ADAPT Insider

ADAPT

This is ADAPT Insider. Proudly A/NZ first. For more than 15 years, ADAPT has empowered Australia and New Zealand’s executive community with trusted data, insights, and connections so leaders can make better decisions with confidence. Because this region is different. Our markets are unique. And the challenges facing enterprise leaders from legacy technology to transformation are only getting bigger. Each year, through in-depth research, benchmarking and executive-only events, ADAPT engages with over 2,000 senior leaders across the region’s most influential enterprise and government organisations. ADAPT Insider brings you inside those conversations. Real perspectives from technology and business leaders. Independent research grounded in local data. And practical intelligence you can actually use. This is not theory. It is insight for leaders driving modernisation. Welcome to ADAPT Insider. Built for A/NZ leaders. Backed by data. Designed to help you move with confidence.

  1. 3d ago

    Enterprise AI requires an operating model built for uncertainty

    Enterprise AI pilots often succeed under controlled conditions, then break when messy data, edge cases and dependent systems enter the journey. In this first episode of ADAPT Insider’s AI Economics Series, Escaping the Pilot Trap and the Demo God Curse, Vijayan Seenisamy, Author of The Pilot Trap | Enterprise Agentic AI Delivery, joins ADAPT’s Byron Connolly to explore why organisations manage probabilistic AI through operating models designed for deterministic software. The gap surfaces when a successful demonstration reaches production. AI systems change with data, context and user behaviour, requiring continuous monitoring, clear ownership and business cases that account for reliability across the entire journey. Key takeaways: Treat AI readiness as a continuous management responsibility rather than a gate the organisation passes once.Test the messy end-to-end journey instead of relying on an individual agent or carefully curated demonstration.Fund experiments as experiments and assign one owner to the reliability of the entire chain. AI requires an operating model built for change Many enterprise AI experiments run through operating models designed for traditional software. Code is tested, defects are fixed and the system is expected to behave consistently in production. AI behaves differently. Its performance shifts as data, context and user behaviour change. Vijayan describes the distinction as construction versus weather. A building can be completed and signed off. An AI system requires ongoing observation, correction and governance. Without that operating discipline, a pilot may perform well in controlled conditions while remaining unprepared for production. A perfect demo proves potential, not resilience A polished demonstration can create false confidence when its conditions are mistaken for evidence of production readiness. Demo data is clean, prompts follow a happy path and the environment is arranged to help the agent succeed. Production introduces messy data, unscripted questions, edge cases and failures in surrounding systems. The environment has become honest. Before approving the business case, executives should ask what the test actually covered. A curated demonstration shows potential. Production readiness requires evidence that the system can perform under real operating conditions. Reliability belongs to the entire chain Multi-agent journeys expose how quickly reliability falls across connected steps. Five agents with 92% reliability each produce an end-to-end success rate of about 66% when every agent must perform correctly in sequence. Each component can pass its own test while the customer journey still fails around one time in three. Measuring agents individually conceals the reliability of the outcome experienced by the customer. The business case should price that end-to-end result and assign one person accountability for the entire journey. Five owners focused on five agents leave no one responsible for whether the chain works.

