Latest news with #complexity
The Independent
4 days ago
- Business
- The Independent
The hidden cost of tech complexity – and what you can do about it
Freshworks is a Business Reporter client Most tech solutions promise simplicity but deliver chaos, costing time, decisions and connection – it's time for change. As companies grow, they often move fast. New markets, new customers, new demands. But growth tends to bring a flood of quick tech purchases – each solving a specific problem, each adding another layer. Before long, the very tools meant to enable speed begin to slow everything down. It's a familiar trap: complexity creeps in quietly. A duplicate process here, a siloed system there, and suddenly teams are misaligned, data is fragmented and performance suffers. Complexity is the enemy of scale As a tech leader with experience across the sector, I've seen this pattern repeat across industries and continents. Businesses of all sizes end up fighting the same invisible force: fragmentation. Teams operate from conflicting versions of the truth. Manual handoffs and makeshift integrations clog up workflows. And tech investments stall before delivering value. And it's not just operational. Fragmented systems slow down operations and obscure visibility. When your support desk, product analytics, customer database and financial systems can't communicate effectively, you're essentially making decisions without real insight. Take customer retention. If your support platform can't surface relevant in-app behaviour or billing anomalies, your team can't intervene at critical moments. That's not just a missed support ticket – it's a lost customer. Worse, it may signal dozens more if warning signs aren't shared across departments. Good intentions, bad outcomes Ironically, fragmentation often stems from good intentions. Departments adopt specialised tools to solve local challenges. But without a coherent architecture or integration strategy, organisations end up with tech stacks that resemble patchwork quilts and intelligent automation falls flat. It's what Stanford researchers Bob Sutton and Huggy Rao, authors of The Friction Project, call 'addition bias' – the instinct to add features, tools or steps instead of removing them. In their study of global brands, this tendency increased friction and slowed performance. Simplifiers, they found, often faced resistance, while adders, those who added complexity, were rewarded – even when performance suffered. Too often, organisations are sold bloated platforms packed with unused features, marketed as 'added value' but delivering the opposite. Implementations drag on for months, results take years, and the very tools meant to empower teams end up complicating their work. Meanwhile, the real cost is paid by employees, who now spend their time navigating systems rather than solving problems. AI only works if it's connected Artificial intelligence has enormous potential to accelerate business. But that promise breaks down fast without integration. Disconnected systems can't fuel automation and half-built workflows create more work – not less. But when applied strategically, AI delivers real results. Finance teams can analyse costs and optimise spending in real time. Support teams can use AI-powered agents to handle routine support tasks. Engineering can automate troubleshooting. HR can screen candidates more efficiently. And the payoff is clear: 98 per cent of employees are already getting time back in their workday thanks to AI – reinvesting it in higher-value efforts such as boosting productivity (71 per cent), coaching others (67 per cent) and tackling more creative or complex challenges (66 per cent). When AI is properly integrated across functions, it doesn't just streamline operations. It empowers people. Escape the cycle: a strategic path to uncomplicating systems The good news? It's possible to break the cycle. Here's how forward-thinking organisations are simplifying by design: Inventory everything. Map every tool across departments. You can't fix what you can't see. Use workflow automation to identify data gaps, redundancies and ownership. Prioritise integration. Evaluate platforms for open APIs and native integrations. Tools that don't integrate easily should raise red flags. Unify your data. Create a single source of truth for customer information – whether via a centralised platform or a modern data unification layer. Ensure every team works from shared insights. Designate integration leaders. Empower individuals or teams to connect departments, break silos and ensure systems integrate strategically, not reactively. Collaboration tools help align efforts. Think in platforms, not point solutions. Consolidate where it makes sense. Choose platforms that support multiple workflows – not only for current needs but also for future direction. Simplicity as a competitive edge Customer experiences are powered by the systems employees use every day. That's why tech leaders must focus on alignment, not just implementation. Sustainable speed doesn't come from scattered bursts of progress. It comes from unified momentum. In any context – business, productivity or daily operations – complexity breeds inefficiency, higher costs and slower decisions. Simplicity unlocks focus, clarity and results. For teams, unnecessary complexity causes stress and burnout. Simplicity fuels effectiveness. So the question leaders should be asking isn't whether they can afford to simplify. It's whether they can afford not to. At Freshworks, we believe simplicity isn't a sacrifice. It's a competitive edge. It's time to uncomplicate and get maximum value from your tech stack.
