
Ravi Kumar's Vision: Leading Cognizant Through Uncertainty Into the AI-Powered Future
Growing up in India as the eldest of three brothers, Ravi Kumar didn't start out looking like leadership material. "I didn't do well in school. I was at the bottom of my class," he admits. "Normally, when you're at the bottom, you're good at something like sports or art. I wasn't good at anything." He lived in the shadow of his younger siblings—both brilliant students who went on to become doctors. "I was the elder, and I was known as their brother," Kumar says, the irony evident in his voice. "It wasn't a great thing."
Yet, the academic underachiever would go on to produce a remarkable turnaround, excelling in chemical engineering at Shivaji University, a solid but decidedly not elite state school. "Once I tasted success, the aspirations to punch above my weight grew," Kumar says. He eventually landed a coveted position at India's prestigious Bhabha Atomic Research Center (BARC). There, working alongside graduates of elite institutions, Kumar discovered his potential. "I didn't go to an IIT [Indian Institute of Technology], but I felt like, 'Wait a minute, I'm able to compete with these guys,'" he says.
Not that everyone agreed at the time. In 1992, Kumar won an award for young scientists named after "the Indian Oppenheimer," Dr. Homi Bhabha. "When I told my dad, he couldn't believe it," Kumar recalls. "He almost innocuously said, 'Can I see the certificate?'"
Today, that once-struggling student turned nuclear scientist runs a $36 billion global technology company with nearly 350,000 employees. In his office high in a gleaming tower in Manhattan's Hudson Yards development, Kumar greets visitors with a high-wattage smile. Dressed in an impeccably tailored suit, he gestures toward large windows that frame a panoramic view out towards the Hudson River—and, as he points out with amusement, his own apartment in the next tower over.
Cognizant at the Crossroads
Kumar inherited a company at an inflection point. Founded in 1994 as an in-house technology unit of Dun & Bradstreet, Cognizant had grown into a powerhouse in IT services by providing skilled technical labor in India—today, more than two-thirds of Cognizant's employees are based in India—to Western companies looking to outsource their technology operations. But after years of stellar growth, the company had hit turbulence. In the months before Kumar's arrival, its stock had declined nearly 40 percent off its pandemic peak.
The challenges weren't unique to Cognizant. The rise of AI threatened to upend decades-old business models. The entire IT services industry faced an existential question: What happens to a business built on human outsourcing when machines start writing code?
Kumar's response was characteristically bold. Just months after joining Cognizant (which has led to ongoing litigation with Infosys over trade secrets and anti-competition allegations by both companies), he committed $1 billion to AI initiatives—a massive bet for a company still working through organizational challenges. "Cognizant had a lull for a couple of years," Kumar acknowledges. "It was hard for somebody to say, 'As I'm fixing the ship, I'm going to invest $1 billion into the future.'"
The Outsider's Path
What makes Kumar's rise to CEO remarkable is how dramatically it diverges from those of most Indian executives who lead large global companies. High-profile CEOs of Indian ancestry often follow one of a few well-worn paths: They are either American-born to immigrant parents, American-educated (usually the privilege of quite wealthy families in India), graduates of the hyper-competitive IITs which have acceptance rates that make the Ivy League look like community colleges, or they work their way up the corporate ladder at a large multinational company, usually moving to the United States as younger adults. Kumar did none of these things.
Instead, Kumar forged his own way through the less-traveled route of nuclear science at BARC, a pivotal institution in India's recent history and a symbol of its scientific self-reliance and national ambition.
Working in this environment provided Kumar with an analytical framework that would underpin his entire career. "Science was slow and methodical, giving you a framework to apply yourself," he explains. This scientific grounding would shape his approach to business problems throughout his career, but he also discovered something else about science: "The pace of science was slower than the pace of technology."
That insight led Kumar to make a pivotal decision to shift from science to business. "I felt like if I had to make an impact, I had to be in a high-velocity world. So, I switched to technology, a high-velocity world." This led him to pursue an MBA and eventually a 20-year stint at Indian IT giant Infosys, where he rose to become president before taking the top job at Cognizant in 2023.
