CEO Industry Insights

It’s amazing to see how the conversation around AI has evolved in the past year. In Davos last week, the discussions reflected the shift from the era of generative AI - models that write text and code - to agentic AI that can reason, plan, and take action. This shift brings immense potential to increase productivity and solve complex problems in the real world. As agent-based systems become more prevalent, the good news is I think we’ll see demand from enterprises and users that will drive the right behaviours regarding safety and security. Businesses will require guarantees that the systems they deploy are reliable and handle data securely. There will be a lot of commercial pressure on frontier AI providers to get this right, and it will be essential preparation for when bigger stakes come around with AGI. AGI will impact all of humanity. Currently, mechanisms for international coordination to realise its benefits and mitigate any potential risks are lagging behind the technology. We vitally need more dialogue between companies, governments, and civil society to ensure we get this transformative technology right. Ideally, as we approach AGI the best minds in the world would collaborate across disciplines - philosophers, social scientists and economists, as well as technologists - to figure out what we want from this technology and ensure all of humanity benefits from it. Today there is fear and reasonable concern around the impact of AI. It is incumbent on the industry to demonstrate the unequivocal good AI can do. Our work at Isomorphic Labs to design new drugs is an incredible example that builds on our pioneering breakthroughs with AlphaFold - but we need a lot more. AI has the potential to help us discover new materials, develop new clean energy sources and move us towards a post-scarcity world, all of which would dramatically improve the human condition. Our Google DeepMind Science team is leading the way on building AI tools to accelerate the pace of scientific discovery - like AlphaGenome, which was just released this week. I have spent my entire career on developing AI because I always believed it would usher in a new golden age of scientific discovery. I’ve been thinking about the technical risks for just as long, but I remain a big believer in human ingenuity and adaptability. If we approach building AI with the time and thoughtfulness it deserves, grounding our work rigorously in the scientific method, I am confident mitigating the technical risks is a tractable problem. There are profound questions to answer about the post-AGI world we want to build. It’s for us, as humanity, to write what happens next. It was great to discuss this and more when I was in Davos: https://lnkd.in/eGmag9Cs 

🌍 𝗖𝗘𝗢𝘀 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝗻𝗼 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗮𝗳𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲. The risks of a warming world and the transition to a low-carbon economy are no longer future threats—they’re here today. The question is, will your company adapt and thrive or fall behind? A great new report from the World Economic Forum and the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) explores the costs of climate change and the imperatives for leaders to succeed in a changing world. 📉 The cost of inaction is staggering: Businesses unprepared for climate impacts could lose up to 25% of EBITDA by 2050 due to physical risks. 💰 The opportunity is equally compelling: Companies that invest in adaptation and resilience now could see a return of up to $19 for every dollar spent (CDP data). 🔑 Four critical steps for climate risk readiness: 1️⃣ 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸𝘀 𝗮𝗰𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗶𝗻. 2️⃣ 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗼𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝘂𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲-𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗼𝗳 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀. 3️⃣ 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗹𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗴𝗿𝗼𝘄𝘁𝗵 𝗼𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗯𝘆 𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹𝘀. 4️⃣ 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗶𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗴𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗯𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁. For leaders who understand the stakes—and the opportunities—this is your chance to lead the way and ensure your business is on the right side of history. 💡 What steps is your company taking to manage climate risks and embrace green growth? I’d love to hear your insights. 📖 Explore the full report here: https://lnkd.in/de3Nn3n5 #climate #climaterisk #physicalrisk #ceo #sustainability