Forbes
19-05-2025
- Business
- Forbes
How AI Can Help Leaders Deal With Ever-Increasing Volatility
For some time now, leaders of organizations have been warned that they live in uncertain times and so need to be able to cope with volatility and complexity. Indeed, they are repeatedly told that in order to thrive they need to embrace such challenges. But it is one thing to deal with events and situations that — although they may be unpredictable and unique — are within the bounds of what might be if not exactly expected then not completely unforeseeable and quite another to handle things that can change from day to day and back again. Since the recent flurry of announcements from the Trump White House on tariffs and trade deals falls squarely into this category, leaders need to adopt fundamentally different mindsets than the ones that have served them until now. Sure, the pandemic accelerated a profound change in the way that many organizations work, while the invasion of Ukraine by Russia has forced a shift in European attitudes towards defence and security. But a world in which tariffs can be imposed on a company's goods or services one day only for them to be reduced, raised or even lifted entirely a few days later is something completely different. This is not something that that old corporate standby, scenario planning, is much use for. As a banker quoted in a recent Financial Times article on the issue said: 'The one scenario everyone seems to have forgotten to plan for is the one where all the scenarios are wrong.' Although all leaders — whether in politics, business or elsewhere — still seem to think that those they lead require something akin to certainty from them, it seems self-evident that the opposite is true. With so many unpredictable things happening at once, how can leaders expect, and be expected, to have the answers? Instead, suggests Sharmla Chetty, CEO of Duke Corporate Education, which provides customised leadership programs around the world, leaders should be curious and asking questions. Pointing out that 'agility is no longer just about speed,' she adds that it is also about leaders listening and learning. They need to demonstrate authenticity and vulnerability while also encouraging trust. A more traditional response comes — inevitably perhaps — from the management consultancy McKinsey & Co. At its heart is one of the words of the moment — 'resilence.' (The concept is also in the vocabulary of Chetty, albeit more in the context of her overcoming serious challenges growing up and developing her career in South Africa.) In an article just published, the firm argues that this resilience is vital for success in a time of 'uncertainty and permacrisis' and that CEOs — as the only executives with the 'holistic perspective' required — must take the lead in investing in and building it. Among the five actions that it says CEOs must take to make their organizations stronger and less susceptible to shocks are embedding resilience in the company's vision so that there is an inextricable link between the organization's strategy and its levels of resilience and building 'full-body resilience' by paying attention to all the resilience dimensions in an organization and assessing how and where they compensate for and reinforce one another. McKinsey also advocates hiring 'gritty' individuals who show adaptable traits and behaviours. This all makes sense — to a degree. But it also seems like more of the same. In the view of Emiko Caerlewy-Smith, partner with Elixirr, which bills itself as the challenger management consultancy, the much faster pace and the requirement for leaders to be constantly connected is creating a situation that is not sustainable without moments of recovery and support from infrastructure. 'Human beings have a limited capacity to give energy,' she says. While she shares the McKinsey view that building strong partnerships with a diverse set of external stakeholders can help build resilience, she also sees a role for technology, specifically AI. Using it as a sort of business hub that keeps executives one step ahead almost in a predictive way could make a huge difference to how organisations are able to respond to a hyper-volatile economic climate. Caerlewy-Smith points to a recent project the consultancy recently carried out with a telecommunications company in the U.S. that wanted to use AI to modernise its sales and unlock new revenue. In just a few months, they built two custom AI models that cut sales representatives' research time from eight minutes to 45 seconds, effectively giving them instant access to critical insights, and streamlined prospecting to generate higher-quality leads and accelerate deal closures. 'Imagine multiplying that across the business,' she says of the 93% increase in productivity. But AI is not the only tool. Like the McKinsey authors, she sees strength in numbers at times like these and recommends organizations develop collaborative eco-systems. 'A platform-based business with a network of suppliers or partners is likely to be strong,' she adds, pointing out that younger leaders are more open-minded than their predecessors about collaboration. Businesses also need to look at how they organize themselves internally. With a clear need to be able to make decisions more quickly, they should move away from the production line approach to one more based on systems thinking. At the same time, they need to be dealing with risk more systematically. The recent cyber attacks on U.K. retailers such as Marks & Spencer and the Co-op should serve as a reminder that executives need to look at the issue in the round. In the end, though, it is — as nearly always — about the intersection of humans and technology. 'Leaders that are successful cannot rely on data,' says Caerlewy-Smith. 'They need to have experience.' That said, there is no denying the ability of AI to create data much more quickly than before and to use it to challenge the gut feelings on which executives used to rely.
