leads to scalable, value-driven outcomes.​

75
 Paradox of Progress 2025

…With A Few Differences in

Multiplying and Derailing Behaviors​
PEOPLE FIRST STRATEGIST
Senior-focused workforce excelling in customer functions with strong AI talent and agile, cross-functional culture.​

MULTIPLIERS DERAILERS

01 Collaborative Innovation 01 Accountability Drift

Leads change by actively C onsistently prioritizing emotional buy‐in over
engaging all levels in iterative establishing clear processes, roles, and accountability—
design, soliciting diverse input, resulting in drift and confusion.
and sharing decision-making so
that teams prototype, learn, and Signal Blindness
adapt together.​ 02
U nder‐prioritizing data literacy and technical grounding results
and over-focusing on culture causes leaders to miss small
02 Value-Driven Transformation declines in service, misinterpret pilot results and miss emerging
Acts with courage in risks, creating a disconnect between culture and evidence.
transformation, consistently testing
each decision against core ethical
03 Consensus Paralysis
and human-centred values and Inclusive instincts can lead to excessive alignment-seeking,
pausing or adjusting when those slowing decision velocity through endless workshops to gather
values are at risk. opinions before launch, delaying product releases.

TECH-DRIVEN TRANSFORMERS
Balanced workforce with strong engineering focus, AI-driven innovation, and flatter, agile structures.​

MULTIPLIERS DERAILERS

01 Systems Curiosity 01 Technology Overreach

Develops a working‐level O ver‐prioritizing technology while ignoring user needs and
understanding of critical process fit leads to poor adoption and wasted effort.​
systems—whether operational,
technical, or process—to
02 Culture Blindness
ground decisions and bridge Treating culture as a byproduct of tech rollout leads to
strategy with execution. resistance, friction, and failed pilots.​

02 Distributed Leadership Structure De-emphasis

Enables autonomous teams to drive 03
Overvaluing flat or hierarchy-free models, resulting in unclear
local innovation while ensuring accountability, decision rights and governance structures. ​
enterprise coherence through shared
interfaces and lightweight guidelines.​ Integration Blindspot
04
R apid iterations unaligned with operational flows lead to
friction, duplication, and poor adoption.​

05 Sidesteps Ethical & Governance Concerns

M oving too fast without ethical or compliance guardrails can
lead to reputational, regulatory, or systemic risks.​

76
 Paradox of Progress 2025

…With A Few Differences in

Multiplying and Derailing Behaviors​
ENTERPRISE OPTIMIZERS
Stable workforce structure with broad functional strength, focused on AI optimization and agile teamwork​.

MULTIPLIERS DERAILERS

01 Scalable Excellence 01 Governance Paralysis

Role‐models and instils a commitment Applying rigid rules or lengthy sign-offs that delay
to process excellence by promoting progress—undermining timely execution.​
effective, repeatable ways of working,
guiding teams to uphold and refine 02 Em pathy Deficit
standards, and ensuring consistently Focus on process without emotional intelligence causes
high‐quality execution.​ resistance and hidden adoption barriers.​

Accountability 03 Trend Disconnection

02 Tuning out external signals—opting to “optimize what’s in front
Through Governance
of us” rather than adapting to changing contexts.​
Establishes clear decision rights, role
definitions, and escalation paths so that Underinvests in Future-Proofing Talent
every team member understands 04
Over-focus on current skill needs neglects emerging
ownership, responsibilities, and how to competencies, leaving teams unprepared for future shifts.​
escalate issues—ensuring transparent,
dependable accountability.​ Misaligns Incentives with Desired Outcom es
05
Rewarding narrow metrics—causing teams to optimize locally
while the broader organization suffers.​

BALANCED BUILDERS
Workforce shifting with more juniors & seniors, balanced functional impact, and cautious AI adoption focusing
stability & cross-functional teams.​

MULTIPLIERS DERAILERS

01 Balanced C hange Stewardship 01 C hange Inertia

Leads coexisting legacy and emerging A low appetite for risk and limited structural change leads
teams—each with distinct skills, to missed low-stakes opportunities and stagnation. Over-
mindsets, and mandates—by making focus on consistency leads to resistance to any disruption,
informed trade-offs, designing no matter how minor, risking obsolescence.​
reversible pilots, and ensuring all
groups share a common purpose,
02 Signal Blindness
receive equitable resources, and feel A lack of responsiveness to evolving internal/external cues
respected throughout change.​ risks relevance and team morale.​