Want to know what's dominating CEO conversations? Here is the most recent data for Q3 2025 by Knud Lasse Lueth with IoT Analytics - Hot off the Press! 𝐊𝐞𝐲 𝐅𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬: • 𝐓𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐬 𝐒𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 #𝟏, 𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐒𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧: Mentions of tariffs appeared in 53% of earnings calls, down 28% from Q2. CEOs are no longer reacting in shock, they’re adapting with structured management strategies. • 𝐀𝐈 𝐚𝐭 𝐑𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐇𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐬 & 𝐀𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐜 𝐀𝐈 𝐑𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐅𝐚𝐬𝐭: AI was mentioned in 45% of calls (+23% QoQ). Agentic AI references climbed 40% QoQ, with companies like Goldman Sachs piloting AI agents for software development. MCP (Model Context Protocol) also gained attention, appearing in earnings calls for the first time. • 𝐃𝐚𝐭𝐚 𝐂𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 (𝐋𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲): Discussions surged back to 15% of calls, with demand outstripping supply. Microsoft and Prysmian noted capacity constraints, while CEOs flagged energy consumption as a major challenge. • 𝐑𝐨𝐛𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐬 (𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐇𝐮𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐨𝐢𝐝𝐬) 𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐩 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐩𝐨𝐭𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭: Robotics mentions grew 28% QoQ, with humanoids up 38%. Manufacturing leads the charge, 11% of companies in the sector discussed robotics as a growth engine. • 𝐃𝐞𝐜𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐌𝐚𝐜𝐫𝐨 𝐅𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐬: Mentions of uncertainty dropped 32% QoQ (42% of calls), and recession mentions collapsed by 81% QoQ to their lowest level this year. 𝐌𝐲 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞: The Q3 CEO agenda reveals a new normal: companies are adapting to tariffs instead of panicking, while AI (especially agentic AI) has shifted from hype to hands-on pilots. Data centers are the backbone of this digital push, but their energy footprint is a growing pain point. Robotics, particularly humanoids, are moving from sci-fi to boardroom reality. The macro storm clouds of uncertainty and recession seem to be clearing…for now. What stands out to me is the speed of adoption, CEOs aren’t waiting for perfect clarity; they’re experimenting in parallel across AI, robotics, and digital infrastructure. That makes governance and ROI tracking more critical than ever, without a clear framework, investments risk becoming fragmented or misaligned. 𝐌𝐲 𝐚𝐝𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞: Move quickly, but don’t skip the scaffolding. Build strong governance and ROI gates into your AI and robotics initiatives so you can scale the winners and cut the noise before it burns resources. 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭: https://lnkd.in/eQZAmuVg ******************************************* • Visit www.jeffwinterinsights.com for access to all my content and to stay current on Industry 4.0 and other cool tech trends • Ring the 🔔 for notifications!

AI can play a real role in addressing the capacity challenges facing construction, manufacturing, and infrastructure if public policies can drive this forward. Today, we released Autodesk's AI public policy recommendations alongside a video I recorded on responsible AI adoption with the Business Software Alliance. Governments can help accelerate AI adoption and digital transformation in these industries that are critical to economic growth. Our focus is on clear, practical steps policymakers can take now, including supporting digital design and construction in public infrastructure and manufacturing, fostering data sharing to solve public challenges, establishing risk-based AI guardrails and standards, and investing in workforce programs so people are equipped to use these technologies effectively. Getting this right requires balance. Public policy should enable innovation while ensuring AI is developed and deployed responsibly. Delaying action only makes it harder to put the right guardrails in place as AI adoption accelerates. I encourage you to watch the video and read our recommendations to see how thoughtful policy can help scale AI responsibly and expand capacity across the industries that build the world. https://lnkd.in/gYHA2TkJ

Sometimes, it’s the things hiding in plain sight that make the biggest difference. Europe is at an inflection point. In a world where geopolitical pressure, digital transformation, need for resilience and decarbonization are reshaping the rules, staying competitive means rethinking how we invest in infrastructure — not just how much. Yes, we need more capital. Our latest BCG research with Dansk Industri shows that Europe will require €12 trillion in infrastructure investment by 2040 — more than doubling the current spend from around €300B to €800B annually. But the real challenge isn’t just the money. It’s delivery. We need faster permitting, smarter coordination across borders, and a step-change in how public and private sectors work together. Because without fixing the machinery behind the scenes — execution, regulation, talent — even the best-funded plans will fall short. I’m excited to be working alongside Dansk Industri and my brilliant colleagues to help unlock this shift. The stakes are high. But so is the opportunity. Imagine a Europe where energy, transport and digital systems act as one seamless network rather than siloed national projects. Where cross‑border corridors are planned, permitted and built faster. Where private capital joins public ambition and skilled people are ready to deliver. I’m really excited to be working with Danish Industry, and with my brilliant colleagues at Boston Consulting Group (BCG), Esben Hegnsholt, Mogens Holm, Mikkel Krogsgaard, Trine Filtenborg de Nully on this important topic. Read more 👉 https://lnkd.in/ecHPC7X8 #Europe #Infrastructure #CompetitiveAdvantage #DeliveryExcellence #PublicPrivatePartnerships #SustainableGrowth #Coordination #RelatedPeopleAndOrgs Boston Consulting Group (BCG) Danish Industry European Commission

