“Resilience”, “adaptability”, “connected execution” all look great at headline level. The real test is whether any of this survives first contact with incentives, budgets, and tired teams.
Reconfiguring “on the fly” is easy to say.
Harder when contracts, labour, and physical assets don’t move at the speed of strategy decks.
AI being “finally practical” is probably the most honest line here — not as a saviour, but as a force multiplier for people who already understand their system. Everywhere else, it mostly accelerates bad assumptions.
I write a lot about this gap between design intent and operational reality — the point where smart ideas start quietly shedding their promises. If that lens is useful, it’s here:
Thank you for the thoughtful comment! I agree -- how well you execute, which requires leadership, patience, and investments in people and technology, is what separates the winners/leaders from the laggards.
Most of this sounds sensible.
That’s usually the danger.
“Resilience”, “adaptability”, “connected execution” all look great at headline level. The real test is whether any of this survives first contact with incentives, budgets, and tired teams.
Reconfiguring “on the fly” is easy to say.
Harder when contracts, labour, and physical assets don’t move at the speed of strategy decks.
AI being “finally practical” is probably the most honest line here — not as a saviour, but as a force multiplier for people who already understand their system. Everywhere else, it mostly accelerates bad assumptions.
I write a lot about this gap between design intent and operational reality — the point where smart ideas start quietly shedding their promises. If that lens is useful, it’s here:
https://therantingforwarder.substack.com
The thinking is right. The execution bill is the part worth watching.
Thank you for the thoughtful comment! I agree -- how well you execute, which requires leadership, patience, and investments in people and technology, is what separates the winners/leaders from the laggards.