Want to Know Your 2027 Priorities?  Look to Nebraska.

Want to Know Your 2027 Priorities? Look to Nebraska.

In October, at InnoLead’s annual conference in Boston MA, everything was AI. When the facilitator of a LEGO Serious Play workshop announced we would not talk about AI, the room erupted in applause.

In April, at Inside Outside Innovation’s biannual conference in Lincoln NE, everything was human. By day’s end, speakers and attendees alike were celebrating the sweet relief of a human-led, AI-supported future.

Why the difference? AI hasn’t fallen out of the news cycle, nor have AI-driven layoffs ceased.

Perspective.

InnoLead’s conference featured practitioners living the day-to-day reality of change and innovation. IO 2026 spotlighted thought leaders like Eric Ries, David Bland, and Erin Stadler, advisors able to see across organizations and invited into the C-Suite’s inner sanctum.

One conference talks about what is. One about what will be.

So, if you want to know what your C-Suite will task you with in six months, look to Nebraska.

 

To move forward, we must face hard truths

Eric Ries, the creator of Lean Startup and author of the forthcoming Incorruptible, exposed the myth that free markets reward value creation. They reward value extraction. Companies focused on extraction forget their purpose, serve themselves over their customers, and ultimately fail.

Elliott Parker, CEO of Alloy Partners and author of  The Illusion of Innovation, declared corporate innovation to be alchemy. Isaac Netwon spent his life pursuing alchemy (creating calculus was just a side quest) but failed because the basic building block of matter, the atom, is immutable. The same is true of big company executives pursuing innovation. The atomic elements of corporations (efficiency) and entrepreneurship (autonomy, passion, urgency, skin in the game, and freedom) are immutable and incompatible. Just as lead cannot become gold, companies can’t create like startups.

 

 

To do better, we must focus on people

Erin Stadler, founder of Design Culture and author of one of my all-time favorite articles on innovation, shared a forgotten truth: “When we lead with people, the human element, the science, the innovation comes with it.”  To do this requires leaders and organizations to find and state their purpose, to build principles and values, and to act on them every day

Dan Hassenplug, VP of Design at sport tech company Hudl, boldly declared that customer obsession is the “real AI strategy.”  After all, getting 10x faster at something doesn’t matter if it’s on something that doesn’t matter. And what matters are your customers. Living with them, talking to them, listening to them. You’ll get radical and game changing insights that no competitor, survey, or synthetic persona can.

David Bland, founder of Precoil and author of Testing Business Ideas, implored the audience to flip the 80/20 ratio of feasibility experiments to desirability experiments. Why? “We can make anything these days. It doesn’t matter if you can make it if no one wants it.”

 

 

To focus on people, we must serve them

Ted Ullrich, co-founder of Tomorrow Lab, reminded us that “simplicity is earned,” not a starting point. We start by trying to do all the thingsfor customers, but that’s overwhelmng and unnecessary. Only by listening to humans and staying humble can we create the simple solutions that create value.

Julie Ann Crommet, founder of Collective Moxie and former VP at Disney, dazzled us with the simple fact that “the more specific the story, the more universal.”  She backed this up with data that films with Authentically Inclusive Representation perform nearly 3x better at the box office and the story behind how Coco became Pixar’s highest grossing movie in China, despite content that is typically banned.

 

 

The future is wonderfully human

AI isn’t going away and it will change almost all aspects of life and work. But if the thought leaders, advisors, and designers in Nebraska are right (and I think they are), the future will be far more human than machine.

You’re Addicted to AI. That’s by Design.

You’re Addicted to AI. That’s by Design.

“AI is the new cigarette.”

When a colleague said this in the waning days of 2022, days after ChatGPT burst on the scene, she took my breath away. The idea that this miracle would kill us seemed confined to hysterical handwringing foretelling the birth of Skynet.

She was right.

But neither of us knew it was designed to be that way.

 

Designed for addiction

My friend predicted that ChatGPT would stay free and helpful until usage reached “critical mass,” and then we’d have to pay. Less than three months after its November launch, OpenAI introduced its $20 per month service.

