News


Seven Traps That Could Kill Your Executive Career

October 10, 2021

Seven traps that could kill your executive career


You can’t control the market and you can’t control who your boss is or what your customers are doing. 


But you can control your team.


Sally Patten, BOSS editor at the Australian Financial Review interviewed Margot Faraci , Managing Partner for Financial Services at Derwent Oct 7, 2021


Senior executive roles are invariably well paid, interesting, challenging and come with a variety of perks and privileges.


But they are hard and there is no end of traps that can trip executives up. At worst, they could be career ending or lead to severe reputational damage and profit losses or fines. At best, falling in to such traps may frustrate executives’ rise further up the corporate ladder and hinder team performance.


BOSS has identified seven traps executives would do well to avoid.


1. Getting your team wrong


The one thing you control as a leader is the composition of your team, notes Margot Faraci, managing partner in financial services at executive search firm Derwent. You can’t control the market, you can’t control who your boss is or what your customers are doing. But you can control your team, and you must be accountable for that.


That means ensuring your team is not housing toxic outperformers and friendly, likeable underperformers. Both will frustrate the performance of your business.


In the case of the former, you will no doubt think they are brilliant, high in energy, great revenue generators, loved by clients – and not causing any harm. But, warns Faraci, the chances are that the people who operate underneath toxic outperformers will feel suppressed and be reluctant to demonstrate their talents. “You will never know their true potential,” Faraci says.


“If you remove the toxic high performer, you’ll lose the revenue, and there will be disruption to your clients. But you as a leader have to back yourself to find someone good to replace them, and back yourself that you’ve chosen the right team, and without that [toxic high performer], it will flourish.”


Then there is the likeable underperformer, who is cordial, agreeable and co-operative. However, other team members will constantly have to rescue and cover for them, and could become resentful as a result. They will also assume that you are condoning underperformance by not addressing the issue. The upshot is that the cordial underperformer should also be moved on. The blow can be cushioned with the offer of financial compensation.


“Sometimes the most compassionate, respectful thing you can do is have the direct conversation quickly and generously,” Faraci says. “If they’ve been there a long time, be generous.” You may, in fact, be doing them a huge favour.


2. Not knowing your team


The chances are that your direct reports are going to be on their best behaviour when they talk to you. They are likely to be congenial and respectful. But, warns Faraci, they could be “entirely toxic when they face back into their peers [and] their own team”.


If there is destructive toxic behaviour in your business or your team, it won’t necessarily find you. Often you have to find it.


What executives need to know about making the right decision


To know your team, Faraci recommends having a program of meetings that enable you to meet the direct reports of your direct reports. It is rare that someone will come forward with accusations or complaints, but if you ask the right questions, you should be able to tease out information. Being open about your experiences will help create an environment in which a junior team member will feel safe to be honest with you.


And remember, the chances are that if you have hundreds or thousands of people in your division, toxic behaviour will be occurring somewhere. Executives of large teams should ensure their direct reports are also on the lookout for poor behaviour, such as bullying and aggression.


3. Not understanding the limits of technology


Technology is not a proxy for strategy, says Louise McElvogue, a technology adviser and director of Cluey Learning and Healthdirect.


“Choosing the right technology is important, but it won’t solve your business problems,” McElvogue says.


The experienced director points to a tendency for executives to invest in data collection and analytics before defining what questions the data is expected to answer and how it will be used.


“In the past year, I have worked with two companies using the same expensive data platforms. One had fantastic insight while the other struggled to get the answers they need,” McElvogue says.


“The first company had a clear strategy and knew what they needed to measure and the data points that would deliver value and insight, while the second company plugged everyone into the platform and expected it to deliver value.”


4. Not knowing your capabilities


A few years ago Stephenson Mansell Group, an executive development firm, conducted a survey at one of the big four banks. It gave 500 leaders a set of 16 competencies and asked the executives to rank their traits in descending order. The firm gave the executives’ team members the same list and asked them to rank their bosses.


Most leaders ranked their top attribute as the ability to influence others. From their team’s point of view, influencing was their boss’ worst capability.


“People judge themselves and their capability based on their intent, rather than what is actually showing up,” says Stephenson Mansell senior partner Mehul Joshi.


5. Not knowing your audience


You need to change your communication style to suit your audience, says Joshi. Think about who is in the audience and what message you want them to receive.


Joshi points to the presidential debates between former US president Donald Trump and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton held before the 2016 election as a case in point.


