Lead AI by Leading People

The loudest voices say AI will fix everything; the quieter truth is that behaviour, incentives, and trust decide whether it works at all. We sit down with CPO Brian Parkes to get past the noise and talk about what actually moves an organisation from AI theatre to real outcomes. 

Fear, imposter syndrome, and quarterly pressure make leaders cling to control, yet value shows up only when teams collaborate across silos and redesign workflows end to end.

TL;DR:

• Hype versus behavioural reality of AI
• Executive fear, imposter syndrome, and incentives
• Gap between C-suite intent and frontline capacity
• Reverse mentoring and small experiments
• Board-level questions on mission, analysts, and ethics
• Reframing AI as augmentation, not replacement

We dig into the gap between C-suite intent and frontline reality—where overloaded teams are asked to learn a “second job” just to keep up. Instead of rolling out tech first and patching people later, we map a different path: start with a precise problem, anchor it to mission, and assemble a cross-functional owner group with shared accountability. 

Reverse mentoring becomes a zero-budget unlock that lets senior leaders learn from practitioners already using AI. Small, time-boxed experiments replace 18-month slide decks. And partner selection shifts from brand comfort to proven speed and scars, because the right three-month pilot often beats the wrong long programme.

Brian also offers three board-level questions to stop “faster crap” before it starts: What problem are we solving and how does it align to mission? Which analyst concerns or customer pains does this address? What are the ethical and risk implications? 

The throughline is culture: trust enables decentralised decisions, and decentralised decisions let AI cut through politics and deliver across workflows. 

The final nudge is a reframe—treat AI like the jump from dial-up to broadband. It felt awkward until it didn’t. Respect the risks, invest in people as much as platforms, and let human intelligence amplify artificial intelligence. 

If this resonated, follow the show, share it with a colleague who’s wrestling with AI adoption, and leave a review to help others find it.

And if you need help implementing AI in your business then lets chat about getting you the help you need - https://calendly.com/kierangilmurray/executive-leadership-and-development

Chapters

• 0:00 Cutting Through AI Hype
• 0:39 Fear, Imposter Syndrome, And Cost
• 3:21 Leadership Gap Versus Org Reality
• 7:08 From Tech Project To Shared Mission
• 10:58 Decentralisation Versus Hierarchy
• 14:45 Trust, Culture, And Collective Ownership
• 18:15 Board-Level Questions And Ethics
• 21:18 Reframing AI And Closing

Transcript

Kieran Gilmurray: 0:03

There's a gamut of media, new experts and influencers claiming that AI is radically reshaping organizations, markets, roles, and businesses. And decrying your response to this is the needs that this is all contained within a digital transformation project. That's wrong at best, deceitful at worst. Most of the online content bombarding people is selling a dream or utopia, which may or may not exist. And there isn't enough content out there about human behavioral change that is required to actually enable AI to achieve its full potential. Today, expert CPO Brian Parks and I will try and put some sense and sensibility around AI and describe how AI is less of a technology issue and more of a leadership and a behavioral issue. Welcome, Brian.

Brian Parkes: 0:54

Thank you for having me, Karen. I'm looking forward to the conversation.

Kieran Gilmurray: 0:57

Well, let's dive in. We'll we'll make no one wait. Uh Brian, why do so many executives respond to AI with fear over control and what it does? What does that cost an actual organization?