But it’s not the “first one’s free, the next one will cost you” aspect of drugs that makes AI addictive. It’s the design decisions at its core that keeps you coming back:

  • Purchase Decoupling in which you convert real money into tokens, creating psychological distance between you and your actual spending
  • Difficulty Curve where skills and benefits accumulate quickly giving you the sense that you’re becoming more capable over time and therefore more committed after progress slows.
  • Skill Atrophy where every skill you stop practicing because the machine does it for you, quietly disappears.

Even casual AI users have experienced one or more of these:

  • You get a message mid-chat telling you you’ve used all your tokens and need to come back in three hours even though you’ve paid your monthly $20 fee
  • You’re prompting in all caps because it’s the only way you can think of to get the LLM to stop hallucinating, while reminiscing about the days when it was a brilliant thought-partner
  • You’ve relied on AI to outline articles for the last several months, but you need to write in a different style and have no idea how to get started.

And yet, we keep going back.

But it’s not just individuals who are addicted. It’s entire organizations.

 

Signs that your organization is addicted to AI

Your CFO asks for the total AI spend across the organization. Three weeks and four departments later, the number is three times what anyone expected because the licenses are buried in IT infrastructure budgets, the pilots are expensed as innovation projects, and half the tools were purchased by business units on corporate cards.

The board approved the AI transformation initiative based on the pilot results. Eighteen months later, the pilot case study slide hasn’t changed, headcount has been reduced in anticipation of productivity gains that haven’t materialized, and the team running the pilot has quietly moved on to other work.

You eliminated the analyst pool two years ago because AI could do in minutes what they did in days. Now you need to evaluate whether the AI’s output is actually correct, and you’ve just realized there’s nobody left in the organization to check it because everyone who’s done it is gone.

Sound familiar? Your organization is an addict.

 

Recovery is possible

Addiction can’t be cured, only managed. The same is true for AI.

The road to recovery starts in a similar place: Visibility

  • Centralize AI spending the way you centralize other business processes AND allow some flexibility by setting strict spending limits and clear decision-making criteria and ownership.
  • Start pilots with the end in mind by establishing success metrics and scaling plans at the start of the pilot, not when it’s already in process.
  • Treat certain human capabilities as strategic reserves the same way you’d treat any critical operational dependency. Before automating a function, explicitly document what judgment and expertise currently lives there, who holds it, and what it would cost to rebuild it if needed.

Unlike cigarettes or gambling, we’ve reached a point where we can’t quit AI.

But we can be aware of our addiction and we must manage it.

The first step is admitting that it’s real.  And by design.

What Would You Do If You Were Certain?

What Would You Do If You Were Certain?

If you’re uncertain, you’re not alone. According to data from FactSet, 87% of Fortune 500 companies cited “uncertainty” during their 2025 Q1 earnings calls.  And while things are definitely a tad chaotic in the world, I’ve started asking my clients, “What would you do if you were certain?”

It’s not an academic thought experiment. It’s a very practical exercise that radically shifts the way the think about and lead their businesses.

An Example That Proves the Rule

Most leaders facing disruption do one of two things: freeze and hope that “this too shall pass” or follow and hope that there is safety in numbers.

Neither is a strategy. Both are knee jerk reactions rooted in fear and communicated in the language and buzzwords of business.

This behavior didn’t start with AI. It happens every time a disruptive technology or philosophy bursts onto the scene. The printing press. The industrial revolution. Microchips. Each time, a new leader and paradigm emerges. How do they do it?

They’re certain.

Not because they’re omniscient. But because they know the answers to three questions

 

Question 1: Who Are You?

When photography made academic realism obsolete, Picasso didn’t freeze. He didn’t pick up a camera. He created something entirely new. Why? Because he knew exactly who he was. “I don’t seek,” he said. “I find.”