On every single measure, Clinton won those debates – except for the measure that really mattered, says Joshi.


“What did the voters who were going to decide the election take away? What did they think?” he says. “You actually have to take a different style and approach, according to the context,” Joshi adds.


6. Being complicit


There is a litany of companies – and executives – that have failed their customers, employees and shareholders because no one spoke out about a poor decision or poor behaviour. As a senior executive, you need to ensure you have team members who will challenge you, says Derwent’s Faraci, who is a former executive at National Australia Bank, Commonwealth Bank and Macquarie Group.


One of the best things bosses can do is invite opinions.


“I start every meeting by saying: ‘I’m going to tell you what I think. And then I want you to tell me what I’m not seeing.’ You must argue. You must debate respectfully and compassionately. As a leader you must seek it.”


It is not acceptable, Faraci adds, for executives to nod and do what their boss tells them. What are they getting paid for?


That said, realistically, social conditioning will mean that many people won’t speak up in meetings. It is a point worth considering when assembling your team.


If you’ve got 10 people on your leadership team, you should be able to get two or three people who will “thump the table” all the time, Faraci argues. “That then will mean it becomes normal to thump the table. That will encourage [people who are conditioned to want to fit in and be liked] to speak up, too. That’s when we’re humming, because that’s when we’re getting the true capability and the true potential of everyone at the table realised.”


7. Setting and forgetting


Stephen Mansell managing partner Christopher Patterson warns that executives can’t afford to set a policy or a course of action and apply it forever more.


“Things are in motion,” Patterson tells BOSS. “Unless you’re constantly adapting and constantly updating what you’re doing, you are going to be wrong-footed pretty quickly.” Leaders should always be asking their teams for advice on how tasks can be done differently and more efficiently. As a result, constant adjustments can be made – and large, painful overhauls avoided.


https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/management/seven-traps-that-could-kill-your-executive-career-20211004-p58x6l 

