
The Culture Playbook Is Broken. CXOs Must Take The Wheel Now.
Shujaat Ahmad Speaking On Stage
For years, leaders have been told to pay attention to 'people and culture.' But in most organizations, that directive has quietly defaulted to human resources (HR).
The result? Culture has been treated as a support function—adjacent to business, not embedded within it. In a world that is increasingly defined by social, technological, and geopolitical disruption, this approach is no longer viable.
The playbook is outdated. And the assumptions behind it no longer hold.
It's time for CXOs to take direct responsibility for culture and people strategy—not as a matter of values, but as a matter of business viability.
For the past decade, HR leaders and influencers have told leaders to invest in engagement surveys, wellness programs, and diversity initiatives; months long processes to create purpose and value statements.
And yet, employee satisfaction remains elusive, turnover persists, and cultural misalignments continue to undermine organizational objectives.
Shujaat Ahmad, an expert in AI, Future of Work, and Cultural Transformations, notes, 'The traditional people and culture playbook has grown stale. What worked in predictable, stable environments breaks down amid rapid technological change, shifting societal expectations, and evolving workplace norms.'
He points to an uncomfortable truth: The command-and-control approach to organizational dynamics is colliding with the reality of a workforce that demands transparency, purpose, and agency.
The external environment only makes these challenges worse.
Employees no longer have hard boundaries between work and home lives. Political polarization seeps into workplace dynamics. Economic uncertainty creates tension between organizational needs and individual security. Social movements continue to transform expectations around equity, inclusion, and corporate citizenship.
In this new world of work, current people strategies don't just underperform—they actively backfire.
When confronted by culture challenges, executives rightly look to HR leaders for guidance. Leaders who bring impressively formatted dashboards and comprehensive reports that provide more confusion than clarity.
In short, data theatre.
In his experience, Ahmad has seen engagement scores, turnover metrics, and diversity statistics fill PowerPoint slides without answering the fundamental question: "What should we do differently? And why does it matter to our business?" Benchmarks and industry comparisons create the illusion of insight while obscuring the unique context of your organization —too much information, not enough actionable intelligence.
To move beyond data theater, executives must push for insights that connect to business outcomes. Rather than asking "How engaged are our employees?" demand to know "How does engagement impact our ability to innovate?"
Rob Hadley observes, 'I have seen companies implement a generic engagement survey such as Gallup, with the expectation that their managers have the ability to understand that data (which is light on context), and take action while running their businesses or functions. They simply aren't equipped in many cases.
If organizations are not executing regular interaction between managers and employees e.g., 1-on-1s or other opportunities to connect and communicate, no amount of engagement data is going to be helpful in building a better employee experience. Talking to people and building relationships is still the best engagement data.'
Leaders, instead of tracking time-to-hire, focus on the quality of decisions and their downstream effects on performance and culture.
This shift requires a new partnership with HR—one where executives clearly articulate their strategic questions and HR delivers targeted insights that inform decision-making. But it also demands that CXOs take responsibility for translating people data into cultural direction.
Hadley says, 'It's a mistake for business leaders to think they can outsource culture to HR. Many of the factors that drive employee engagement—like day-to-day operational clarity and team dynamics—are far beyond HR's scope. If your daily operations are chaotic, no HR program in the world can fix that.'
Whether you care about the work habits and expectations set by Gen Z employees or not, younger workers have fundamentally different values around transparency, authenticity, and purpose. And close behind them, Gen Alpha is developing perspectives shaped by even more profound technological and social change.
Gone are the days where the employees remained silent on dissatisfying and toxic workplaces.
These generations have no interest in silently enduring work cultures that don't prioritize their safety, dignity and well being. At the same time, they're not afraid of sharing their unfiltered reality on Discord, Reddit, and TikTok—creating a permanent, searchable record of your culture that no employer branding campaign can overcome.
They are 40% of the workforce and growing—more than that in your customer base. Their experiences at work are your brand. One viral post about toxic leadership can undo years of carefully crafted recruitment messaging.
Any leader serious about building a lasting brand has to contend with the incoming workforce.
Shujaat Ahmad is seeing this play out in real-time. AI is changing everything: how work is done, how skills are valued, and how companies are structured. This is not a future scenario—it's already here. AI is reshaping how businesses and careers are built. As he sees it, 'The biggest shift isn't just in productivity today—it's in unlocking innovation that wasn't possible with humans alone.'
Business strategy is shifting from taking the easy but failed path of predictable planning to the hard but impactful path of innovating amidst uncertainty. That means your culture—how your people collaborate, learn, and lead—has to shift too. And here's the truth: most leadership teams don't yet know how to hire, design, or upskill for this new environment.
Ahmad shares his foresight based on how AI has made it easier and faster to build a technology product and go to market. 'Companies will shrink their full-time workforce, relying on AI, marketplaces, and fractional talent. This shift will fuel a rise in smaller, more agile businesses disrupting traditional giants.'