Today’s business icons are no different. Richard Branson describes himself as curious and someone who challenges the status quo. Lou Gerstner, when he arrived at a floundering IBM, declared himself a results man, not a visionary.

These self-definitions aren’t marketing. They’re decisions filters that define what you are and aren’t willing to do, agnostic of events, technologies, and capabilities.

 

Question 2: What Does Your Organization Actually Do?

Not what you make. Not what you sell. What Job to be Done do customers hire you to do?

Nintendo’s answer has been consistent across 130 years of radical product change: help me have fun with friends and family. From playing cards to the Game Boy, Wii, and Switch, their products changed completely. The Job didn’t.

IBM has done the same. From punch card tabulators to consulting and AI, the Job of helping customers make sense of complex information to run better never change. Amex moved from freight forwarding to credit and debit cards, but it’s commitment to move value securely when direct exchange isn’t an option never wavered.

When you know the Job you do, you stop chasing trends and start making choices.

 

Question 3: How Do You Move Forward?

You can’t answer this question without answering the first two. When you try, you get caught in the same freeze/follow trap as everyone else.

But when you answer the first two questions, the answer to this one becomes clear. For Picasso and Branson, they create. For Gerstner, he optimized the status quo. For most businesses, the answer is “And, not Or.”  They must stabilize today’s business, step into (even follow) the next wave, and invest in creating the new.

Satya Nadella’s transformation of Microsoft is a perfect example. He defined himself as a learner, not a knower. He defined Microsoft’s job as helping people make a difference in their roles. From those two answers, every major move followed logically: maintain Office 365, step into cloud, create quantum computing technology.

None of it was reactive. All of it felt certain.

 

Your Moment Is Now

Yes, the world is uncertain. You don’t have to be.

Before you close this tab and tell yourself you’ll think about it later, answer the first two questions. You can change your answers later, but you need to start now.

The leaders who navigate this moment won’t be the ones who wait and see or follow the crowd. They’ll be the ones who know themselves and their organizations well enough to be certain.

“Reinvention” is the latest C-Suite Priority.  It’s also BS

“Reinvention” is the latest C-Suite Priority. It’s also BS

“Change is changing: How to meet the challenge of radical reinvention” – McKinsey

“End to End Reinvention Unleashes a Technology’s Full Potential” –  BCG

“Reinvention: The Overlooked Skills Leaders Need Right Now” – Forbes

Don’t look now but we’ve got a new buzzword!

Hello, REINVENTION

Wait, what happened to Transformation?

Oh hon, “Transformation” is so 2025 and for good reason. In a survey of 750 global organizations, researchers found that 52% of respondents suffer from “transformation fatigue,” 44% cite constant change as the reason for their burnout, and more than one-third are considering quitting as a result of never-ending transformations.

Unfortunately, massive technologic, economic, and societal shifts demand executives rethink every aspect of their organizations. So, what do you do when you need to transform but using the word is likely to lead to a revolution?

As fans of The Wire know, you rebrand.

 

So, Reinvention is the new Transformation?

Yes and no.

Both terms apply to large-scale organizational changes that often hit at the heart of an organization’s operations. As a result, they require leadership commitment, employee buy-in, and lots of money and time to execute.

The difference is that Transformation is positioned as a finite endeavor to increase performance, usually through technology adoption and integration or restructuring. Reinvention, however, “requires leaders to embrace more radical approaches and actions – in effect, to embrace the creative destruction of the company so it creates value in new ways.”

On-going. Radical approaches. Creative destruction.

Just what C-Suite execs want.

 

Honestly, it sounds like Reinvention is needed so why is it BS?

To be fair, it’s only two-thirds BS.

Building a capability for ongoing change, iteration, and learning isn’t BS. In fact, it’s mission critical in a world of constant change and uncertainty. But this capability requires new mindsets and skills that take time, consistent role modeling by senior leaders, before they stick.

What is BS is the need for radical approaches and creative destruction.

Instead, leaders need to return to their roots and reimagine their future.

Return and Reimagine?