Brian Parkes: 1:12

Yes, uh, so yeah, start with it, start with a big question. So you know, I think the main thing I see is, you know, it's a phrase you'll know, imposter syndrome, you know, fear of failure. Um, I I think a lot of senior executives uh you know realize that time frames are shorter. Um forecasting is getting harder to do, as we know. Um, AI is probably injecting steroids in into that perfect storm. Um, you know, it's tough and unforgiving at the top of corporate life, and I think people don't want to fail. Uh, I think that is one human reality that I see. You know, if you think about how these how these ladies and gentlemen are paid, there's a big bias towards action and speed and delivery and quarterly updates to analysts. You know, the hamster wheel is is constant that they're on. Um, but if you go on to the you know the the right side of the brain, you know, the the bit that's not task-focused and the bit that's more interested in creativity, uh, emotion, uh, which and fear, which is where it comes in. You know, we we fear things that we don't understand. And I I think um the people I coach will will say that to me once we establish rapport, um, which is that they're they're they're afraid of AI, they don't really understand it. Um, they're getting bombarded with lots of promises that it will transform their lives, but they just don't know where to start. Um and you know, like last week, the week before, MIT, which you'll know uh well, you know, you know, reminded us that about 90% of the AI implementations are are failing. Um, so that doesn't make people feel confident. So I think that um the fear of of messing up is is a definite reason why leaders kind of avoid it or or don't want to be associated with something that they think will will fail. Um you know, I I I find that people at the same time haven't read any case studies uh uh that are applicable to their sector or to their challenges. So I'm not sure how much people are helping themselves yet to kind of know where to even start with AI. So I think there's a fear of failure, uh, there's there's the the right brain fear. Um, a lot of executives don't want to delegate work to humans, never mind synthetic workers, right? Um, in terms of what it costs, uh you know, it's hard to put a number on the on the commercials. Um, every company's different, but you know, I do say to people that you know if they're not driving AI literacy uh and developing AI literacy in their organizations, their best people who probably are AI literate are probably going to walk and work somewhere else, right? And and like why shouldn't they? Why why shouldn't they work with like-minded people who want to use tools to improve you know their outputs? So I think there's like a there's an impact on talent which will cost um organizations, uh, because when you know when you should be building AI literacy, it could be actually declining. And that's the one way take it to irrelevance, you know, for any organization, and that that's not a good place to be.

Kieran Gilmurray: 4:38

No, it's a bit of digital Darwinism, isn't it? Or or the definition of it. Someone said to me as well, it's interesting that uh leadership is lonely as well. So not only can't they do it currently, but they don't like admitting it either, and imposter syndrome jumps in. What was it that first convinced you that AI is less of a technology issue and more of a leadership and a behavioral issue?

Brian Parkes: 5:01

Um, so I I definitely think what you know, I've seen repeatedly um that there's there's an absolute disconnect um between you know the C-level execs that I'm coaching who you know they they like to talk about being custodians of an organization's health, uh, of its capacity, of its profit, um, which is right. Um but you know, you do some digging one or two layers down the orc chart, um, and you find you find a whole other tranche of people who are going, look, you know, I'm struggling to do my job as it is. Now, with all of this new AI stuff coming in, it kind of feels to me like I have to learn to do a second job on top of the job that I'm struggling to do. And and I think that is part of the problem. And there is a gap which needs to be bridged between what the C level executives would like to see in terms of desired outcomes and the messier reality of where the organization actually is. Um, but it's just good to change management. Um, and I think that bridge or that that gap needs to be bridged. Um, in terms of the behavioral piece, um, you know, I would do individual coaching. I I also probably do more team coaching when we were talking about AI broadly, because what I you know, my understanding, I'm not an AI or digital transformation expert, and I deal with the people who are trying to deal with that stuff. Uh, and I think it's important to be able to address both. But I do I do see AI will require much more of a shared responsibility at executive level. Um, and I think this is kind of at the heart of the issue, Kieran. You know, a lot of executives are have been promoted, they're very, very successful, they're they're very well paid, and they are that that happens on this quarterly cycle of delivering results to to external analysts, and it's a hamster wheel that they're on. So and and and remuneration is also based on individual performance and attainment. And with AI, I I think you know, AI is not a respecter, automation is not a respecter of functional silos, you know, by its very nature, it wants to cut across the enterprise. And uh, I think the senior executives behaviourally um could be better. Some some are excellent already, of course, but uh I think it's quite mixed in terms of the level of sophistication at the sea level um with this sense of shared ownership to the corporate mission. Um I think they they say they do it, but when you get into but actually, are you accountable for your colleagues' success? I don't think they're there yet. And and again, AI is just going to inject steroids into that. I think it's a problem.

Kieran Gilmurray: 7:55

Yeah. Uh faster crap, I think is the phrase that I've used several times, not anything else. And again, it's interesting going back to the MIT study that was being mentioned. You know, you'll not get real value from any level of AI or automation inside of a particular task. You know, you need to work across workflows, which is what you're describing. But again, you know, it opens up the question about organizational structure and rewards, regardless of AI, never mind anything else. But Brian, most people online, let's be transparent, are content bombarding people, selling a dream or a utopia, which may or may not exist. You know, AI does offer a tremendous amount, but there isn't a lot of content out there about human behavioral change required to enable AI. It all comes from a tech perspective. So, how do we get human potential to reach its full potential? You know, what is that? How does that conversation or narrative need to change or even begin?