"Each one of us discovers ourselves," Kumar reflects. "I discovered myself pretty late." His early frustrations stemmed from an intense drive for excellence that wasn't yet finding its outlet. After exploring various roles, Kumar recognized his true strength lay in organizational leadership, particularly in businesses centered on human capital.
Gut, Data, Gut
Kumar may have left the laboratory behind, but he never abandoned his scientific mindset. It deeply influences his approach to business decisions through a framework he calls "gut, data, gut."
"I'm a believer that decision-making is about blending intuition, experience, and data. There is a formula in my head that I've applied to decision-making: You don't make a decision with less than 40 percent of the information needed. You make the decision when you have at most 70 percent of the information," Kumar explains. "Don't wait for a decision to be made beyond 70 percent of the data, because if you make that decision after 70 percent, you're already late. Intuition helps you ask the right questions, and data helps you validate it."
Srinivas Kamadi, who worked with Kumar at Infosys and now runs his own AI firm, AidenAI, has witnessed this decision-making framework firsthand. "He's always validating his hypothesis," Kamadi notes, describing how Kumar rigorously applies data to test his ideas. Rather than seeking consensus or popularity, "he goes about his job in a very clinical way," filtering through options methodically.
Kumar's $1 billion AI investment at Cognizant stands as perhaps the boldest application of this framework of combining scientific rigor with an intuitive leap—a high-stakes decision made when the company was still struggling to regain its footing and, coming before the ChatGPT-fueled AI boom had fully kicked in, when committing such resources to an emerging technology seemed risky to many observers. His conviction came partly from early signs that AI would transform software development—Cognizant's core business. "Some of the early experiments we did, including with Microsoft, [Amazon Web Services], and Google, gave me this feeling that this is going to come and conquer software development cycles and write code," he says.
The bet appears to be paying off. On a recent Cognizant earnings call, Kumar boasted that 20 percent of its code had been generated by AI.
The Networked CEO
"I spent my first 40 years of my life in India and the next 10 in the US," he says. This later-career transition provided a unique perspective on both business environments. "In those 40 years, I dealt with the world in India, which is a very chaotic country. It's a growing economy but very chaotic." A daily life of "navigating that heterogeneity, complexity, uncomfortable zones and ambiguity," he explains, built strengths that prepared him for leadership challenges.
Kumar points to a simple example: Indian roads. "If you drive a car in India, you can drive in any part of the world," he laughs. With more than 172,000 road fatalities in 2023 alone—approximately one death every three minutes—India's roads are a place where life-or-death decisions happen constantly. "Thriving in ambiguity, as I call it," Kumar says.
The easy part of being a visionary leader, Ravi Kumar says, is having a vision of what's to come. The harder part is "to make everybody believe something is coming that they don't see."
The easy part of being a visionary leader, Ravi Kumar says, is having a vision of what's to come. The harder part is "to make everybody believe something is coming that they don't see."
Marleen Moise
Kumar's leadership philosophy reflects another significant shift: from command-and-control to network-based organizational structures. "As organizations evolved in the digital age—I call it the golden age of technology—organizations went from hierarchical structures to network structures," he explains.
In this networked world, Kumar believes the art of persuasion is more important than one's position on an org chart. Rather than imposing directives from above, he emphasizes building support through influence and communication. "As a CEO, I've always said it's easy to see what is coming," he explains, because people are constantly bringing you information, "so you can see what's coming." The hard part of being a visionary leader is not coming up with a vision but rather figuring out how to inspire others to follow it. "The bigger virtue is to make everybody believe something is coming that they don't see," he explains.
Shrinivas Udatha, who worked with Kumar at Infosys for over 20 years, witnessed this persuasive leadership when Kumar spearheaded Infosys's U.S. expansion around 2018. "He can connect dots," Udatha observes, explaining how Kumar tailored his messaging to different stakeholders—highlighting long-term financial benefits when speaking with the CFO while emphasizing strategic client proximity when addressing the CEO.
At Cognizant, Kumar describes his role as balancing the needs of key constituencies: employees, clients, and investors. Rather than considering these groups in isolation or prioritizing them sequentially, he emphasizes a holistic approach. "Every decision has to be integrated across these three stakeholders," he says.
