Organizational Change Leadership

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗮𝗻𝗸 𝗼𝗳 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗮𝗿 𝗼𝗻 𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝘀𝘂𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻. They have moved from guidance to governance. From principles to board-level expectations. The PRA's new consultation paper proposed a change in climate risk governance for the UK financial system. These recommendations are long overdue. This is what's being proposed: 🔸 𝗚𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗶𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗲𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱. Boards and senior management are now 𝙚𝙭𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙚𝙙 to 𝘰𝘸𝘯 climate risk, embedding it into governance structures, risk appetites, and strategic oversight. 🔸 𝗦𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼 𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘀𝗶𝘀 is no longer a one-off compliance exercise. It must now be conducted 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺, feeding directly into strategic decisions and risk appetites. That includes 𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴—a powerful tool that forces institutions to confront their most vulnerable assumptions. 🔸 𝗗𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗾𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴. Expect more scrutiny of internal datasets, risk models, and how disclosures align with real-world exposures and transition plans. 🔸 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗽𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗲. The PRA's expectations must now be 𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘰𝘳𝘦𝘥 to a firm's exposure and complexity. That means more explicit justifications for methodology, sharper risk differentiation, and a more active approach to applying proportionality—not less responsibility, but smarter allocation. 🔸 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗥𝗔 𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗴𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀—from the Basel Committee to the IAIS and beyond. This means the bar is rising in the UK and across the global financial system. 𝗠𝘆 𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲 Recent studies indicate that financial institutions may underestimate climate-related losses by as much as 70%, highlighting the urgency for more robust risk assessment frameworks. By embedding climate considerations into core supervisory frameworks, the BoE acknowledges that climate risk is not a peripheral concern but a central financial stability issue. This proactive approach strengthens the resilience of the UK's economic system and sets a precedent for integrating climate risk into strategic decision-making globally. Please respond to the consultation here: https://lnkd.in/ewQWiCQe _____________ 𝘛𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘺 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘵𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘥, 𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘭 𝘧𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘭𝘪𝘬𝘦 𝘰𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘵. 𝘓𝘪𝘯𝘬𝘦𝘥𝘐𝘯 𝘱𝘶𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩. 𝘍𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸 𝘮𝘦 𝘰𝘯 𝘓𝘪𝘯𝘬𝘦𝘥𝘐𝘯: Scott Kelly

Sustainable Leadership 🔄 In a business landscape marked by systemic risks like climate change, social inequality, and economic volatility, leadership cannot be business as usual. Drawing on research from the University of Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership, it’s clear that leadership for a sustainable future must be reimagined as a dynamic, collective process that is purpose-driven and context-specific. This aligns closely with the need to navigate the complexity of modern challenges that impact both people and planet. The framework identifies five pillars that should guide business leaders today: a clear Purpose that goes beyond profit to contribute to societal well-being; Connected leadership that navigates complex interdependencies; Courageous decision-making based on ethical imperatives; Collaborative alliances that extend across sectors; and Creative approaches that drive innovation for sustainability. These pillars align with business strategies that not only contribute to competitive advantage but also help in risk mitigation by understanding the interconnected nature of societal, environmental, and economic factors. Corporate leaders who embed these principles into their strategies are better positioned to navigate emerging risks and capitalize on opportunities. This shift also addresses broader issues of global sustainability and social responsibility, providing a competitive edge in a market that increasingly values sustainable practices and governance. This framework offers concrete, actionable steps for businesses that aim to align their leadership models with the realities of our interconnected world. Leadership in this era must be collective, agile, and attuned to the pressing needs of both people and planet. #leadership #sustainable #sustainability #purpose #impact #esg #innovation #climatechange #collaboration