Forbes
19-05-2025
- Forbes
5 Mental Models For Resilient Leadership In Times Of Change
Sometimes the road is unclear unless we're able to zoom out. We live in a world that won't sit still. Tech leaps weekly. Politics go Orwellian. The climate is boiling. The economy rolls like a slot machine. And still we're expected to lead, build, create in this context. That's why, especially in times of great change, many look to frameworks and methodologies to regain a sense of clarity. Recently, Nicolas Francisco Arroyo of the strategy and design firm Manyone shared a curated set of five mental models that, together, offer a powerful lens through which leaders can approach complexity, build resilience, and drive meaningful progress. 'I spent the last few months looking for concepts that help me not just cope, but think clearer, move smarter, and lead braver in this chaos,' said Arroyo. 'What I found isn't a framework. It's not a method. It's a mindset. A mental infrastructure. A collection of sharp lenses to see the mess and find ways through it.' So here are 5 ideas that won't fix the future, but they might just help you shape it. These are not rigid tools. They are conceptual anchors, drawn from systems theory, philosophy, and biology, that can help individuals and organizations evolve rather than simply endure. Coined by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, the idea of antifragility goes beyond resilience. Whereas resilient systems withstand shocks, antifragile ones actually grow stronger because of them. The classic metaphor is the immune system and how it must encounter stressors to adapt and build strength. As Arroyo puts it, 'In volatile times, fragility breaks, robustness resists but only antifragility learns and grows.' In a family office context, this means not shielding structures or successors from every potential threat, but rather designing governance and operations to adapt under pressure. Exposure to well-calibrated risks can be a form of long-term investment in capability. Chaos and instability are not always enemies. They are often the catalysts of the next evolution. From Chilean biologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela comes the concept of autopoiesis. This is the capacity of living systems to self-maintain, adapt, and evolve from within. Cut your skin, and it heals. No command needed. Applied to leadership, this mental model suggests the most resilient organizations are not top-down, but rather cellular. Think decentralized decision-making, empowered teams, and cultures that regenerate in response to change. For family offices transitioning between generations, building internal capacity and adaptability may matter more than legacy processes. Borrowed from complexity theory and championed by author Steven Johnson, the adjacent possible suggests that transformative innovation often comes from small, near-term combinations of existing elements. Those who are driving radical change don't try to predict the distant future with total certainty, but they continuously push the boundaries of what's possible by experimenting, iterating, and making connections between already existing ideas, in order to build momentum, learn from mistakes and incrementally steer change towards a desired direction. The same applies to individuals: the best way to future-proof yourself isn't by trying to guess what's the next big thing in a distant future , but by constantly expanding your own 'adjacent possible' through learning, new experiences, and interdisciplinary thinking. By exponentially growing your own curiosity towards the world. Consider the iPhone. It was not a leap into the unknown, but a brilliant recombination of known technologies. In business, especially during chaotic periods, the path forward may not require a moonshot but rather a door already ajar. In a world obsessed with the next big thing, the Lindy Effect tells us: don't just ask what's new, ask what's stood the test of time. According to Arroyo, 'The future isn't only built from what's next. It's also built on what refuses to die.' The longer an idea, practice, or institution has survived, the longer it likely will. Not everything new is better and not everything old is obsolete. Meditations by Marcus Aurelius remains a bestseller not because it's ancient, but because it's timeless. In wealth strategy, too, enduring principles such as stewardship, discipline, intergenerational perspective, often outlast fast-moving trends. Finally, from the world of sports psychology comes playing hurt. This is the act of showing up, performing, and leading despite setbacks or discomfort. Waiting for perfect timing or conditions is often fear in disguise. We keep telling ourselves we'll act when we feel ready. But readiness is a myth. The people who shape the future aren't the ones who wait, they're the ones who step in, imperfect and in motion. Play hurt. Or sit out. Those are the options. Think of Olympic gymnast Kerri Strug landing a gold-winning vault on an injured ankle. Or of countless entrepreneurs and principals making tough calls without all the data. True leadership isn't about pristine conditions. It's about stepping forward when it matters most. Mental resilience is doing the hard thing when it matters, not when it's easy. What unites these five mental models is their refusal to be passive. Each insists that strength, clarity, and progress are possible even in uncertainty. In the fragmented, opaque world of wealth and leadership, where long-term thinking meets constant change, these ideas offer more than comfort. They offer direction. As Arroyo puts it, 'We treat uncertainty like a glitch in the system. But it's the system. Nature evolves through randomness. Innovation comes from noise. Even your brain relies on prediction errors to learn.' We don't need a fixed map. We need a new way of seeing the terrain.