Kumar strives to create what he calls a "big small company" at Cognizant—an organization with enterprise-scale capabilities that maintains startup-like agility and entrepreneurial spirit. "For the fact that we have 350,000 employees, I'm amazed that everybody seems to know everybody," he says. "It's a very closely knit company."
This networked approach has also influenced Kumar's approach to innovation. Shortly after taking the helm at Cognizant, he launched an initiative called Bluebolt to drive grassroots innovation across the company. "Everybody believes innovation is done in a department," Kumar says, rejecting the conventional siloed approach of "innovation labs" and "chief innovation officers." "I mean, you are insulting innovation by saying it has to be in a department."
Instead, the Bluebolt program encourages all 350,000 Cognizant employees to think entrepreneurially about their work. So far, the initiative has generated over 300,000 ideas. "We have a central team which looks at these ideas, and we fund them with expertise, financial capital infrastructure so that we can prototype them and take it to clients," Kumar explains. "And in the process, you find the big idea as you keep looking for the small idea."
The AI Revolution
Cognizant was born during a period of global business expansion that was creating new technological needs. "As enterprises went global, they used technology to scale efficiently," Kumar explains. What that means, he says, is that instead of companies building their own "technology plumbing," as he calls it, "You wanted to focus on your own core and outsource the non-core." That outsourcing model formed the foundation of Cognizant's business for decades, but Kumar sees AI demanding a fundamentally different approach.
Now, with AI, Kumar sees an even more profound change: "The future of technology is every industry is going to be a tech industry. Software is the alchemy for every business." He describes AI's impact working along three vectors. The first is embracing AI's ability to write code to speed up an organization's technology development cycle. "The second vector is to enable AI and agentification in an enterprise. You integrate it with the workflows in a company." The third vector, which he considers the most fascinating, is using AI to "unlock new service pools. These are new business opportunities."
Cognizant office in Plano, Texas, USA.
Cognizant office in Plano, Texas, USA.
JHVEPhoto/Getty
As an example, Kumar cites a recent client visit with a medical device company. The CIO described how they sell compact home medical equipment, including dialysis machines previously available only in clinical settings. The primary users are typically seniors aged 65 and older who, despite having these devices at home, often struggle to operate them independently. Instead of enjoying the convenience of home care, "they buy these compact devices, and then go to a clinic and they get a nurse to help them."
Kumar recognized an opportunity: "I said, we can build a digital nurse for you as a service around the device. People can use the digital nurse to self-serve themselves."
The transformation Kumar envisions goes beyond simply expanding Cognizant's service offerings—it's about redrawing the boundaries between what companies consider core functions and what they're willing to entrust to partners. Insurance underwriting exemplifies this shift. Surya Gummadi, Cognizant's president of Americas, explains: "Underwriting is considered core for the insurance industry. Historically, they have kept underwriting within their wheelhouse." But AI is fundamentally altering this calculus by disaggregating the process into components where intelligent agents can handle specific functions.
The Human Element
Despite his focus on technology, Kumar places remarkable emphasis on the human aspects of leadership—particularly vulnerability and psychological safety. "I'm one of those people who will not only be vulnerable but make everybody around me comfortable to be vulnerable," he says.
His passion for Formula 1 is evident throughout his office space, where racing memorabilia dominates the décor—paintings of F1 cars adorn the walls. In the reception area, visitors can try their hand at a full-size simulator of the Aston Martin car his company sponsors.
During a recent gathering with CEOs at a Formula 1 race in Las Vegas, Kumar found himself rethinking conventional wisdom about vulnerability. "When I'm the CEO and say I don't know AI, people won't judge me because I'm in a position of strength," he reflects. The challenge is different for those with less power or status. "If a school graduate tells me they don't know how to put on a tie or write something," he says, "they are putting their jobs at stake." And there lies the value of making employees feel safe: "If you create a psychological safety net, they will punch above their weight," he says, becoming "your force multiplier because people are learning boldly without hesitation."
Workers working on laptops.
Workers working on laptops.
Abdul-Rafay Shaikh/Getty
This human-centered approach to leadership reveals a profound understanding of what will distinguish human contribution in the age of intelligent machines. As AI takes over more routine cognitive tasks, the premium on uniquely human capabilities—creativity, empathy, collaboration, ethical judgment—will only increase.