Share this Article

Recent Articles

By Michelle Gardiner August 19, 2026
The boardroom has changed. Permanently. The issues filling board agendas today are not temporary disruptions. They are the operating environment. AI, cyber risk, geopolitical instability, regulation, climate exposure and cost volatility are reshaping how organisations compete, invest and make decisions. For boards, the expectations have changed. Directors are being asked to understand more, engage more deeply and bring increasingly relevant experience to the table. Regulators, investors and other stakeholders are also looking more closely at whether boards are equipped for what lies ahead. The question is no longer simply whether a board is well governed. It is whether the board has the right mix of capability, judgement and adaptability to lead the organisation into its next chapter. The capability conversation is changing Credentials and experience remain important, but they are no longer enough on their own. Curiosity, adaptability and a willingness to keep learning are becoming equally valuable. AI is a clear example. Directors do not need to become technologists, but they do need enough understanding to ask informed questions about risk, ethics, data, accountability and return on investment. Cyber security and data governance present a similar challenge. These issues now sit firmly within board accountability. Scenario planning, crisis preparedness and understanding where the organisation’s exposures lie are no longer occasional agenda items. They are part of the board’s regular rhythm. Renewal cannot wait for a vacancy Strong board renewal starts with future strategy. What capabilities will be required over the next five to ten years? Which risks will become more material? Where does the board need deeper commercial, functional or sector experience? Which perspectives may be missing? These questions are more useful than simply asking whose term is ending next. The most effective boards are moving beyond static skills matrices and periodic succession discussions. They are treating board composition as a dynamic capability plan that evolves alongside the organisation. They are refreshing skills matrices against future strategy, building learning agendas across AI, cyber, ESG, risk and geopolitics, reviewing committee structures and linking succession to capability rather than tenure alone. They are also paying closer attention to board dynamics. A technically capable board can still underperform when trust is low, challenge is poorly handled or directors struggle to work together under pressure. Constructive challenge, sound judgement and the ability to listen, learn and adapt are central to effective governance. The briefs are changing Across Derwent’s Board Practice, we are seeing more mandates where recent sector and functional experience is a primary driver of selection. Boards are seeking contemporary expertise in areas including technology and AI governance, audit and risk, renewables and infrastructure, capital allocation and mergers and acquisitions. The profile of who is considered “board-ready” is therefore broadening. Traditional governance experience remains valuable, but boards increasingly need directors who bring current knowledge, diverse perspectives and the ability to contribute to new and fast-moving conversations. Board search and succession planning are not simply about filling a vacant seat. They are about building a board that is ready for the future of the organisation. The strongest boards will be those that renew with intent – bringing together the experience, behaviours and perspectives required not only for today’s agenda, but for the decade ahead. ___________________________________________________________________________ If you're reviewing your board's composition, capability, or succession planning, reach out to Michelle Gardiner , Managing Partner – Board Practice, or contact us here . We'd welcome the conversation. Derwent brings together executive search, interim solutions, and board search, partnering with your organisation to find and connect the right high-impact talent to support your leadership needs, now and into the future.
By Lindsay Every May 25, 2026
Every leader in the room on Tuesday 5 May had something in common: they are being asked to guide their organisations through a transformation they are still learning to understand themselves. That shared reality – not a technology problem, but a leadership one – set the tone for our AI & The People breakfast in Melbourne, where senior executives gathered to examine what AI transformation actually requires of organisations, their people functions, and their leaders. The internet took decades to reshape business. AI is compressing similar changes into years, sometimes months, and waiting for certainty is not an option. We were privileged to have Peter Tonagh and Jenny Bryant join us as guest speakers – both navigating this transformation firsthand, not observing it from a distance. Five themes shaped the conversation. This is a leadership moment – not a technology decision AI is not primarily a question of which tools to buy. It is a question of how value gets created in an organisation, and who takes responsibility for leading that shift. The organisations pulling ahead are not the ones that have AI figured out – they are the ones learning to experiment intelligently while others hesitate. The most effective leaders are approaching this as conductors of human-AI teams: setting direction, making judgement calls, and ensuring AI amplifies their team's capabilities rather than displacing their critical thinking. That requires adaptive leadership, evolving cultural awareness, and a genuine commitment to bringing people with them through the change. This also reframes where accountability sits within organisations. AI transformation is not an IT project. It is a workforce capability shift – which means HR, learning and development, and operational leaders need to be at the centre of it. Adoption is the constraint – not capability When senior leaders use AI visibly in their own work – for writing, analysis, and decision-making – adoption accelerates across the organisation. Where leaders delegate it to an innovation team, uptake stalls. The tone is set from the top. AI capability is advancing well ahead of organisational uptake. Most businesses already have access to powerful tools but are significantly underutilising them. The gap is not about access or functionality – it is about behaviour, confidence, and whether AI has been genuinely embedded into daily workflows. Many organisations are still treating AI as a procurement decision when it is, in reality, a usage problem. When AI tools are positioned as specialist or optional, adoption stays low and uneven. When they are treated as standard infrastructure – available to everyone, expected to be used, as commonplace as email – adoption normalises