02 C hange Anchoring 03 Trust and Buy-In De ficit

Provides consistent, reassuring Surface-level alignment without deeper discussion leads to
communication and actions during miscommunication and missed co-creation opportunities. Trust
uncertain times, helping teams is assumed to persist without ongoing transparency and
maintain confidence and a clear sense consistency, which erodes credibility during surprises.​
of identity throughout transitions.​

77
 P aradox of Progress 2025

…With A Few Differences in

Multiplying and Derailing Behaviors​
DIGITAL INTEGRATORS
Stable workforce with strengths in engineering & customer service, cautiously adopting AI & digital enablement
without major org changes​

MULTIPLIERS DERAILERS

01 Cultural Stewardship 01 Change Inertia

Cultural Stewardship: Guides Defaulting to current processes or structures—even when small
teams through change by enhancements are feasible—leading to incremental decline.​
preserving core values, trusted
practices, and clear roles, ensuring 02 Signal Blindness
transitions feel smooth and safe.​ Ignoring cues that employees seek new responsibilities
or learning—leading to stagnation and attrition.​

02 Evolutionary Change
Leadership 03 Trust and Buy-In Deficit
Making decisions in isolation—failing to ensure affected
Builds sustained momentum by
parties understand and support even minor adjustments.
introducing small, non-threatening
Assuming a stable environment alone maintains trust—
adjustments that accumulate into
neglecting to actively nurture transparency and reliability.​
meaningful transformation over time.​

STRATEGIC TRANSFORMERS
Reduced junior/mid roles with stable seniors, strong in engineering and AI innovation, driving agile,
digital-first transformation​

MULTIPLIERS DERAILERS

01 Strategic Reinvention 01 Transformation Fatigue

Drives visionary change by redefining Tendency to launch multiple, large-scale efforts at once—
the organization’s future—challenging overloading capacity and undermining sustainable advancement.
legacy assumptions, painting a clear Overlooks exhaustion and assumes teams can sustain high

end-state, reimagining value creation, intensity indefinitely, harming morale and performance.​
and co-creating a roadmap of
reversible pilots to reach that future.​ Culture Blindness
02
Assumes a uniform culture across teams, missing subcultural
igh Velocity Execution dynamics and weakening localized trust.​
02 H

O rchestrates fast-paced, large-scale

change by maintaining a unified
03 Control Concentration
narrative, clear accountabilities, and Centralizing decision-making undermines distributed
team energy—ensuring multiple leadership, creating bottlenecks and trust erosion.​
workstreams move in lockstep
without burning out.​
04 One-Size Thinking
Defaulting to a single approach—regardless of differing team
needs, capabilities, or environments—leading to inconsistent
outcomes and frustration.​

78
Executive
Summary​
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Executive Summary​
THE AI IMPERATIVE:
A Tipping Point for Technology Organizations​
Artificial Intelligence is no longer a distant frontier—it is now a defining force reshaping the very core of
technology organizations, from IT product and services firms to Global Capability Centres (GCCs).
Our survey of over 200 senior business and HR leaders across these sectors reveals a
market that has decisively shifted from AI experimentation to enterprise-wide execution.
More than half of all organizations now consider AI central to their business strategy, embedding it into
product roadmaps, delivery models, and customer engagement.​

SECTOR-SPECIFIC REALITIES: ORGANIZATIONAL

Divergence in AI Integration​ STRUCTURES & ROLES:
Disruption Underway
Tech Consulting & Services
Lead the charge, with 68% citing AI as core R ise of Multidisciplinary Teams
to strategy. They face intense client pressure to Siloed, function-centric models are giving
deliver AI-driven transformation and must way to agile, cross-functional teams that
demonstrate AI capability not just as a service, blend domain, data, and AI expertise.
but as a fundamental consulting posture.​
Role Redesign and
Tech Product & Platform Firms Emergence of New Roles
57% have made AI central, embedding it into their Traditional roles are being redefined (e.g., from
product DNA—driving use cases like personalization, reporting analyst to prompt curator), but most
predictive analytics, and intelligent automation. organizations are lagging in clarity,
accountability frameworks, and transition paths.
GCCs
Show a split mindset. Only 42% see AI as AI Centers of Excellence (CoEs)
central, with many still awaiting direction from global Are emerging, but their impact is limited unless
HQs. This ambiguity is slowing talent development and AI becomes embedded across mainstream
investment, risking their relevance in the AI era. delivery, not just innovation labs.