One of the biggest risk in markets lies in The Dispersion Trade. The Dispersion Trade involves buying volatility on single stocks constituting the index, and selling index volatility against it. The idea is to monetize diversification and low correlations. As long as single stocks become more and more uncorrelated, their individual volatility might remain high (you buy that) but the index volatility will keep coming down (you sell that) as low correlation amongst single stocks means less volatility at an index level. The amount of money chasing and monetizing the Dispersion Trade is very large. Large hedge funds often have multiple pods embarked in some version of this strategy, and they have been consistently making money for over a year now. Today, the cost to enter a Dispersion Trade is quite elevated. Investors are happy to pay a high price to enter this trade, effectively assuming that single stock correlation will stay low (e.g. we won’t see a rapid deleveraging event). The chart below shows how the 1-month implied correlation for SPX constituents is priced to be extremely low. Yet the Dispersion Trade keeps making money and keeps getting bigger. This is because despite paying a higher and higher price to enter the trade, realized correlations amongst SPX constituents has been virtually zero. But what happens if you have a deleveraging event / sharp sell-off? Single stocks correlations converge to 1 (e.g. they all sell off together), and chaos ensues. Do you think the Dispersion Trade is a big risk for markets? 👉 If you enjoyed this post, follow me (Alfonso Peccatiello) to make sure you don't miss my daily dose of macro analysis.

HR: We’re updating the manuals and organizing team events. CEO: I don’t care about manuals or happy hours. HR: What should we focus on? CEO: Build a talent engine. I don’t want just job posts. HR: More strategic hiring? CEO: I want early signals on skill gaps. I want a clear view of our future leaders. HR: Got it. CEO: Use exit data to learn. Use performance data to grow. Build your high performers, and hold everyone to a higher standard. HR: So… less process, more performance? CEO: Exactly. Link talent to revenue. Make HR a growth function, not just a support role. The lesson? CEOs don’t want HR to manage people. They want HR to build teams that drive growth. It's about business impact now, not process excellence.

VW wrapped 2024 with €325B in revenue and 9 million vehicle deliveries. But... Beneath these headline figures, the strategic challenge is clear. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘪𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘪𝘵𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧 𝘪𝘯 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭-𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦. Here's the headlines from FY24. 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘂𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 (1% YoY). But Operating profits are down 15%. ⤷ Driven by restructuring (€3bn cost), intense EV competition and rising fixed costs. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗿��𝗳𝗶𝘁 '𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗴𝗿𝗮𝘃𝗶𝘁𝘆' 𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 ↑  Impressive growth in South America (+11%) and North America (+6%). → Stable market in Europe. ↓  Decline in China, a critical market (-12%). 𝗖𝗼𝗿𝗲 Brand and 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 were stable, but the 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗴𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗲 and 𝗟𝘂𝘅𝘂𝗿𝘆 brands declined. (see 📌 comment for divisional performance ↓) 𝗘𝘂𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗮𝗻 𝗠𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲𝘀 with sluggish EV sales, compounded by reduced subsidies and heightened competition is putting further strain on profitability. 𝗔𝗴𝗴𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 in Germany aims to recapture profitability, targeting >€4bn in annual cost reductions through workforce reduction of 35k and wage freezes to 2030, leading to capacity adjustments of ~730k units (in Germany). 𝗥𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗲𝗱 𝗜𝗻𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗥𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼 with spending levels peaked in 2024, including €1.3bn investment related to the JV with Rivian and €21bn in R&D. The 2025-29 investment plan has been reduced to €165bn (from €180bn 2024-28). 𝗣𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗙𝗹𝗲𝘅𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆, with VW are embracing a pragmatic multi-path approach. 30 new models launching in 2025 across electric, hybrid and combustion platforms. This positions them to adapt to varying regional adoption rates (the right play I believe). 𝗔 𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗳𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵 𝘁𝗼 𝗖𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗮. VW are implementing a dedicated "In China, for China" strategy with targeted partnerships and NewCo to address the unique competitive dynamics of this critical market. 𝗟𝗼𝗼𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗮𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗱 ⤷ The 2025 guidance (5.5-6.5% operating margin, up to 5% revenue growth) reflects a company in transition - balancing short-term profitability pressures against investments in future capabilities. The big question for me is, 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘝𝘰𝘭𝘬𝘴𝘸𝘢𝘨𝘦𝘯 𝘢𝘨𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘦𝘯𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘵𝘰 "𝘥𝘰𝘥𝘨𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘬𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘴"? 2025 will be decisive in determining whether the transformation strategy can deliver. As industry leaders, how are you effectively balancing cost control with the imperative to innovate and adapt?