quickly. The organisation that emerges looks different As individuals become more capable with AI support, the rationale for traditional management layers is shifting. Where a manager's primary function has been information aggregation and reporting – and AI can do much of that work – the case for that layer weakens. This does not mean fewer leaders. It means leaders operating with broader remits, and decision-making moving closer to the front line. The nature of the work itself is changing too. As AI absorbs routine, process-driven tasks, roles are becoming more focused on judgement, problem definition, creativity, and communication. That shift is not straightforward – the cognitive load on people can increase, and organisations need to be realistic about supporting teams through it. As AI tools become widely available, competitive advantage is shifting to how deeply they are integrated with internal data, knowledge systems, and the specific context of the business. The proprietary knowledge organisations hold becomes more valuable, not less, when AI is properly grounded in it. That grounding requires deliberate effort and consideration – providing AI with the context of the organisation's actual situation, its people, its way of working. The organisations doing this well are building human intelligence into their models, not just deploying generic tools and expecting meaningful results. Beyond organisational structure, AI is also changing how people functions operate in practice. Leaders are using AI to support coaching conversations, sharpen performance management, and improve the quality of feedback to their teams. Used well, AI does not replace those human interactions – it helps leaders show up better in them. Build broadly before you narrow Rather than concentrating effort on a small number of high-impact use cases, the organisations making the most progress are enabling broad, distributed adoption. Hundreds of small improvements across individuals and teams compound into significant productivity gains – individually modest, collectively meaningful. The practical approach: create the conditions for open experimentation without over-structuring it early. Allow teams to test different tools, discover what’s possible for the whole business through different perspectives, styles and responsibilities, share what they are learning, and let value emerge before formalising investment decisions. More mature organisations are beginning to focus on a small number of enterprise-wide priorities – customer experience, supply chain, and contact centres among them – but they arrived there through exploration, not by picking their bets upfront. Explore widely, then narrow with evidence. Talent strategies are evolving – and so is the baseline Hiring is shifting toward the attributes that enable individuals to keep pace with change: curiosity, critical thinking, learning agility, and resilience. Technical skills are increasingly table stakes. The differentiator is how quickly someone can learn, unlearn, and relearn as tools and roles continue to evolve. Building that capability internally is more scalable than chasing scarce external talent. The organisations making progress are treating AI literacy the way organisations treated digital literacy a decade ago – as a baseline expectation built through training, coaching, and everyday use, rather than a specialism held by a small number of experts. The conversation was a reminder that the leaders thriving through this period are not waiting for certainty. They are turning uncertainty into opportunity – experimenting intelligently, bringing their people on the journey with them, and building AI fluency from the inside out across the whole workforce. Our thanks to Lindsay Every , Group Managing Partner at Derwent, for hosting the morning, and to Peter and Jenny for sharing their experience and expertise with such honesty and depth. Continue the conversation For further insights or to explore how Derwent can support your organisation's approach to AI and workforce transformation, connect with our team at melbourne@derwentsearch.com.au To register your interest in future Derwent events, please reach out to us at events@derwentsearch.com.au .
By John O'Leary April 30, 2026
What was once viewed as a temporary stopgap is now recognised as strategic capability. As organisations operate leaner than ever, through automation, AI-enabled processes, and efficiency drives, the pressure point is clear: when major initiatives arise or executive roles become vacant, there is little capacity left to absorb the workload. Interim executive leadership bridges the gap, maintaining momentum and delivering change at pace – while a quality permanent search secures the right long-term appointment. What's Driving This Shift Lean Operations Creating Capacity Walls Organisations that have successfully streamlined operations are vulnerable to the trade-off: when major initiatives emerge, there’s little capacity in the system. A private equity-backed logistics organisation acquiring two competitors can’t pause organic growth to integrate the acquisitions. A publicly listed financial services firm implementing new regulatory requirements can’t pull their Chief Financial Officer off business as usual for nine months. The permanent executive team that runs lean operations brilliantly often lacks the bandwidth for the strategic initiatives that drive growth. Business Continuity During Leadership Transitions Leadership transitions may be more frequent than boards would like. According to FTI Consulting’s 2024 Global CFO Report, 61% of Chief Financial Officers globally report average tenure of less than five years, and Chief Executive Officer turnover follows a similar pattern. When an executive exits, organisations face a choice: rush a permanent appointment, redistribute workload across an already stretched team, or maintain momentum with interim leadership while a thorough permanent search runs in parallel. Without interim support during the transition, the risk is real – critical decisions get delayed, strategic projects stall, and team morale suffers when colleagues absorb additional responsibility. From Stopgap to Strategic Capability Private equity firms are expert at leveraging flexible, high-calibre leadership into their portfolio companies to execute value creation plans without long-term fixed costs. The model is powerful and accessible with the right partner – proven interim executives (sometimes referred to as fixed-term contractors) are brought in to deliver defined outcomes while the permanent search identifies the right long-term appointment, then transitioned out when that person is in place. In many cases, the interim executive becomes the permanent appointment – an effective de-risking mechanism that lets both the organisation and the individual assess fit before committing long-term. We’re now seeing this model adopted well beyond