Return

Jørgen Vig Knudstorp is widely credited with saving LEGO from bankruptcy and turning it into the world’s biggest toy company.  At the 2025 Thinkers50 Summit, he shared his 10 rules for a successful transformation. Number one, “Why do we exist?”  He spent three years trying to answer this question.

Why do we exist?  What makes us relevant, valuable, rare, hard to imitate?

The answer isn’t your industry, products, or processes. It’s something more fundamental. It’s the Job to be Done that your organization and ONLY your organization can do.

John Fallon, who led Pearson’s turnaround as their CEO, answered this question in a recent conversation with Outthinkers’ Kaihan Krippendorf.

“The job to be done was not publishing textbooks.  The job to be done was empowering people to progress in their lives through learning.”

Reimagine

When you know why you exist, you’re able to go beyond rebuilding to reimagining what your organization could be. Knowing your Why changes how you think about your organization and its potential. It enables you to step out of the hype, ignore the peer pressure, and explore all the future Whats and Hows before committing to action.

Then, and only then, do you commit to action. To concrete changes in business models, operations, and capabilities.  To Reinvention.

 

I think I get it.  Reinvention is BS not because it’s wrong but because it skips two essential steps.

Reinvention implies rebuilding, but if you don’t know why your company exists, how can you be sure you’re building something that matters?

And, if your “reimagining” is focused only on the latest tech or doubling down on a dying business model, you’ll never see all the other possibilities that may be more resilient.

Return. Reimagine. Reinvent. The 3Rs. That’s a buzzword I can support.

You Got Buy-In So Why Is Execution Stalling?

You Got Buy-In So Why Is Execution Stalling?

Congratulations, you’ve done the hard part required to get buy-in!  You asked instead of told, said “I don’t know” out loud, and got genuine buy-in. Your team believes, is engaged, and ready to go.  And yet execution is stalling.

What gives?

Activity without Achievement

There’s no doubt that people are working hard. You can see it in their schedules and you hear it in your one-on-ones.  But projects are moving slower than they should, decisions that seem straightforward take weeks, and agreements made in meetings are quietly undone. Strategies, buy-in, timelines are powerless against an invisible and unnamed force.

So, you consider your options. A team offsite can provide a helpful rest but there’s no guarantee it sticks when you’re back in the office. Training can help shore up skill gaps, but your team is already capable, so this doesn’t feel like a skill problem. You could reorg but that creates new problems.

Your People Aren’t the Problem

The problem isn’t your people, your team, or even your culture. The problem is the hidden seams between people, teams, and cultures, that create friction.

Because of friction, people hesitate to share information across functional or hierarchical seams. They make assumptions about other generations. They work to achieve individual or functional, rather than collective, goals.

These friction points have been part of your organization for so long that they are accepted as normal. As immoveable and unchangeable as your company’s mission and vision. And because they’re so ingrained, you shift your efforts to things that feel changeable: skills, org charts, and communication plans.

You’re addressing symptoms because the root cause seems impossible to fix.

It’s not impossible.

How One Company Resolved the Friction and Tightened the Seams Without Extra Work

When a K-5 curriculum company decided to expand into the Middle School market, they knew they were asking the project team to do something new that was complex, ambiguous, and fraught with high-stakes decisions.

Six months in, the project was breaking down. Decisions that should have taken a day took weeks or months. Work got stuck as different functions weighed in at different times with different mandatory requirements. People hid problems and gave optimistic updates.

The executive who owned the project had seen this before. In fact, she was seeing it in every project team across the entire company. So, she knew that the problem wasn’t the project or the people, it was something much deeper, something that was such a part of the company’s standard operating process that it had become invisible.

So, she brought in someone (me) who could see things differently and together we sought out the seams, naming the moments when friction occurred, and engaging the team in developing and experimenting with solutions.

And we did it all as part of the daily work.

We redesigned hand-offs in real time, experimented with decision-making rules until we found what worked for multiple decision types, and rewarded people for saying “I don’t know.”