Last month, Leslie Feinzaig, the CEO of Graham & Walker named this new trend - seed-strapping. She has seen more and more female founders, 'Raising one round and growing profitably from there.' With smaller, higher impact teams.
However, Ahmad makes a key callout for leaders. 'The fundamentals of good leadership and culture remain the same. AI isn't replacing human skills—it's reshaping what matters. Critical thinking, ethical decision-making, and empathy will be indispensable. The ability to ask the right questions and interpret AI-driven insights will separate leaders from followers.
In a world flooded with AI-generated output, authenticity and originality will be the ultimate differentiators. Storytelling and communication—translating complex insights into action—will be a game-changer. Leadership and collaboration will matter more than ever. AI can crunch data, but only humans can inspire teams, build trust, and drive meaningful change.'
Ahmad believes that AI can be your strategic culture advisor—giving you the signals that matter and cutting through the noise. But AI only works if your organization is truly data-oriented—measuring outcomes, not activities.
Culture is no longer a downstream concern—it is a strategic differentiator. It determines whether your organization will attract top talent, adapt to disruption, and retain customer trust in a high-transparency era.
Chris Powell, CEO of Talmetrix, with decades supporting CXOs agrees - 'Culture isn't decor—it's the code. It drives decisions, power, and performance. Transformation means recoding the patterns that run the place.'
The organizations that lead the next decade will not be defined by their technology alone, but by the cultures they build to support innovation, inclusion, and agility.
It's time for the C-suite to lead that effort.
Not beside the business strategy. But at the very heart of it.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
3 Warning Signs That It's Time to Sell Cardano
Cardano's competitors are attracting more attention, capital, and talent. They're also getting more adoption and perhaps more favorable regulatory treatment. Its latest tech upgrades aren't exactly wowing the market. 10 stocks we like better than Cardano › Few investments age gracefully when the world around them speeds up. The same pressure applies in crypto. Builders, investors, and users do not wait politely for laggards to catch up; they migrate to speed, liquidity, and, most of all, excitement. That reality now confronts Cardano (CRYPTO: ADA), which was once celebrated for its emphasis on peer-reviewed research to advance its underlying technology, as well as for its deliberate pace of technical progress. Three red flags, in particular, suggest that the project risks permanent middle-of-the-pack status unless something changes quickly. Let's check out each of these warning signs in detail. In the crypto world, developers are the lifeblood of a blockchain. They build decentralized apps (dApps), protocols, and tools that generate utility, liquidity, and real-world adoption. A thriving developer ecosystem attracts users, capital, and other partners, creating a virtuous cycle that drives a chain's value and growth. Without them, even the most technically sound chain can remain a ghost town. In terms of developer activity in Cardano's ecosystem, it doesn't hold up very well against its chief competitors, Ethereum and Solana. Per Cryptometheus, a cryptocurrency data provider, Solana had 499 active developers, and Cardano had just 175 developers pushing updates for the week, down 33% from three months ago. Furthermore, developers flow toward concentrations of capital, and that capital is pooling elsewhere. Fidelity, a major asset manager, filed in March to list a Solana exchange-traded fund (ETF). Bloomberg now pegs the approval odds of that ETF at 90% for 2025, which would be an institutional seal of approval that no Cardano product enjoys. Meanwhile, Solana's total value locked (TVL) on its chain was nearly $12 billion in January and currently rests at around $8.6 billion. Cardano's TVL is just $331.6 million, down from $680.8 million in early December 2024. That means there's less real money parked on its chain. And when builders, money, and regulators all prefer the other options, it's a big problem. Blockchains tend to have technical constraints. Sometimes, those constraints are troublesome enough for users that the main engineers of the chain create big new modules or other solutions in an attempt to prevent the flight of disaffected investors, users, or ecosystem developers. The success or failure of those solutions is, thus, often a major factor in determining whether to invest in the chain's native token. And in Cardano's case, the record with successfully developing workarounds to the chain's issues isn't great, at least not in recent times. Cardano's Layer-2 (L2) system, Hydra, dazzled testers with a 1 million transactions-per-second (TPS) demo last December, implicitly promising to solve the issue of lethargic transaction times during periods of peak load. L2s like Hydra are designed to handle transactions off the main blockchain, reducing congestion and perhaps also fees while maintaining security and interoperability. But they only matter if users adopt them and volume grows. Otherwise, they're tech demos, not adoption drivers. Five months after launch, no major exchange, payment processor, or other project has committed to using Hydra beyond a pilot. Another solution, called Midnight, is a side chain, which means it's a parallel network intended for specialized features such as privacy, among others. Side chains can extend a blockchain's functionality by providing