Brian Parkes: 8:53

You know, I think we're we're at a certain age in life where you know we remember when we were younger um that that wave of big kind of ERP implementations, SAP, Oracle, and other platforms exist. Um and I I I think it's possibly one of the reasons we're falling into this trap is a lot of the big tier one consulting houses who who are who tend to be the ones um selling selling this myth, um, I I think treat ai the way they treated previous big ERP implementations, they treat them as a tech implementation. And and actually, I'm not sure whether their model is to say, well, let's get the tech implemented, then let's get it configured, and then let's deal with all the people stuff, because actually that that's quite a cool business model. Now, now lots of very good consulting houses do exist. Um, but you know, I I think that's part of the problem is that you, you know, if you're afraid of something, you may go to your you know, your audit firm, or you may go to one of these big six, big seven houses because you you trust them. Um but I think there's a danger there that people will you know stop seeing AI as a tech implementation, um, or else you would make the same mistakes as our bosses did 15 years ago, where you have new tech, the same, the same rubbish, same problems. Um I I I would get back to this, you know, this shared ownership of you know, of corporate, you know, the shared purpose or the smaller tech firms talk about mission, um, but you know, the whole kind of what's the point of us being here? Like, what are we trying to achieve that wouldn't achieve, wouldn't be achieved if we weren't here? Um, you know, the chief people officers, CPOs, um, are one of the few executives, I think, which are in that intersection of you know, they're their mandate is quite open. They're they're interested in organization-wide capability and organizational success. Um, yes, they are guilty of having pet projects as well. Um, but I think the CPO is in a really good position and intersection to kind of grab that, you know, less drive alignment around common purpose and mission. Because if they don't do it, other people will. You know, the IT function now is like well, HR and IT emerge, and you know, next month it'll be something else. But I would say to CPOs, you grab that initiative because you're actually really well positioned inside organizations to develop it before somebody else does.

Kieran Gilmurray: 11:30

Yeah, I I always sort of would agree entirely, subject to the CPO not being a process monkey. And by that I mean, you know, process for process sakes, compliance for compliance sake. And I'm as odd as it seems, I've seen that recent move, you know, let's get the CHRO to own the IT team. I think those are two different skills altogether. And it may be an admission that maybe HR has fallen slightly behind from a technical perspective. And the answer isn't just to smash two departments together. That doesn't feel like the right approach. And that people strategy, business strategy, and tech strategy are the three legs of a stool that I absolutely adore. One missing, and the stool falls over. So we live in interesting times. Let's see if CHROIT, and there must be a bigger initial than that, uh, is actually going to fix it. I'm I'm a bit like yourself, I don't think so. You know, this needs more than tech. Uh it not only needs tech, Brian, but AI requires what I would call a decentralized decision-making approach. You know, it's agility, it's about speed. But the organizations that I see who are struggling with this are wired for hierarchy and caution. How do leaders resolve the tension between the need to lead and whatever that means, and the need for speed?

Brian Parkes: 12:43

Um you know, I think being really honest from it from a coaching and a developmental perspective, I've spent 20 years doing this, and sometimes you just need to skip a layer and go further down the organization and find people who are more inclined to understand the need to collaborate. Um, I think you you had levy the a similar question to the main board of directors about what why do you maintain a C-suite uh that isn't collaborating? Um, and we're into the pressures of the commercial pressures. So I this probably one of the main reasons why I'm getting asked to be coached at the moment is is this drive to collaborate. You know, you can design a synthetic worker as as you know, which which which it doesn't care about pet projects. Um, it's designed to collaborate with other departments, it will cut through bias and politics. And so and we all have good relationships and less good relationships with people at work uh in reality, and you know, your your synthetic workers, which I suppose is is how I understand it, are are more able to cut through that than human workers. And I think that also applies at the executive level. Um, I'm not advocating replacing C-level executives with synthetic workers, but we may be talking about that in a couple of years' time. Um, but I think that you know the need to drive collaboration. Um, the you know what I what I am saying to people is talk about reverse mentoring. It doesn't cost any money to do reverse mentoring, you know, executive coaching or external um experts charge money, but you know, putting in reverse mentoring programs, which I've done quite successfully, allows the senior execs in a in a very unthreatening way to kind of learn from the people in their team who are already using AI, but who may not want to admit they're using AI, it allows that conversation to start. Um, and with with most things, you know, I I try and avoid the word transformation. I'm much more into continual iterative changes, small changes, momentum going in the right direction, and eventually you may find that you've transformed something. But start small, experiments, um, you know, build the right coalition internally with the right people. I think more importantly, partner with the right externals, you know, people who understand your business, which may or may not be the big big tier one consulting houses. And I think that's a really important decision, which may require a bit of bravery with senior executives, is to go with maybe smaller firms who have the experience, the battle scars, and they know what's going to work. And they're quite happy to do, I can do that in three months. I'm not gonna spend 18 months doing it because I know I can solve this problem for you in six months. I think that's that that's the difference. I guess a lot of those roads lead to trust. Um, so you know that that's you know, how do you how do you help people who are fearful of their jobs be more trusting of a technology that they don't understand? Uh, I think just go to the people who are already using it internally and let them help you. I think that's easy.