In Newsweek's AI Impact interview series with leading thinkers in the field, the importance of keeping humans in the loop with new AI tools has been a recurring theme. As Meta's chief AI scientist Yann LeCun told Newsweek, "AI will have a similar transformative effect on society as the printing press had in the 15th century." But crucially, the impact will be through "amplifying human intelligence, not replacing it."
Staying Hungry
For all his success, Kumar maintains the hunger that drove him to overcome his early academic struggles. This sometimes leads him to actively seek out uncomfortable situations, such as when he was invited to speak at a school in India while running a 25,000-person operation. When he got home, his wife, Amita, asked how it went. "Look, I didn't do well. I didn't feel like I hit it out of the park," Kumar recalls telling her. His wife's response: "So be it. Nobody's appraising you there. Why the hell are you worried? Move on." But Kumar couldn't let it go. "The next day, I went to my office. I kept calling schools," he says, inquiring whether they needed a guest speaker. He was determined to master this new challenge. "I wanted to do it again. I mean, I just wanted to beat it."
"I'm very hungry for learning," Kumar says simply. "Who cares whether I did well in school?" This willingness to acknowledge shortcomings while relentlessly working to overcome them forms the cornerstone of Kumar's approach to both personal growth and corporate leadership.
Leading a global technology giant into an uncertain future, Kumar—the once overlooked elder brother turned nuclear scientist turned global CEO—approaches the AI era with the quiet confidence of someone who has made a career of turning uncertainty into opportunity. The unconventional path that once made him an outsider may be precisely what equips him to lead in this new technological era.
With reporting by Katherine Fung, Lauren Giella and Oliver Staley
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Times
30 minutes ago
- New York Times
Latest G.O.P. Tax Proposal Would Sell Millions of Acres of Federal Land
Senate Republicans are resurrecting a plan to sell millions of acres of federal lands as part of President Trump's giant tax and spending bill, setting up a fight within the party. The proposal would require the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service to identify and sell between 2.2 million and 3.3 million acres of public lands across 11 Western states to build housing. Past efforts to auction off public land have enraged conservationists and have also proved contentious with some Republicans. A smaller proposal to sell around 500,000 acres of federal land in Utah and Nevada was stripped from the House version of the tax bill last month after opposition from Representative Ryan Zinke, Republican of Montana and a former interior secretary. 'This was my San Juan Hill; I do not support the widespread sale or transfer of public lands,' Mr. Zinke said last month. 'Once the land is sold, we will never get it back.' The new plan to sell public lands was included in draft legislation issued on Wednesday by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee that is part of Mr. Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' The draft envisions raising as much as $10 billion by selling land for housing in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming over the next five years. Notably, Mr. Zinke's home state of Montana was left off the list. Senator Mike Lee, the Utah Republican who leads the energy committee, said that the move would turn 'federal liabilities into taxpayer value, while making housing more affordable for hardworking American families.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The UK, Germany and Canada have slashed foreign aid this year, deepening damage done by US cuts, analysis shows
Western countries have slashed foreign aid budgets this year and reductions will steepen in 2026, with the United States, United Kingdom, Germany and Canada cutting the most, according to a new analysis from the Center for Global Development (CGD). The aid cuts will mean 'significant losses' for many developing nations, according to the analysis from the DC-based think tank, shared exclusively with CNN. Ethiopia is projected to lose the most aid in nominal terms, with Jordan, Afghanistan and the Democratic Republic of Congo also hit particularly hard. Smaller nations will also be hammered by the reduction in foreign aid, with Lesotho, Micronesia and Eswatini each losing around 50% of their aid. 'It's setting fire to the bold ambitions to solve poverty and transform developing countries,' Lee Crawfurd, one of the authors of the report, told CNN. 'It's some of the poorest, most fragile places in the world that are going to be hardest hit.' The analysis looked at projections of bilateral aid – money provided directly to another country rather than routed through multilateral organizations such as United Nations agencies or the World Bank – for 2025 and 2026. The US is projected to cut the most, with a projected 56% reduction compared to levels two years ago. The Trump administration's gutting of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) earlier this year has already left a hole in many international aid budgets, and several other Western nations are following suit rather than filling the void. 