PURPOSE & IMPACT

Month: June 2026

Counter-programming Against Your Inner Critic

Many of us tend to be tough on ourselves, probably more than on others. This approach seems to intensify in corporate environments because of constant judgment scenarios. I noticed an interesting Ted talk, that brought out a personal experience journey, along with the related improvements in a light manner. In today’s world, the message seems very relevant to many people, with valuable food for reflection and application. Practicing the “loving-kindness” meditation statement seems valuable to experiment with and apply practically.

Here are some selected valuable notes from the talk.

* “If I wanted to be less of a jerk to other people, I needed to start by being less of a jerk to myself…”
* “All the ways in which I was torturing myself showed up in my relationships with other people. And as those relationships suffered, so did I.”
* Meditation statement while focusing on others – “May you be happy, may you be safe, may you be healthy, may you live with ease.”
* Start consciously counterprogramming against your inner critic.
* Research shows that the process of replacing your sadistic inner tyrant with a supportive inner coach, who has high standards but is not a jerk about it, makes you more likely to reach your goals.

Psychological Safety in Organizational AI Transformations

A recent IMD business school article highlights the importance of psychological safety in organizational AI transformation, based on related experiences, from Kameshwari Rao, Global Chief People Officer at international digital consulting firm Publicis Sapient. This also provides useful notes for leaders who are thinking about or working through AI related transformations.

These are selected notes from the article.

* Organizations need a psychologically safe environment for their employees to innovate and experiment.
* Unless employees feel psychologically safe, it is unrealistic to expect them to engage with, let alone embrace, the technology. Inevitably, user hesitation will impede organizational efforts to explore AI.
* Important to remember that “People’s identities are at stake”.
* Human intelligence has been evolving for hundreds of thousands of years, developing characteristics such as empathy, resilience, and judgment to adapt to a changing environment. The role of leaders is to remind people that they possess those irreplaceable human qualities.
* Requires businesses to commit to increased communication and support that considers each employee’s personal reaction to the technology and allows them to adapt at their own pace.

* Publicis Sapient focused on three simultaneous strands of AI change:
1. the shift to a mindset of curiosity rather than anxiety about AI,
2. building confidence, and
3. integrating AI tools into everyday jobs.

* “We wanted to begin the conversation by getting everybody to have a bit of fun with AI. It was about building familiarity.”
* The town hall was followed with a dedicated campaign, AI Habits, where the goal was to pique curiosity, with initiatives based on psychological research into habit formation.
* At the same time, Publicis Sapient prioritized experimentation, getting people to think about the skills and training they might need to make the most of AI. One useful approach here was gamification. 
* Note that companies should not see these three AI initiatives as one-and-done exercises: “At any given point, you will have people at different stages in all three areas – everyone’s change cycle is different.
* Leaders have framed AI as an ongoing learning journey.
* Listening, sharing – a range of listening tools that Publicis Sapient uses to understand whether employees are feeling confident in the workplace. Leaders, starting with the CEO, also serve as role models, share their own anxieties.
* No single initiative will create psychological safety around AI. Rather, it will take a spread of different, ongoing measures. 

Source: Publicis Sapient on AI: A three-step guide to psychological safety; IMD; June 8, 2026

Notes on Organisational Political Dynamics and the Concept of Dominant Coalition

I noticed some interesting, practical notes regarding ‘organisational political dynamics’, from the new book, The Age of HR. Since this was relatable from past experiences and valuable to reflect on, I thought of sharing. Have you been able to observe dominant coalitions in your organisations?


These notes are from Chapter 59 – To Be or Not to Be Part of the Dominant Coalition as the CHRO: Understanding the Political Dynamics of Your Organisation and How to Deal with Them, written by Dirk Buyens, Koen Dewettinck, and Silke Van Gansbeke


* It is helpful to recognise that politics and political behaviour are an inherent part of organisational life.
* In Darwinian terms, ‘survival of the fittest’ in this context often means those who are able to adapt best to the political environment are often the winners. 
* In executive committees, we once again observe striking differences in who truly has influence and who does not.

* The dominant coalition can be defined as the group of individuals who, relative to their peers, exert a disproportionate level of influence over organisational decisions. Every company contains employees who, over time, gravitate towards the centre of decision-making in the organisation.
* In practice, dominant coalitions are rarely secretive. Most employees are aware of who belongs to them, and very often it is functionally driven.

* For a CHRO, it is crucial to understand what we refer to as the paradox of the right strategy. The ‘right’ strategy is typically one chosen that delivers quick wins soon. Even if an alternative strategy might have produced superior long-term outcomes, this can never be proven. Challenging the dominant coalition on this basis is therefore futile and politically suicidal.

* The fundamental question CHROs must ask is: “How important is it for me to be part of the dominant coalition, and what price am I willing to pay?”
* Being part of the dominant coalition as a CHRO ensures that HR processes and policies are taken seriously when key decisions are made. The downside is that HR may be perceived as less neutral, undermining the role of the credible activist.
* Remaining outside the dominant coalition enhances perceived neutrality but risks HR initiatives being dismissed as mere exercises that aren’t taken seriously when it truly matters. 
* Ultimately, successfully sensing and navigating dominant coalitions requires strong political skills from the CHRO. 
* There must be a balance between the degree to which an organisation tolerates political behaviour and one’s own personal tolerance for it.
* Some CHROs are dismissed for being too naïve; others for being overly political. In all cases, dominant coalitions – and how CHROs engage with them – profoundly shape their careers. Purposeful self-management is therefore indispensable.
* Until CHROs navigate the political nature of organisations, they will continue to be limited in their impact. 

© 2026 Lead-Wise

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