private equity – ASX-listed companies and large private enterprises are building interim capability into how they plan, not just how they respond. The Delivery Advantage When organisations face major initiatives, many have historically turned to consulting firms. The interim executive model offers something fundamentally different: accountability from the inside. An interim executive integrating an acquisition isn't engaged alongside the business – they're embedded within it, leading teams, owning decisions, and driving outcomes as part of the leadership team. What This Means For Private Equity Firms and Portfolio Companies: The model of running assets lean whilst executing rapid transformations is being adopted more broadly across the Australian corporate landscape. Interim executive talent provides senior capability precisely when and where it is needed, without inflating the fixed cost base. When that interim executive is also a potential permanent appointment, the engagement becomes a live assessment – providing a powerful de-risking mechanism on both sides of a critical hire. Boards and C-Suite Executives: Major transactions, transformation projects, and unexpected executive departures no longer require a choice between overwhelming the permanent team, rushing critical appointments, or engaging consulting firms. Executive interim leadership provides a fourth option: proven leaders who own delivery, integrate with the organisation, and transition out when the initiative is complete or the permanent appointment is in place. Talent and Human Resources Leaders : The calibre of interim executive talent now accessible, and the speed at which it can be deployed, is reshaping how talent leaders advise the business on leadership capacity. Building those relationships before capacity constraints or leadership transitions emerge is the difference between a reactive conversation and a strategic one. The organisations getting this right aren’t treating interim leadership as a fallback – they’re building it into how they think about leadership capacity and talent strategy. Interim and permanent executive search are powerful partners: one buys the time the other needs to ensure you get the right talent solution for your organisation. If you're exploring how interim executive leadership works in practice, reach out to John O'Leary , Partner – Interim. To learn how interim and permanent executive search could work together for your organisation, contact us here . We'd welcome the conversation. Derwent brings together executive search, interim solutions, and board search, partnering with your organisation to find and connect the right high-impact talent to support your leadership needs, now and into the future.
Show More
By Michelle Gardiner August 19, 2026
The boardroom has changed. Permanently. The issues filling board agendas today are not temporary disruptions. They are the operating environment. AI, cyber risk, geopolitical instability, regulation, climate exposure and cost volatility are reshaping how organisations compete, invest and make decisions. For boards, the expectations have changed. Directors are being asked to understand more, engage more deeply and bring increasingly relevant experience to the table. Regulators, investors and other stakeholders are also looking more closely at whether boards are equipped for what lies ahead. The question is no longer simply whether a board is well governed. It is whether the board has the right mix of capability, judgement and adaptability to lead the organisation into its next chapter. The capability conversation is changing Credentials and experience remain important, but they are no longer enough on their own. Curiosity, adaptability and a willingness to keep learning are becoming equally valuable. AI is a clear example. Directors do not need to become technologists, but they do need enough understanding to ask informed questions about risk, ethics, data, accountability and return on investment. Cyber security and data governance present a similar challenge. These issues now sit firmly within board accountability. Scenario planning, crisis preparedness and understanding where the organisation’s exposures lie are no longer occasional agenda items. They are part of the board’s regular rhythm. Renewal cannot wait for a vacancy Strong board renewal starts with future strategy. What capabilities will be required over the next five to ten years? Which risks will become more material? Where does the board need deeper commercial, functional or sector experience? Which perspectives may be missing? These questions are more useful than simply asking whose term is ending next. The most effective boards are moving beyond static skills matrices and periodic succession discussions. They are treating board composition as a dynamic capability plan that evolves alongside the organisation. They are refreshing skills matrices against future strategy, building learning agendas across AI, cyber, ESG, risk and geopolitics, reviewing committee structures and linking succession to capability rather than tenure alone. They are also paying closer attention to board dynamics. A technically capable board can still underperform when trust is low, challenge is poorly handled or directors struggle to work together under pressure. Constructive challenge, sound judgement and the ability to listen, learn and adapt are central to effective governance. The briefs are changing Across Derwent’s Board Practice, we are seeing more mandates where recent sector and functional experience is a primary driver of selection. Boards are seeking contemporary expertise in areas including technology and AI governance, audit and risk, renewables and infrastructure, capital allocation and mergers and acquisitions. The profile of who is considered “board-ready” is therefore broadening. Traditional governance experience remains valuable, but boards increasingly need directors who bring current knowledge, diverse perspectives and the ability to contribute to new and fast-moving conversations. Board search and succession planning are not simply about filling a vacant seat. They are about building a board that is ready for the future of the organisation. The strongest boards will be those that renew with intent – bringing together the experience, behaviours and perspectives required not only for today’s agenda, but for the decade ahead. ___________________________________________________________________________ If you're reviewing your board's composition, capability, or succession planning, reach out to Michelle Gardiner , Managing Partner – Board Practice, or contact us here . We'd welcome the conversation. Derwent brings together executive search, interim solutions, and board search, partnering with your organisation to find and connect the right high-impact talent to support your leadership needs, now and into the future.
By Lindsay Every May 25, 2026