TALENT:
The Bottleneck to AI Ambition​
Repurposing Shortage of Learning Models
Existing Talent AI-Skilled Talent Are Obsolete
66% cite this as a challenge— 63% struggle to hire or develop deep Most organizations rely on one-off,
legacy mindsets and skills are not AI expertise (e.g., prompt engineering, certification-based learning,
keeping pace with AI’s demands. model interpretability, ML Ops). inadequate for AI’s rapid evolution.

80
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Executive Summary​
INTEGRATION & DATA:
The Hidden Barriers
System Data
Integration Quality
59% face challenges integrating AI with 45% cite poor data as a barrier—
legacy systems, risking ROI and undermining without clean, contextual, and real-time data,
trust in AI initiatives. even the best AI models will fail.

LEADERSHIP CAPABILITIES:
A New Behavioral Playbook

Orchestrator Data and AI Change

Mindset Fluency Agility
Leaders must move from Foundational AI literacy The ability to drive and
command-and-control to and data-driven sustain cultural
orchestrating multidisciplinary decision-making are transformation—overcoming
teams, empowering rapid now table stakes for resistance, legacy mindsets,
experimentation and leaders at every level. and inertia—is critical.
iterative delivery.

Learning Ethical Customer-

Agility Stewardship Centricity
Leaders must champion Navigating the ethical, As AI transforms products and
continuous learning, modeling regulatory, and reputational risks services, leaders must keep the
curiosity and adaptability as of AI requires leaders to set clear customer at the center—balancing
AI capabilities evolve. guardrails and foster trust. automation with empathy and
human judgment.

Collaboration and Resilience and Visionary

Influence Ambiguity Tolerance Storytelling
Leaders must break down With AI accelerating change Leaders must articulate a
silos, foster collaboration and uncertainty, leaders must compelling AI vision,
across technical and demonstrate resilience and translating technical
business domains, and comfort with ambiguity, possibilities into business
influence stakeholders to guiding teams through value and inspiring buy-in
align on AI strategy. uncharted territory. across the organization.

81
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Executive Summary​
THE CALL TO ACTION:
Act Now Or Risk Irrelevance​
The window for incremental change has closed. Organizations that delay will be outpaced by
competitors who reimagine their structures, talent, and leadership for the AI era. The urgency is clear:​

Redesign roles and Invest in continuous,

structures for AI-native embedded learning—not
operations.​ just skills, but mindsets.​

Modernize data and Reframe leadership

integration expectations—from directive
architectures to unlock to adaptive, from functional
AI’s full potential.​ to multidisciplinary.​

82
Appendix
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Shift in Leadership Capability

Expectations Across All Industries​
COMPETENCY CURRENT DEFINITION FUTURE DEFINITION
Influence and Leaders consistently act with integrity, Leaders champion visionary ideas
Persuasion​ building long-term credibility.​ that challenge existing paradigms. ​

Accountability​ Leaders establish well-defined roles Leaders embed accountability into the
and performance standards.​ organizational mindset and practices.​

Learning and Leaders continuously refine products or Leaders integrate innovation into
Innovation​ services based on feedback and market core strategies, driving industry-wide
trends.​ transformation.​

Results Leaders establish measurable, time- Leaders pivot strategies in response

Orientation​ bound targets for success.​ to evolving conditions.​

Team Building Leaders foster inclusivity by valuing Leaders facilitate open, transparent
and Collaboration​ different viewpoints and experiences.​ exchanges to enhance collaboration.​

Trust and Leaders set the tone for ethical, trust- Leaders create an inclusive space where
Interpersonal Skills​ driven organizational culture.​ team members feel heard and valued.​

Communication Leaders tailor communication styles to Leaders use technology to enhance

Skills​ different stakeholders.​ workplace engagement and to streamline
internal communication.​

Customer Leaders ensure customers receive reliable, Leaders ensure customers receive
Focus​ high-quality service experiences.​ reliable, high-quality service experiences.​

Decision Making Leaders ensure decisions reinforce Leaders remain flexible, adjusting
and Strategic long-term organizational goals.​ decisions as new data emerges.​
Planning​
Risk Leaders embrace calculated risks that Leaders challenge industry norms by
Taking​ align with strategic objectives.​ making groundbreaking strategic moves.​

Change Leaders communicate the rationale Leaders identify inefficiencies and

Management​ behind change and manage resistance.​ advocate for necessary improvements.​