'A big, big chunk of overall cuts in the next couple of years are going to be from the US pulling out, rather than other countries. But these other countries are making things worse,' said Crawfurd, a senior research fellow at the CGD. The UK aid cuts are estimated to represent a roughly 39% reduction compared to 2023 levels of spending. Meanwhile, Germany is cutting about 27%, Canada 25% and France 19% of their international aid budgets. The true level of aid cuts remains unclear, as the Trump administration's proposed budget and other government proposals are still making their way through legislatures. But some funding cuts are almost guaranteed. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced in February that his government would increase the UK's defense spending by cutting its aid budget to 0.3% of gross national income in 2027, its lowest level since 1999. Many organizations and aid workers have raised alarm about European governments pitting aid budgets against defense spending. 'Cutting the already lean aid budget is a false economy and will only increase division and amounts to a betrayal of the world's most vulnerable people,' said Halima Begum, head of Oxfam GB. 'It is a false dichotomy to pit international cooperation to tackle poverty against national security interests in order to avoid tax increases.' Crawfurd said that bilateral aid is a 'really small part of government budgets' and the money for defense or security could be found elsewhere. 'It's a choice… it's a political choice,' he added. The think tank wrote in its analysis that 'one striking takeaway is that some countries are projected to lose large amounts of ODA (official development assistance) simply because of who their main donors are – while others are projected to lose very little' – a game of chance, with losses not matching up to the recipient country's needs. Yemen, for example, is projected to experience a 19% fall in its bilateral funding compared to 2023, while its 'comparable' neighbor country Somalia is projected to lose about 39%. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has also warned that multilateral aid cuts are threatening efforts to tackle 44 of the highest-priority, protracted humanitarian crises. As of April, only 11.9% of the funding for UN response plans had been covered. 'Every year, the UN has been helping more than 100 million people in the world as they go through the worst time of their lives in wars and disasters. But let's be clear: we won't reach the level of funding in 2025 that we've seen in previous years,' Anja Nitzsche, OCHA's chief of partnerships and resource mobilization told CNN in a statement. 'Vulnerable families are being left without food, clean water, healthcare, shelter or protection in places such as Sudan, Yemen, Ukraine, Myanmar and Afghanistan.' The CGD is urging Western donors to reallocate aid to the poorest countries to try to 'ensure that resources are directed to populations in greatest need.' Western countries also need to improve coordination to mitigate further damage, especially as they are withdrawing from countries receiving aid, the think tank said. In some countries, the cuts will change who the largest donor is, which 'can lead to major shifts in what gets funded and how,' according to the CGD. For example, Portugal will likely overtake the US in aid to Angola, and Japan is projected to overtake France in Egypt. 'A new lead donor may not continue the same programs' or may take time to get up and running, according to the analysis. Giving a larger share of aid to multilateral organizations can also help improve international cooperation and cut down on duplication of aid efforts. 'Coordination is an ongoing challenge,' Crawfurd told CNN. 'The easiest way to do that is just to fund big multilateral funds like the World Bank.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Italy says it needs at least 10 years to raise defence spending
ROME (Reuters) -Italy's Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani on Thursday said his country needs at least 10 years to raise defence spending and comply with new targets due to be agreed by NATO, adding that a deal on them could soon be reached. Italy is one of the defence spending laggards within the Western military alliance, having spent just 1.49% of gross domestic product last year against a current target of 2%, according to NATO data. Rome has said it would respect the 2% target in 2025, but mainly through a series of accounting changes which add to defence budget calculations items that were previously not included. "I believe that we can do good work with NATO and arrive at The Hague summit with an agreement ready beforehand, so that NATO can demonstrate its unity," Tajani said speaking alongside NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. The alliance leaders will meet in The Hague on June 24-25. Defence Minister Guido Crosetto, speaking in parliament, said it "is not possible" for Italy to meet U.S. requests for NATO allies to hike their defence budgets to 5% of GDP, and said an intermediate target of 3.5% "is not easy". Italy has limited room for spending, with its massive public debt projected to rise to almost 138% of GDP in 2026 before edging down the following year. "We are maintaining a conservative stance on the matter because we do not want other key investments, such as those on public health or social spending, to be affected", Crosetto said, adding that every government within NATO would need to discuss defence spending commitments with national parliaments.