This is exactly right. The gap between "we approve of AI" and "here's your budget, tools, and authority" kills more initiatives than resistance ever does.
One pattern I keep seeing: leadership alignment isn't just one problem among many. It's usually the binding constraint. Fix that first, or the culture and adoption issues never resolve.
Curious if you've seen the same sequencing in your work.
The core insight here is psychological safety. When leaders say "go" without committing resources, clarity, or support, employees face role chaos: Am I a "data analyst" deploying tools, or a "change agent" figuring out adoption? Without clarity on how their work identity evolves with AI, teams can't make real progress. Leadership commitment isn't about enthusiasm—it's creating the conditions for people to ask "what's my new value here?" and actually get answers. That's where adoption begins.
This is exactly right. The gap between "we approve of AI" and "here's your budget, tools, and authority" kills more initiatives than resistance ever does.
One pattern I keep seeing: leadership alignment isn't just one problem among many. It's usually the binding constraint. Fix that first, or the culture and adoption issues never resolve.
Curious if you've seen the same sequencing in your work.
The core insight here is psychological safety. When leaders say "go" without committing resources, clarity, or support, employees face role chaos: Am I a "data analyst" deploying tools, or a "change agent" figuring out adoption? Without clarity on how their work identity evolves with AI, teams can't make real progress. Leadership commitment isn't about enthusiasm—it's creating the conditions for people to ask "what's my new value here?" and actually get answers. That's where adoption begins.
Extremely relatable. I ran an AI workshop last week. It was for a team of 30 - 2 showed up.
Let's hope more firms are able to apply the lessons from 2025 in 2026!