Within six months, the project was back on track and engagement and morale were sky-high. Other teams took notice and asked for advice. New products began shipping on time, on budget, and to rave reviews.

Now the Real Work Begins

Where are your seams showing up? A cross-functional initiative that’s losing momentum? A decision that never seems to stick? A team that’s aligned on paper but stuck in execution?

That friction has a name. And it’s findable.

If you’re ready to find the seams and resolve the friction, set up a SeamSpotter Session. It’s a 60 to 90-minute conversation, no prep required, and you’ll receive a written summary and recommended next steps within 48 hours.

If your team is bought in, but execution keeps stuttering, you can fix it. Email me at robyn@milezero.io to get started.

Compliance is Not Buy-In: The Real Reason Your Strategy Stalls

Compliance is Not Buy-In: The Real Reason Your Strategy Stalls

“None of it worked. When I pulled the executive team back together and asked what went wrong, these executives said, ‘You told us what to do. You never asked us what to do.

“What I should have done is just said, ‘I don’t know.’ And when you say those words, what happens is everybody wants to help you.”

That is how Josh D’Amaro, the newly named CEO of the Walt Disney Company, characterized his defining leadership development moment.

Sound familiar?

Every executive, at some point in their career, has faced this moment. The business is doing poorly, the future is uncertain, and everyone is looking to you for answers.

But few of us learn the lesson that Mr. D’Amaro did. So, we keep telling and wondering why compliance isn’t generating the results we expected.

 

Compliance and Buy-In are not the same

In our world of “using positive words to describe uncomfortable realities,”  we often characterize compliance as buy-in.  And that’s a dangerous mistake.

Compliance,” explains innovation expert Tendayi Viki, “comes from external pressures to follow rules and policies due to fear of consequences. In contrast, buy-in comes from internal motivation where people genuinely view the initiative as valuable and legitimate.”

Compliance is what happened when D’Amaro convened the market and sales executives of Hong Kong Disneyland together and told them “to adjust, build, and set ourselves up for the future.”

When things are not going well and the future is uncertain (and therefore scary) it’s normal to think that, because you are in a role with authority, that you need to have all the answers. But you don’t. Because you can’t. Because no one has the answers.

You need help.

 

 

Why Buy-in, not compliance, is required for success

No one is going to help you when they’re afraid. Instead, they’re going to execute orders regardless of their own experiences or judgment, which may be more informed and likely to result in the desired outcome (as was the case with D’Amaro and his team).

But when you ask for help, people help. They feel ownership of both the problem and the solution and seek out creative ideas and alternatives. They work across traditional organizational boundaries, like functions and levels, and they’re more resilient when faced with adversity. Even better for you, they don’t require constant instruction, surveillance, and micromanagement.

Getting buy-in frees you up to do the very thing you want to do: lead a team to a common goal and better future.

Buy-in is NOT another Change Management initiative

I’m sorry to say that getting buy-in is much harder than running the standard Change Management playbook.

Change management gives leaders a structured playbook of communication plans, training schedules, governance milestones. It’s systematic, observable, and leader-driven. And it’s not wrong. It’s just not sufficient to gain buy-in.

Buy-in is individual, nonlinear, and rooted in belief, not process. It forms one person at a time based on trust, relevance, and whether the individual sees themselves in the future state. It happens when one human being trusts the motives and behaviors of another human being.

How to get Buy-In

Earning buy-in requires you to do what D’Amaro eventually learned: invite dissent, share incomplete thinking, and say “I don’t know.”  But that’s just the beginning.

You also have to find where things are breaking down internally, the gaps that allowed the situation to grow ever more concerning and dire. And it’s rarely at the obvious boundaries between silos that everyone can see and org charts try to fix.

It’s at the seams: the hidden disconnects between people, decisions, handoffs, and incentives where functions, levels, and priorities intersect. These seams are where compliance lives and buy-in dies. And until you make them visible, you’ll keep mistaking one for the other. But they can be made visible and that changes everything.

Now that you see the difference, where is compliance masquerading as buy-in in your organization?