Conflict Leaders encourage win-win solutions Leaders leverage disagreements as

Management and through dialogue and cooperation.​ opportunities for learning and innovation.​
Negotiation​

Valuing Leaders acknowledge cultural and Leaders ensure inclusivity becomes an

Diversity​ individual differences with respect.​ embedded part of the organizational DNA.​

Adaptability​ Leaders drive an environment of Leaders anticipate change and

ongoing learning and evolution.​ prepare accordingly.​

Emotional Leaders recognize their emotions Leaders create emotionally

Intelligence​ and regulate responses accordingly.​ intelligent work environments.​

Analytical Leaders identify trends and insights Leaders use data-driven insights
Thinking​ from complex datasets.​ to enhance processes.​

Resilience Leaders maintain composure under Leaders foster a work environment that
high-pressure conditions.​ embraces challenges.​

84
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Shift in Leadership Capability

Expectations Across GCCs​
COMPETENCY CURRENT DEFINITION FUTURE DEFINITION
Influence and Leaders construct compelling, logic-based Leaders champion visionary ideas
Persuasion​ narratives to gain stakeholder buy-in. ​ that challenge existing paradigms. ​
Accountability​ Leaders establish well-defined roles Leaders embed accountability into the
and performance standards. organizational mindset and practices.
Learning and Leaders continuously refine products or Leaders integrate innovation into
Innovation​ services based on feedback and market core strategies, driving industry-wide
trends. transformation.
Results Leaders establish measurable, time- Leaders pivot strategies in response
Orientation​ bound targets for success. to evolving conditions.
Team Building Leaders foster inclusivity by valuing Leaders facilitate open, transparent
and Collaboration​ different viewpoints and experiences.​ exchanges to enhance collaboration.​
Trust and Leaders set the tone for ethical, trust- Leaders create an inclusive space where
Interpersonal Skills​ driven organizational culture.​ team members feel heard and valued.​
Communication Leaders tailor communication styles to Leaders use technology to enhance
Skills​ different stakeholders. workplace engagement and to streamline
internal communication.
Customer Leaders ensure customers receive reliable, Leaders ensure customers receive
Focus​ high-quality service experiences. reliable, high-quality service experiences.
Decision Making Leaders ensure decisions reinforce Leaders think beyond immediate
and Strategic long-term organizational goals. concerns to drive transformational
Planning​ impact.​
Risk Leaders balance risk with data-backed Leaders challenge industry norms by
Taking​ insights to make informed choices. making groundbreaking strategic moves.​
Change Leaders develop structured change Leaders identify inefficiencies and
Management​ roadmaps for seamless transitions. advocate for necessary improvements.​
Conflict Leaders encourage win-win solutions Leaders leverage disagreements as
Management and through dialogue and cooperation.​ opportunities for learning and innovation.
Negotiation​
Valuing Leaders acknowledge cultural and Leaders ensure inclusivity becomes an
Diversity​ individual differences with respect. embedded part of the organizational DNA.
Adaptability​ Leaders drive an environment of Leaders anticipate change and
ongoing learning and evolution. prepare accordingly.
Emotional Leaders recognize their emotions Leaders create emotionally
Intelligence​ and regulate responses accordingly. intelligent work environments.
Analytical Leaders identify trends and insights Leaders use data-driven insights
Thinking​ from complex datasets. to enhance processes.​
Resilience Leaders maintain composure under Leaders foster a work environment that
high-pressure conditions.​ embraces challenges.​

85
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Shift in Leadership Capability

Expectations Across Tech Product
& Platforms
COMPETENCY CURRENT DEFINITION FUTURE DEFINITION
Influence and Leaders consistently act with integrity, Leaders champion visionary ideas
Persuasion​ building long-term credibility.​ that challenge existing paradigms. ​
Accountability​ Leaders embed accountability into the Leaders embed accountability into the
organizational mindset and practices.​ organizational mindset and practices.
Learning and Leaders continuously refine products or Leaders integrate innovation into
Innovation​ services based on feedback and market core strategies, driving industry-wide
trends.​ transformation.​
Results Leaders establish measurable, time- Leaders pivot strategies in response
Orientation​ bound targets for success.​ to evolving conditions.​
Team Building Leaders facilitate open, transparent Leaders facilitate open, transparent
and Collaboration​ exchanges to enhance collaboration.​ exchanges to enhance collaboration.​
Trust and Leaders create an inclusive space where Leaders create an inclusive space where
Interpersonal Skills​ team members feel heard and valued. team members feel heard and valued.​
Communication Leaders articulate ideas clearly and Leaders articulate ideas clearly and
Skills​ succinctly.​ succinctly.​