Many organizations spend time and money on brand marketing, not realizing that one of the biggest threats to their brand is the toxic individuals they keep and protect. When employees come forward or raise the flag on unethical workplace behaviors, a practice many leaders and HR departments adopt is to try to downplay the problem or silence the employee. They do so to protect leadership and the organization's reputation. While these tactics might appear to work to "contain the problem" in the short run, they are not effective down the road. The problem is not with the employees raising the flag of unethical behavior but with the people committing these behaviors within the organization. Toxic individuals do much human damage within organizations. It is impossible to deal with human damage by trying to camouflage a problem and make it look as though the target is the perpetrator. An organization is made of humans. When toxic behaviors are present and tolerated, humans can see and feel them as targets and as bystanders. This will affect their well-being and their motivation to work and stay with the organization, and it will affect their performance. Employees, as humans, are connected; when some are suffering, and the systems in place to protect them are inefficient, they lose trust in leadership and their organization. When employees trust that leadership and the organization want what is best for their employees, invest in their well-being, and are ready to act to protect them and live up to their organizational values, they want to invest in their work and their organization's success. Without trust, there is no emotional engagement; this leads to quiet quitting and turnover. When individuals are not held accountable for their unethical actions, they will keep repeating the same toxic behavior, hurting employees and, inevitably, the organization. Ignoring, hiding, or justifying unacceptable, unethical behaviors in the workplace will only increase the risk of recidivism by the perpetrator and others. We need organizations that genuinely care about their employees and walk the talk regarding creating safe workplaces. Dealing with toxic individuals takes courage and determination. While it might seem easier to ignore problems or blame targets and whistleblowers, these "solutions" are a trap, as they give more power to bullies and fraudsters. These individuals don't care about the organization and its employees; they only care about gaining power, control, and money. They will not hesitate to hurt the organization's reputation if they feel it can help them achieve their personal goals. Protecting them may seem like the "safest" solution; however, when organizations protect toxic individuals, no one is safe, including leaders and the organization's reputation. Creating positive and safe workplaces starts with dealing with unethical behavior and making perpetrators accountable. Take care of yourself and the people around you 💗

The urgency of our planetary crises demands strong and principled leadership across governments, sectors, and by individuals, including across health care supply chains. We explore how planetary health leadership can drive climate action across pharmaceutical supply chains in our latest publication: "Planetary health leadership to drive climate action across pharmaceutical supply chains: insights from qualitative research and a call to action" Pharmaceutical supply chains are responsible for up to 55% of healthcare-related greenhouse gas emissions, yet climate action in this space remains fragmented and insufficient. Our qualitative research, based on interviews with industry and health system stakeholders, identifies structural and conceptual constraints impeding climate action. We argue that planetary health leadership, by individuals and organisations across pharmaceutical supply chains, can help overcome these barriers, and catalyse climate action. This leadership can: - Reform health care delivery, and the role of pharmaceuticals, to focus on prevention, promotion, and non-pharmaceutical interventions - Mobilise collective action across a fragmented industry - Challenge entrenched systems that delay decarbonisation This is a call to action for those in pharma, health systems, and policy to rethink leadership in the era of climate crisis. Read the full paper in BMJ Leader here: https://lnkd.in/eje6pA8N With thanks to co-authors Professor Liz Breen, Sietse Wieringa, and Sara Shaw. #PlanetaryHealth #Pharmaceuticals #ClimateAction #HealthcareSustainability #Leadership #SupplyChains

#Climatechange presents both risks and opportunities for businesses. For decision makers, knowing where and how to start is the first step. This brand new guide, written by Deloitte in collaboration with the World Economic Forum, explores the role that Chairs, Non-Executive Directors and Boards must play to guide their organisations toward #sustainable practices. It’s a comprehensive framework designed to help business leaders to navigate the complexities of climate change response, and emphasises the importance of integrating climate considerations into Board discussions, setting clear targets and ensuring accountability. The guide is full of useful insights, case studies and considered guidance that’s applicable for all organisations – a must read for Chairs and NEDs! #decarbonisation #boards #climatetransition #Deloitte #WEF Rebekah Cheney John O'Brien Tom Imbesi Junko Watanabe Dennis Chow

🤝 No single leader, company, or sector can solve the sustainability challenge alone. This realization has become central to my thinking—and to how we approach leadership development. The most effective sustainability leaders I've studied share a common trait: they think in systems and build coalitions. 🌐 Consider Sam Baker's work at Business Declares, mobilizing thousands of businesses for climate action 🌱. Or Catherine Howarth OBE at ShareAction, orchestrating shareholder activism to drive corporate change 📈. These leaders understand that sustainable transformation requires collective action. Yet traditional leadership development often focuses on individual capabilities. We've designed our SLCR course at London Business School differently, emphasizing: 🎯 Stakeholder mapping and engagement strategies 🤝 Coalition-building across sectors and industries 💪 Influence without authority in complex systems 📢 Narrative change and movement building The 2025 refresh includes new case studies and expert interviews that showcase this systems approach in action—from international expansion challenges at Berghaus Ltd 🏔️ to circular economy transformation at Tarkett ♻️. Because the sustainability leaders we need aren't just individual change agents—they're system architects. 🏗️ Ready to develop your systems leadership capabilities? 🚀 👉 https://lnkd.in/eDtfEEsp 🤔 What coalitions are you building to drive sustainable change in your context? #SystemsThinking #CollectiveAction #SustainableTransformation #LeadershipImpact