specialized services that don't burden the main chain. Midnight aims to attract institutional users who want confidential holding of assets on the chain, but so far, no major financial players have signed on, and no real user base exists. These technical marvels might eventually matter. But until developers, institutions, or users adopt them, they remain tantalizing but empty promises. And that's a big warning sign that Cardano is failing to match its development of capabilities to the features that are actually in demand. Crypto is a popularity contest masquerading as a set of technologies. On June 4, Cardano counted around 23,273 daily active addresses, whereas Solana cleared nearly 5 million in the same day. That gap widens whenever meme coin mania or non-fungible token (NFT) drops spark traffic spikes. Those are segments where Cardano barely registers, as its ecosystem is very sparse in both areas. Social chatter mirrors the numbers. Per data from Santiment, a crypto data aggregator, Cardano ranks far below Ethereum and Solana in terms of social media post volume, hinting that investor excitement has simply remained elsewhere. If users, developers, and institutions are not talking about Cardano now, why would they flock to it later? In other words, Cardano's investment thesis -- that academic rigor in the tech development process will eventually lead to late-bloomer dominance -- faces mounting counter-evidence. Unless Hydra suddenly wins real traffic or Midnight lands marquee clients, the token's upside may remain capped while the opportunity cost mounts. And there's just not much evidence to suggest that's happening, nor is there any reason to believe it will soon. Before you buy stock in Cardano, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Cardano wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $669,517!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $868,615!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 792% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 171% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 2, 2025 Alex Carchidi has positions in Ethereum and Solana. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Ethereum and Solana. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. 3 Warning Signs That It's Time to Sell Cardano was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
PepsiCo Inc: A Quiet Giant with More Firepower Than the Market Thinks
PepsiCo might not turn heads the way high-growth tech stocks do, but in the backdrop of inflation shocks, tightening monetary policy, and consumer uncertainty, it's the type of company that quietly keeps delivering. The market may not be giving it full credit, but underneath the surface, PepsiCo is a resilient cash-flow machine a diversified global operator with iconic brands and pricing power that's often underestimated. While competitors like Coca-Cola, Monster Beverage, and Keurig Dr Pepper dominate narrower categories or sport flashier growth stories, PepsiCo's strength lies in its balance across beverages and snacks, geographies and channels. PepsiCo's Q1 2025 earnings didn't cause a stir but that doesn't mean there's nothing to see. The company reported $18.25 billion in revenue, nudging up about 2.5% from a year ago. Most of that lift came from raising prices, not selling more. In fact, volume actually slipped by 2%, as shoppers, feeling the pinch from higher costs, started pulling back a bit. Core earnings per share ticked up to $1.58 just a 1% gain, but still in the black. The stronger U.S. dollar was a drag, trimming around 3% off the top and bottom lines. It's a recurring theme for PepsiCo, with so much of its sales happening outside North America. Frito-Lay North America continued to deliver, posting higher revenue and better margins. The gains came from adjusting product mix and trimming costs nothing flashy, just smart execution. Beverages didn't move the needle as much, but the segment held its ground. Demand for zero-sugar and health-focused drinks helped cushion slower volume trends. PepsiCo's dividend currently runs at $5.69 a share per year, giving it a yield of around 4.35% one of the highest among its peers. They've raised that payout every year for more than five decades. In 2024, they returned north of $8.5 billion to investors through dividends and buybacks not a flashy move, but consistent with how they've always handled capital. To get a sense of what the market thinks, it helps to see who owns the shares. When it comes to PepsiCo, it's mostly big-name institutional investors. Vanguard owns just under 9%. BlackRock's in for more than 8%. State Street? Over 4%. These aren't hedge funds chasing the next shiny thing they're the experienced institutional investors managing retirement plans, pensions, and endowments. This kind of backing doesn't happen by accident. It means the large, patient investors crowd sees PepsiCo as a reliable piece of the puzzle. Not exciting, maybe, but solid and in a shaky market, that counts for a lot. Now, flip to the inside. Executive ownership is low nothing unusual there for a company this size. CEO Ramon Laguarta and other top execs hold a minimal slice, mostly tied to equity compensation. Recent insider trades? Mostly pre-planned, automatic sales. No red flags. Name Hold Type Vanguard Group Inc 9.86% Institution BlackRock Inc 8.26% Institution State Street Corp 4.19% Institution JPMorgan Chase Co 2.58% Institution Geode Capital Management LLC 2.38% Institution Insider Ownership (e.g., CEO Ramon Laguarta) <1% Insider At first glance, PepsiCo's valuation may seem steep, especially relative to growth. But when placed next to its peers, a clearer picture starts to emerge. PepsiCo is currently