Customer Leaders ensure customers receive reliable, Leaders ensure customers receive
Focus​ high-quality service experiences.​ reliable, high-quality service experiences.
Decision Making Leaders think beyond immediate Leaders remain flexible, adjusting
and Strategic concerns to drive transformational decisions as new data emerges.​
Planning​ impact.​
Risk Leaders evaluate and anticipate risks Leaders challenge industry norms by
Taking​ before taking decisive action. making groundbreaking strategic moves.
Change Leaders communicate the rationale Leaders identify inefficiencies and
Management​ behind change and manage resistance​ advocate for necessary improvements.​
Conflict Leaders encourage win-win solutions Leaders leverage disagreements as
Management and through dialogue and cooperation.​ opportunities for learning and innovation.​
Negotiation​

Valuing Leaders ensure inclusivity becomes an Leaders ensure inclusivity becomes an

Diversity​ embedded part of the organizational DNA. embedded part of the organizational DNA.
Adaptability​ Leaders drive an environment of Leaders anticipate change and
ongoing learning and evolution.​ prepare accordingly.​
Emotional Leaders recognize their emotions Leaders create emotionally
Intelligence​ and regulate responses accordingly.​ intelligent work environments.​
Analytical Leaders anticipate challenges and create Leaders use data-driven insights
Thinking​ contingency strategies. AND Leaders use to enhance processes.​
data-driven insights to enhance processes.
Resilience Leaders maintain a positive outlook Leaders foster a work environment that
despite challenges. embraces challenges.​

86
 Paradox of Progress 2025

Shift in Leadership Capability

Expectations Across Tech
Consulting & Services​
COMPETENCY CURRENT DEFINITION FUTURE DEFINITION
Influence and Leaders construct compelling, logic-based Leaders champion visionary ideas
Persuasion​ narratives to gain stakeholder buy-in. ​ that challenge existing paradigms. ​
Accountability​ Leaders establish well-defined roles Leaders implement frameworks that
and performance standards.​ institutionalize ownership and responsibility.​
Learning and Leaders build interdisciplinary teams to Leaders integrate innovation into
Innovation​ generate innovative, holistic solutions. core strategies, driving industry-wide
transformation.​
Results Leaders establish measurable, time- Leaders pivot strategies in response
Orientation​ bound targets for success.​ to evolving conditions.​
Team Building Leaders cultivate partnerships that Leaders foster inclusivity by valuing
and Collaboration​ strengthen organizational effectiveness. different viewpoints and experiences.​
Trust and Leaders set the tone for ethical, trust- Leaders set the tone for ethical, trust-
Interpersonal Skills​ driven organizational culture.​ driven organizational culture.
Communication Leaders align communication with Leaders encourage open dialogue and
Skills​ broader company goals.​ constructive feedback.​

Customer Leaders push for ongoing enhancements Leaders evolve offerings based on
Focus​ to exceed expectations.​ customer demands and market trends.
Decision Making Leaders synthesize data to make Leaders think beyond immediate
and Strategic informed, evidence-based choices. concerns to drive transformational
Planning​ impact.
Risk Leaders embrace calculated risks that Leaders challenge industry norms by
Taking​ align with strategic objectives. making groundbreaking strategic moves.​
Change Leaders develop structured change Leaders communicate the rationale
Management​ roadmaps for seamless transitions. behind change and manage resistance.​
Conflict Leaders recognize and address Leaders leverage disagreements as
Management and underlying causes of workplace opportunities for learning and innovation.​
Negotiation​ disputes.​
Valuing Leaders drive diversity, equity, and Leaders ensure inclusivity becomes an
Diversity​ inclusion programs company-wide.​ embedded part of the organizational DNA.​
Adaptability​ Leaders drive an environment of Leaders anticipate change and
ongoing learning and evolution.​ prepare accordingly.​
Emotional Leaders recognize their emotions Leaders create emotionally
Intelligence​ and regulate responses accordingly.​ intelligent work environments.​
Analytical Leaders use data-driven insights to Leaders anticipate challenges and
Thinking​ enhance processes.​ create contingency strategies.
Resilience Leaders maintain composure under Leaders foster a work environment that
high-pressure conditions.​ embraces challenges.​

87