The riddle every leader should be forced to answer “You cannot keep me until you have given me. What am I?” Answer: YOUR WORD. It’s not a trick question. It’s the foundation of leadership. & yet—somehow—it still feels like a gotcha moment for a lot of leaders. Because here’s the truth bomb: You don’t “keep your word” retroactively. You give it. Then you honor it. That’s the deal. But somewhere along the journey from the corner desk to the corner office, a few folks start treating their word like a PR campaign: • All sparkle, no spine. • All vision, no vigilance. • All "We got this," until the pressure hits—& suddenly, you got nothing. & the team? Oh, they notice. They always notice. They're just too payroll-attached to say it out loud. So instead... • They update their CVs. • Their trust quietly evaporates. • & your once-legendary culture? It starts to rot. From the inside out. Silently. Thoroughly. Why does this happen? Because somewhere, the leader started believing the myth that intentions speak louder than actions. (They don’t. They whisper. Actions scream.) 📚 Let’s talk science. In a 2023 HBR study, researchers found that when leaders break even minor commitments, team #trust declines 39% faster than when no commitment was made at all. Why? Because it’s not just a failure of follow-through—it’s perceived as a failure of character. Even worse? According to a 2024 McKinsey survey on organizational health, “trust in leadership” ranked as the #1 predictor of employee retention, engagement & discretionary effort—beating out pay, flexibility, & even growth opportunities. In plain English? When you say you’ll do something… & don’t? You don’t just lose a task. You lose people. If you can’t deliver, don’t commit. If you commit, then deliver like your leadership depends on it—because it does. In fact, here's your cheat sheet for leadership #credibility: • Say less. Mean more. • Promises are currency. Overspend, & your culture goes bankrupt. • You don’t inspire trust by saying the right things—you earn it by doing them when no one’s watching. The Fix? Start small. Start now. If you promised to show up on time—show up. If you said you’d circle back—circle back. If you told your team “I’ve got your back”—don’t duck when the heat comes. It’s not grand speeches that build loyalty. It’s consistency. ✅ A 2023 Deloitte Insights study found that leaders who consistently followed through on commitments were 2.4x more likely to lead high-performing teams. ✅ A 2022 ETB report also revealed that 78% of employees believe trust is built through “doing what you say you’ll do”—not inspirational keynotes, mission statements, or Monday pep talks. & here’s the kicker: when you get this right, your team starts giving you something far more powerful than compliance. They give you discretionary effort—the stuff no job description can demand & no KPI can measure. That’s when you know: You didn’t just give your word. You became it. #Leadership

🌍 Is Your Board Ready for the New Reality? Attitudes to ESG, climate, and sustainability have shifted dramatically. Today’s directors face rising climate disruptions, volatile regulations, and investors pulling in multiple directions — all with less certainty. Insights from a recent Chapter Zero France workshop reveal what’s working (and what’s not) in climate governance at the board level. 💡 Key takeaways from the article are summarised below and do read the full piece by Charlene Cranny CSIF through the link https://lnkd.in/dQsNNk_r ✅ Climate risk is financial risk — and part of directors’ legal duties. Boards must identify, assess, mitigate, and disclose it like any other risk. ✅ The business case matters. Inaction has costs — rising insurance, reputational hits, legal exposure — while action can unlock new investment and efficiencies. ✅ Many boards still lack clear climate governance structures, KPIs tied to performance, or integrated oversight. ✅ Culture is a hidden barrier: short-termism, fragmented ownership, and “climate fatigue” slow progress. ✅ Rising regulatory complexity (EU, US, global) isn’t an excuse for delay. Flexible systems are critical to change our pathway and adapt to new climate reality. ✅ Transition plans must be science-based, credible, and stress-tested. 🚀 Main priority actions for boards include: 📌 Putting climate & nature on the agenda regularly 📌 Demanding quantified risk & opportunity models 📌 Setting clear governance & accountability structures 📌 Building climate literacy across leadership 📌 Pushing for credible, science-based transition plans 📌 Staying ahead on regulation & reporting 📌 Driving cultural change, not just compliance Boards that proactively navigate these challenges can turn climate and broader sustainability agenda from a risk into a competitive advantage. Is your board ready? Let’s talk ✅ #Governance #ESG #ClimateRisk #BoardLeadership #Sustainability #CorporateStrategy