trading at a forward P/E of 20.8, an EV/EBITDA of 16.2, and a price-to-sales ratio of 2.7. On the surface, those figures suggest a modest premium. But when you break it down, that premium is tied to a more diversified revenue model and better defensive positioning. Coca-Cola, for example, trades at a forward P/E of 21.2, an EV/EBITDA of 18.3, and a P/S ratio of 6.1 considerably higher in terms of sales multiple, despite a narrower product focus. Monster Beverage, the favorite among momentum investors of the sector, sports a P/E of 29.5, EV/EBITDA of 24.4, and a P/S north of 7.4. Keurig Dr Pepper comes in at a P/E of 19.1, an EV/EBITDA of 14.6, and a P/S of 3.2 more modest, but reflective of its smaller scale and regional concentration. What this tells us is that PepsiCo sits in a reasonable valuation relative to its strengths. It's not priced like a pure-play growth stock, but it's also not treated like a business that's stopped evolving. Its reflects its ability to weather storms and grow, modest growth, and consistent capital returns and compared to Coke's lofty sales multiple or Monster's dependence on one category, that's not a bad deal. Company P/E EV/EBITDA P/S PepsiCo 20.8 16.2 2.7 Coca-Cola 21.2 18.3 6.1 Monster 29.5 24.4 7.4 Keurig Dr Pepper 19.1 14.6 3.2 PepsiCo operates in a sector that's as saturated as it is scrutinized, and while it brings scale and diversification, the specific moves and strengths of its key competitors may be skewing investor sentiment and weighing on its valuation. Coca-Cola's 46%+ market share in carbonated soft drinks dwarfs Pepsi's \~25%, and its international dominance only widens that gap. Its highly integrated bottling network, deeper brand penetration, and global consistency make it a more "pure-play" beverage investment and that singular focus tends to earn it a valuation premium. Monster Beverage, meanwhile, controls about 40% of the U.S. energy drink market, operates with sky-high margins over 30%, and continues to expand globally. PepsiCo's energy portfolio Rockstar, Celsius, and other partners still hasn't cracked the top tier. That gap in profitability alone is a reason some growth investors lean toward MNST instead of the blended PepsiCo model. Keurig Dr Pepper is also playing a different game. With an EBITDA margin near 28% and a firm position in the market on the at-home beverage category through Keurig brewers, it's more nimble, more focused, and doesn't have the global FX drag that PepsiCo faces. Dividend strategy is another competitive signal. PepsiCo's forward yield of 4.35% is the highest among peers, backed by a 53-year streak of increases. Coca-Cola offers 2.83% with a 63-year streak, while Keurig Dr Pepper offers 2.73%. Monster doesn't pay a dividend at all. This not only positions PepsiCo as a stable income source, but highlights show its potential as a stable income generator may be compared to growth-focused peers. PepsiCo's business, while steady, has its share of pressure points. One of the most immediate challenges is tariff exposure. The company relies on soda concentrate imports from Ireland, now subject to a 10% tariff, and also faces a 25% import tax on aluminum both of which inflate production costs. In Q1 2025, PepsiCo lowered its full-year earnings guidance, citing these pressures directly. Consumer behavior is also shifting. Inflation-weary shoppers are trading down, cutting into volume even as prices rise. In Q1, organic volumes dropped 2% despite a 3% average pricing lift signaling that consumers are beginning to push back on price. Regulatory challenges are also bubbling up. The FDA is pushing to phase out several food dyes and additives used in products like Cheetos, which could require reformulations and carry additional R\&D and marketing costs. Currency risk remains a ongoing challenge. A stronger U.S. dollar trimmed roughly 3% from revenue and EPS growth last quarter. With over 40% of its sales coming from outside North America, FX volatility is a real constraint. Add in competitive pressure, rising interest rates, and the need for ongoing innovation and the road ahead, while manageable, is far from frictionless. PepsiCo isn't chasing headlines. It's not the flashiest stock in consumer staples, nor is it trying to be. What it does offer, though, is a rare combination of global scale, diversified revenue streams, and durable brand equity and right now, it may not be getting full credit for that. Competitors like Coca-Cola, Monster, and Keurig Dr Pepper each have clear advantages in focus, speed, or category dominance. But what PepsiCo brings is balance and that balance becomes more valuable when volatility creeps in. The risks are visible: tariffs, shifting consumer tastes, FX pressure, regulatory noise but the playbook to manage them is already in motion. If PepsiCo continues executing on cost controls, pivots faster toward health-conscious innovation, and leverages its international footprint smartly, the market's current hesitation could look like a missed opportunity in hindsight. This isn't a turnaround story or a moonshot growth play. It's a global consumer machine priced like a regional challenger. And that disconnect between performance and perception is where long-term value investors may want to start paying attention. This article first appeared on GuruFocus. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Farage: Yusuf made a mistake quitting but is back now
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage says party chairman Zia Yusuf made a 'mistake' by quitting, but has returned in a new role leading a UK Doge team. Yusuf resigned suddenly on social media but reversed his decision within 24 hours following talks with Farage. .