I’m thinking about my next startup, talking to lots of AI founders and VCs. Here’s what I’m seeing: This market moves brutally fast. No one has seen anything like this before. A startup announces a round, ships a product. Within weeks: five clones. One is cheaper. One is open source. Another is already running ads. Your launch becomes their lunch. Speed isn’t an advantage anymore. It seems like a liability unless you have real lock-in. What VCs are seeing: • Most GenAI startups are wrappers on public APIs with a slick UI • Founders claiming to be “infrastructure,” but it looks more like prompt templates • Pricing races to zero unless there’s a clear ROI • Frontier Labs are creeping into the application layer, threatening portfolio companies Some VCs are saying they feel like taking a pause as things are moving at a dizzying speed. What founders are running into: • POCs are easy to land; renewals are a struggle • Enterprise buyers are curious but security reviews and on-prem demands kill momentum • Competitors are offering high levels of customization because it’s easy to build • Many teams mistake early interest for product-market fit Founders look burned out. Even repeat Founders who are strong at execution worry about how the grounds keep shifting every time Sam Altman makes an announcement. Where real opportunities are showing up: • Products tied directly to revenue or cost savings (not vanity outputs) • Workflows that go end-to-end rather than surface-level automation • Systems that learn from customer behavior (not just respond to prompts) • Tools that integrate deeply into messy, real-world systems (e.g. CRMs, ERPs, emails, internal databases) The dream is pricing on performance but it’s tricky to do as it’s risky to eat the cost of API calls or your running your own infrastructure (thankfully, AWS & GCP provide credits). Most GenAI products seem to be flashy - “Mum, look what it can do.” The ones worth watching ask: “Did it work?” Lastly, I used to believe everyone should build in public and announce often. I’m starting to question that belief now. I see the merits of staying in stealth … Do I really want to compete against all of you? 😅 Anyway, I’m still exploring some ideas. I’m 100% going to do another startup. But I know what I’m not building. And that’s a start.

🚢 Launching the second edition of the Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation (GCMD)–Boston Consulting Group (BCG) Global Maritime Decarbonisation Survey! https://lnkd.in/g7cEsYkY When we released the inaugural survey in Spring 2023, our goal was to establish a baseline against which we could track progress year over year.📈 Much has shifted since then.🫨 The Russia–Ukraine conflict persists. The rule-based global order we once took for granted has come under strain. Geopolitical headwinds have intensified, and fresh tariff regimes have introduced new layers of trade uncertainty.💵 But it hasn’t been all bad for #shipping.😮💨 In April, the International Maritime Organization approved a historic global #emissions pricing framework for international shipping.🏁 It’s the clearest signal yet that pollution will no longer be free. And it marks a pivotal shift, repositioning shipping from laggard🐢 to front runner🐇 in the #decarbonisation race.🏃🏻♀️ Our latest survey, covering 114 shipowners and operators and supplemented by interviews with five key #bunkering ports, brings these macro shifts into sharper focus at the operational level.🔍 📈 Progress is evident: 77% now see net zero as a high strategic priority 60% have set net-zero targets, up from 54% 54% have #decarbonisation roadmaps, doubling the figure from two years ago 🛠️ Adoption is rising: Uptake of technical and operational #efficiency levers is uniformly up #Biofuels use has doubled #Methanol adoption has increased from 3% to 6% 🌍 #Ports are getting ready: Roadmaps are in place and initiatives are underway. But without strong demand signals for low-carbon #fuels and #carboncapture from shipping companies, large-scale #infrastructure investment remains constrained.😕 Our survey closed before the IMO’s emissions pricing framework was approved. Its adoption should strengthen those signals.👍🏻 This should give ports and other critical stakeholders more confidence to move. We hope this report helps benchmark where you stand, identify your next move, and recognise who’s already paving the way.🌟 Thank you, friends and partners who responded to our survey;🥰 your collective insights have given us a clearer and updated picture of where the sector stands on its decarbonisation journey. As a token of appreciation, we will be sending you a customised summary that includes comparison with peers and tailored takeaways.🫶🏻 Dr Sanjay C Kuttan, Calvin Khaing, Tan Jia Le, Dave Sivaprasad, Anand Veeraraghavan: thank you for your hard work in pulling off a comprehensive and informative report!❤️ Together, we are stronger; together, we can💪🏻 #GCMDreports