In our 20 years of experience, we have had a fair share of navigating organizational changes, and one thing that consistently stands out as a game-changer is trust in leadership. When leaders genuinely earn and maintain the trust of their teams, it can be the difference between a smooth transition and a rocky one. From our experience, trust isn’t just about having faith in a leader’s vision; it’s about believing they have the team’s best interests at heart. Here are a few key takeaways we’ve learned along the way:    1.   Transparency is Key: When leaders are open about the reasons behind change, it helps build a sense of understanding and purpose. I’ve seen firsthand how this can turn skepticism into support.    2.   Empowering Teams: Trusting leaders empower their teams to take ownership of change initiatives. This not only boosts morale but also ensures everyone is working towards a common goal. I’ve witnessed teams thrive when given the autonomy to drive change forward.    3.   Navigating Uncertainty: Change can be unsettling, but when teams trust their leaders, they’re more resilient in the face of uncertainty. I’ve seen teams weather storms because they knew their leaders were committed to guiding them through. In our experience, trust isn’t something you can force; it’s something that is earned over time through consistent actions and genuine communication. As leaders, we have the power to create an environment where trust flourishes, and that’s when real change happens. What are your experiences with trust in leadership during change? Let’s share some stories and insights! #ChangeManagement #LeadershipLessons #Trust #Teamwork #Resilience

AT&T's CEO just told 99,000 employees something few executives admit in public: We have consciously shifted away from loyalty. For half a century, corporations ran on a handshake deal: companies bet on people before they proved themselves, and people bet on companies before they proved themselves. John Stankey just announced that deal is over. His viral memo admitted: companies now collect commitment without giving it back. "Some of you may have started expecting an 'employment deal' rooted in loyalty," he wrote. "We have consciously shifted away from some of these elements." Wall Street is rewarding the honesty, the AT&T stock is up 46% over the last year. The power tax is what happens when companies collect full loyalty without paying any of their own. AT&T demands five-day office presence for "predictable collaboration." Complete cultural alignment with "market-based" priorities. Measurable contribution tracked through behavioral analytics. In return? A desk, a laptop, and the privilege of not being fired yet. This wasn't always possible. Companies used to bet on unproven people through training programs and job security. The promise of AI gave companies alternatives to humans. Market concentration gave them leverage. Economic uncertainty gave them cover. The Mercenary Response Meta offers $100M signing bonuses because culture can't retain talent when commitment is one-sided. Dell doubled their stock while employee satisfaction crashed. The result? A logical adaptation cycle eroding trust from the inside out: → Top performers sell to the highest bidder  → Everyone else builds exit strategies → Surveillance replaces trust Why It will Backfire: The power tax contains its own destruction. AI shrinks teams. That makes every remaining human exponentially more important. Exactly when the power tax teaches them not to care. The social fabric doesn't rebuild automatically. Once people learn commitment is extracted, not reciprocated, they stay guarded. Yet companies need this trust more than ever: 50% of consumer spending comes from a smaller group of earners. Companies can serve concentrated markets with fewer workers - but only if those workers are fully engaged, not just compliant. The power tax creates two paths: Path 1: Perfect extraction. Use leverage to demand everything while offering minimum viable employment. Path 2: Build reciprocal commitment. Use power to invest in people before they prove themselves. AT&T chose extraction. Stock up 46%, engagement down, organizational memory scarred. But power dynamics shift. When you need people to commit to uncertain outcomes, you can't train them that commitment is a one-way street. LegacyCos are perfecting extraction. The winners of the next decade will perfect reciprocity. (Full version with links and references sent to newsletter subscribers)