Kieran Gilmurray: 16:11

You just bring me in and uh I'll teach you how to use it. And it's interesting as well. Uh I've actually built an agentic board. The idea is that each of the agents have been built with the best expert knowledge in the world that can be fed into those. But the one thing is it doesn't replace a human board. You know, this is augmentation, not replacement. Um what's the one leadership behavior you see as the biggest barrier to AI adoption and what can we do about it?

Brian Parkes: 16:38

Um so I I see that as more of a cultural issue, uh, first of all, rather than what drives behavior. But you know, if you're if you're in a company with heavy bureaucracy and decision-making governance, it's just really slow and very low levels of trust, then uh like implementing AI is going to be very, very difficult. Um if your C-suite members, and you know, some people I work with, um, you know, there's a whole range of people, you know, but if the C's if the C-level exec is is insecure, um if they have low trust, you know, if they don't like delegating work without micromanaging, if they haven't got leverage with their peers, I think a lot of that stuff will will drive them to resist being involved with something like AI because they don't understand it and they will feel exposed by it. Um so trust is important. Um again, Kieran, I would get back to collective leadership um teams, you know, this kind of collective ownership, in my experience, is what's going to accelerate or stifle you know AI adoption. And I think we're seeing that being played out now in real time. So trust is the short answer.

Kieran Gilmurray: 17:54

Uh lots struggle with that. So if you're in a room, let's imagine with 10 you know CEOs or C-suite members paralyzed by fear, what are you going to say to shift their mindset?

Brian Parkes: 18:08

Oh, so many, so many things come to mind, Kieran.

Kieran Gilmurray: 18:11

Um violence can't be one of them, by the way.

Brian Parkes: 18:14

Just yeah, yeah, yeah. Um I think the first thing I I would say to them is not not all of you, but but I I would suspect most of them, if they're chief executives, will be old enough to have experienced the impact of the the internet and how that impacted people's home lives, how it impacted work, how it impacted commerce, you know, online retail, etc. etc. And I guess I would probably ask them to reflect on you know how if they can remember back then how that made them feel, like how exciting it was. It was you know, it was a time for for pioneers, a lot a lot of tech advancement then. Um and I think that storytelling thing, um, can getting people to to remember and recall how they felt about something that was very exciting can make them a bit more likely to respond favorably to my next question, which is look, you know, your job as C-suite is to find those people inside your organization and externally who can help you preside over the impact of AI on your business because it's going to be 10 times faster than the the internet, uh, because other people will probably know more about it than you will, uh, and that's okay. So I think that's the first thing. Remember how you felt when you know you had instant access to the internet rather than dial up and and and all of that stuff. I think a lot of these guys and and ladies will be that that age. Um if they responded well to that, I would probably then say to them, how many use cases have you read which are directly relevant to your sector? Um, and have you digested those with your team? And do you have an action plan to implement relevant solutions into your business? Um, there's normally quite a long, awkward pause at that second question. Um, but yeah, I'd start with a nice question for as a coach about how did it make you feel, and then I would ask them what have they done about it so far and when are they going to start?