Forbes
09-05-2025
- Business
- Forbes
GOP Efforts To Downsize Trump's Tax Cuts Will Make Filing More Complicated
Restaurant server getty When policymakers' ambition to pass big tax cuts collides with the need to limit the cost, the inevitable loser is simplicity. People may get a tax cut, but they'll battle more paperwork to get it. Case in point: the struggles of congressional Republicans to downsize President Trump's many campaign tax promises. Congressional Republicans are straining to balance multiple, often-conflicting goals in a big 2025 tax bill. They want to extend the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and enact some form of Trump's ideas such as tax-free tips and overtime. But while the House and Senate budget frameworks allow trillions of dollars in largely-unfunded tax cuts, open-ended versions of Trump's plans would exceed even those targets. To strike a balance, GOP leaders are exploring ways to limit the costs. But that means adding complexity to an already confusing tax code. The result may be that getting some of Trump's proposed tax breaks may depend on how much tax-favored income you earn, how much money you make overall, and even what you do for a living. Complexifying means more work for taxpayers and their paid preparers. More than that, people lose confidence in tax laws they can't understand. Adding complexity will be especially challenging given the number of IRS employees fired by the Trump Administration and the many who have resigned in recent months. And new regulations also could run afoul of a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that limits the ability of federal agencies to interpret the law. Nonetheless, lawmakers are forging ahead with less costly, but more complicated versions of Trump's campaign promises. For example, Trump wants to make tips tax free. While he's never said how, the Tax Policy Center estimates that exempting all tips from income tax would reduce federal revenue by $6.5 billion in 2025 alone. To lower the cost, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) has introduced a limited version with multiple provisions that would make the law more complicated. For example: Lawmakers are doing the same with Trump's plan to exempt overtime from tax. As with tax-free tips idea, Trump has offered no details. However, the Yale Budget Lab estimated that one version could cost as much as $866 billion over 10 years To reduce that price tag, GOP lawmakers are exploring scaled-back, and presumably cheaper, versions. For example, Rep. Don Bacon (R-NE) has introduced a slimmed-down version of tax-free overtime that would allow workers to deduct OT pay, but only up to 20 percent of their other wages from the same employer. In addition, unmarried workers could take the deduction only if they make $100,000 or less in annual adjusted gross income while a married couple filing jointly would be eligible only if they make $200,000 or less. Because income cliffs like these generally are a bad idea (you get the full deduction if you make $100,000 but get nothing if you make $100,001), Congress likely would add some phase-outs to Bacon's bill. And that would make matters even more complicated. To limit gaming by workers who generally do not receive overtime pay, Bacon would use the Fair Labor Standard Act of 1938 definition of overtime. That might prevent some workers and their employers from recategorizing regular wages as overtime but it brings its own set of complexities. Another version, proposed by Senator Roger Marshall (R-KN) and others, is somewhat different. Instead of a wage limit, it would cap the deduction to $10,000 for unmarried taxpayers and $20,000 for couples. It includes income limits similar to Bacon's, but with phase-outs. Marshall's bill also creates its own definition of overtime which would require more new rules and inevitably exclude some workers from the tax break. Even with these limitations, lawmakers likely are looking at cutting taxes by roughly $4 trillion to $5 trillion over 10 years by extending the individual provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, approving some version of Trump's proposals, and adding special interest provisions they'll need to win votes in the narrowly divided Congress. If Congress succeeds in shoehorning all these ideas into a single piece of legislation, some households will be happy to get a lower tax bill. But they may not be so pleased when they first have to sort through a complicated set of rules to figure out how much of a tax break they get. Or perhaps learn they are not eligible for the new tax benefits at all.