Every leader in the room on Tuesday 5 May had something in common: they are being asked to guide their organisations through a transformation they are still learning to understand themselves. That shared reality – not a technology problem, but a leadership one – set the tone for our AI & The People breakfast in Melbourne, where senior executives gathered to examine what AI transformation actually requires of organisations, their people functions, and their leaders. The internet took decades to reshape business. AI is compressing similar changes into years, sometimes months, and waiting for certainty is not an option. We were privileged to have Peter Tonagh and Jenny Bryant join us as guest speakers – both navigating this transformation firsthand, not observing it from a distance. Five themes shaped the conversation. This is a leadership moment – not a technology decision AI is not primarily a question of which tools to buy. It is a question of how value gets created in an organisation, and who takes responsibility for leading that shift. The organisations pulling ahead are not the ones that have AI figured out – they are the ones learning to experiment intelligently while others hesitate. The most effective leaders are approaching this as conductors of human-AI teams: setting direction, making judgement calls, and ensuring AI amplifies their team's capabilities rather than displacing their critical thinking. That requires adaptive leadership, evolving cultural awareness, and a genuine commitment to bringing people with them through the change. This also reframes where accountability sits within organisations. AI transformation is not an IT project. It is a workforce capability shift – which means HR, learning and development, and operational leaders need to be at the centre of it. Adoption is the constraint – not capability When senior leaders use AI visibly in their own work – for writing, analysis, and decision-making – adoption accelerates across the organisation. Where leaders delegate it to an innovation team, uptake stalls. The tone is set from the top. AI capability is advancing well ahead of organisational uptake. Most businesses already have access to powerful tools but are significantly underutilising them. The gap is not about access or functionality – it is about behaviour, confidence, and whether AI has been genuinely embedded into daily workflows. Many organisations are still treating AI as a procurement decision when it is, in reality, a usage problem. When AI tools are positioned as specialist or optional, adoption stays low and uneven. When they are treated as standard infrastructure – available to everyone, expected to be used, as commonplace as email – adoption normalises quickly. The organisation that emerges looks different As individuals become more capable with AI support, the rationale for traditional management layers is shifting. Where a manager's primary function has been information aggregation and reporting – and AI can do much of that work – the case for that layer weakens. This does not mean fewer leaders. It means leaders operating with broader remits, and decision-making moving closer to the front line. The nature of the work itself is changing too. As AI absorbs routine, process-driven tasks, roles are becoming more focused on judgement, problem definition, creativity, and communication. That shift is not straightforward – the cognitive load on people can increase, and organisations need to be realistic about supporting teams through it. As AI tools become widely available, competitive advantage is shifting to how deeply they are integrated with internal data, knowledge systems, and the specific context of the business. The proprietary knowledge organisations hold becomes more valuable, not less, when AI is properly grounded in it. That grounding requires deliberate effort and consideration – providing AI with the context of the organisation's actual situation, its people, its way of working. The organisations doing this well are building human intelligence into their models, not just deploying generic tools and expecting meaningful results. Beyond organisational structure, AI is also changing how people functions operate in practice. Leaders are using AI to support coaching conversations, sharpen performance management, and improve the quality of feedback to their teams. Used well, AI does not replace those human interactions – it helps leaders show up better in them. Build broadly before you narrow Rather than concentrating effort on a small number of high-impact use cases, the organisations making the most progress are enabling broad, distributed adoption. Hundreds of small improvements across individuals and teams compound into significant productivity gains – individually modest, collectively meaningful. The practical approach: create the conditions for open experimentation without over-structuring it early. Allow teams to test different tools, discover what’s possible for the whole business through different perspectives, styles and responsibilities, share what they are learning, and let value emerge before formalising investment decisions. More mature organisations are beginning to focus on a small number of enterprise-wide priorities – customer experience, supply chain, and contact centres among them – but they arrived there through exploration, not by picking their bets upfront. Explore widely, then narrow with evidence. Talent strategies are evolving – and so is the baseline Hiring is shifting toward the attributes that enable individuals to keep pace with change: curiosity, critical thinking, learning agility, and resilience. Technical skills are increasingly table stakes. The differentiator is how quickly someone can learn, unlearn, and relearn as tools and roles continue to evolve. Building that capability internally is more scalable than chasing scarce external talent. The organisations making progress are treating AI literacy the way organisations treated digital literacy a decade ago – as a baseline expectation built through training, coaching, and everyday use, rather than a specialism held by a small number of experts. The conversation was a reminder that the leaders thriving through this period are not waiting for certainty. They are turning uncertainty into opportunity – experimenting intelligently, bringing their people on the journey with them, and building AI fluency from the inside out across the whole workforce. Our thanks to Lindsay Every , Group Managing Partner at Derwent, for hosting the morning, and to Peter and Jenny for sharing their experience and expertise with such honesty and depth. Continue the conversation For further insights or to explore how Derwent can support your organisation's approach to AI and workforce transformation, connect with our team at melbourne@derwentsearch.com.au To register your interest in future Derwent events, please reach out to us at events@derwentsearch.com.au .
More Posts