Kieran Gilmurray: 20:19

Yeah, because uh this is the interesting bit for me. You know, the competition genuinely is we hear that a lot about tech. Like with respect, I was never going to get uh a headset that weighed the same amount as a small poodle that I could see cartoon bodies with. And AI is is an 85-year-old overnight success story, you know. So this ain't new, which is the other thing as well. And now you're starting to see a lot of millennials, you know, actually going into leadership roles. And I don't think you or I have ever been frightened of someone being better than us. I think you and I have always surrounded ourselves with people who know things that we don't because if we just have the same ingredient in the cake, it isn't going to be the most interesting, whereas combined together, we make a much better business. Now, if that's C-suite or we have to coach a board tomorrow, Brian, what three questions should the board ask themselves before signing off another AI initiative that's now going to be brought by the C-suite or this executive team within a business?

Brian Parkes: 21:16

Yeah, I think I think the role of the board as you know, the main board of directors, I think is is slightly different um just given the responsibilities that being a board director comes with or an executive director comes with. So you know, I think the first question I I would ask them to consider would be you know, what specific problem will this initiative solve and how does that align with your with the corporate mission? So is this going to be relevant or is it a pet project? Um and and I I would stick on that one for a while. So, you know, what's the problem you're trying to solve? Um with the board and maybe the you know the chief financial officer or people involved in investor relations, I'd I'd probably ask them to think about you know, there are lots of analysts commenting on your business. Uh some of them are more important than others. Um, what are the important analysts criticizing you about? What are their concerns about stock and the valuation of your company? Um, and how can this AI project address the concerns that those analysts may be identifying? Um, which I think lifts up, lifts up to you know, look, let's look outside the organization rather than looking down. Uh, and then as a board member, they obviously have ethical and and risk responsibilities about doing doing this stuff properly, um, utilizing it, which may or may not reduce the number of human workers that they the company will need, um, but doing so ethically and and using AI in an ethical way. I think for me that covers the board of directors' responsibility. Um without forgetting, you know, you need to help your chief executive and her direct reports understand that this will come from collective responsibility.

Kieran Gilmurray: 23:17

Yeah. Their job, maximize shareholder value, doesn't necessarily have to be about burning staff. It's that combination. I would find it very strange if a board today wasn't, you know, trying to understand themselves AI, automation, data, insight-driven businesses, you know, agility, all the things that make a modern organization successful. Uh, but they do need convinced, obviously. Uh last question, Brian. If leaders remember one principle to guide their approach to AI, what should it be?

Brian Parkes: 23:48

I I so so uh, you know, a big technique in in coaching or indeed therapy is is reframing. Um, you know, so re-reframe how you see AI. Um would would be the first thing I would say to people, you know, see it as your friend, like the internet. You you know, you need to see 20 years ago, people had to see the people who saw the internet as their friend were the people who who did well um at home and at work. Um so I I'd say you know, reframe it, see it as a relationship, get to know it. Um, and like any relationship at first care, and it may be awkward at first, but you know, the more you get to know each other, you you may even get along.

Kieran Gilmurray: 24:33

Uh single. Uh obviously, hence the comment. Yeah, it it's interesting for me. You know what I mean? We got through the internet successfully when we resisted it, it still came. We managed to get email working. Guess what? It it resisted it, it it still came. You know, name the technology that's truly worked, and and AI truly works. And resisting it is probably not the best strategy. Respecting it, questioning it, of course. And to your point, understanding the value, how it fits, where it fits, where the people are, that's those leaders who will succeed. But practicing the human equivalent of digital Darwinism by sticking your head in the sand and hoping that AI will go away, or thinking that a synthetic worker will replace your human workers and all of the intricacies and problems and layering of management and rewards and communications and everything else won't work in this space. Brian, thank you so much indeed. Uh, exciting to get to hear you today talk about the human side. And if we combine HI, human intelligence, with AI, artificial intelligence, I think we could actually do something exciting and work. And sometimes, as I was saying to you pre-broadcast, as we were communicating, I wonder if we spend as much time getting excited about our people, spending as much time investing in them, as much time thinking forward about them and talking about them. Might we actually do that a little bit better? That said, we now have the choice. Invest in great people, invest in great technology, and we can do even greater things. Thank you very much, sir. Uh, I hope everyone in the audience enjoyed this. I hope you did too, Brian.

Brian Parkes: 26:10

It's been a pleasure. Thank you, Karen.