    Enterprise AI requires an operating model built for uncertainty
  2. 4d ago

    What enterprise AI looks like when leadership and governance are built in

    DBS built AI into the bank through leadership ownership, digital and data foundations, and governance built into the workflow. In this ADAPT Insider conversation, Sanjoy Sen, MD – Group Head of Consumer Bank at DBS Bank (Singapore), shares how that shift helped move AI from isolated use cases into broader operating change across the bank. Key takeaways: Leadership ownership and organisation-wide experimentation help AI move beyond isolated use cases.Digital, data, and workflow foundations make AI more usable across the enterprise.Human accountability and embedded governance help AI earn trust as it spreads.  Leadership ownership helps AI spread across the organisation Sanjoy’s view is that enterprise AI starts with leadership mandate and organisation-wide adoption. A central team can support the work, but adoption grows when leaders across the business understand AI as part of their role and teams are encouraged to experiment with it directly. At DBS, that meant creating a culture where employees could test ideas using data, see what worked, and scale successful ideas quickly. That approach gave AI a place inside the operating rhythm of the bank rather than leaving it in a separate innovation stream. Strong foundations make enterprise AI usable Sanjoy is equally clear on the role of foundations.AI needs digital readiness, usable workflows, and a real-time data environment to support it. DBS had already invested in cloud-based architecture, straight-through processing, and a stronger data platform before pushing AI more broadly across the organisation. Those foundations made it easier to apply AI across underwriting, customer journeys, and service operations in a way that could support real decisions and real execution. Without that groundwork, AI stays fragmented and localised.  With it, AI can move across the business with much more consistency. Governance and accountability shape trust at scale DBS also keeps human judgement and governance inside the design. Sanjoy describes three principles that guide this: human in the loop for key processes, human-centred design in the workflow, and human accountability for the final decision. That sits alongside the bank’s PURE framework, where AI use has to be purposeful, unsurprising, respectful, and explainable. Together, those principles help keep trust close to the work itself. AI can support the analysis, improve speed, and surface better insights, while people remain accountable for judgement, customer impact, and regulatory confidence.

    What enterprise AI looks like when leadership and governance are built in
  3. Sep 7

    Why AI strategies fail when leaders delegate them, according to Pathfindr CEO

    AI strategies often stall because the people expected to lead them are too far from the technology itself. When AI gets handed off to a project team or parked inside the technology function, business leaders stay disconnected from where it actually creates value. In this ADAPT Insider conversation, Dawid Naude, CEO at Pathfindr, talks about how AI behaves less like a fixed enterprise system and more like a capability leaders have to use, test, and learn from directly. Key takeaways: Leaders need direct experience with AI if they expect it to create value across the business.The most useful AI applications often emerge through hands-on experimentation rather than narrow upfront use cases.Cost, data, and oversight still matter, but they need to be managed in ways that support adoption rather than delay it.  Leaders have to make AI their own Dawid’s point is that AI cannot be treated like another transformation program that gets delegated and reviewed at a distance. Even a well-written strategy can fail if the leaders expected to act on it do not feel that it belongs to them. That is what changed in Pathfindr’s own work. Earlier strategy engagements often produced strong recommendations but weak follow-through. The shift came when AI stopped being the strategy itself and became an input into each leader’s own strategy. Once leaders started using the tools directly, they could see where AI helped them think, test ideas, and solve problems in ways that felt practical rather than abstract. AI value shows up through use Dawid also pushes back on the way many organisations still frame AI through narrow use cases. His view is that AI behaves more like a general capability, where the highest value often only becomes clear once people start using it seriously. That is why he compares it to tools like Excel or the internet. The value did not come from defining every use in advance but from putting the capability in people’s hands and seeing where it unlocked better ways of working. In AI, that means leaders using it to prototype ideas, pressure test assumptions, and work through more complex problems than a standard business case would surface. Cost, data, and oversight need better judgementHe is equally clear that none of this removes the need for judgement.  Token costs can rise quickly, so organisations have to link usage back to value. Data still matters, but it should improve alongside adoption rather than hold it up. And human oversight does not disappear, it changes shape as people and AI work back and forth across a task rather than through one static checkpoint. The practical challenge is to sequence all of this properly. Organisations need enough freedom to learn where AI is useful, enough discipline to stop waste, and enough human judgement to know where oversight still matters most.

    Why AI strategies fail when leaders delegate them, according to Pathfindr CEO
  4. Aug 31

    High-performing organisations connect AI to impact before efficiency, says Alyve CEO

    The organisations getting the most from AI are using it to expand what the business can do, where it can grow, and how quickly it can adapt. In this ADAPT Insider conversation, Mark Cameron, ADAPT Executive Advisor and CEO & Director at Alyve, argues that this shift starts with leadership. When leaders connect AI to mission and impact, the business gets a clearer reason to move. Key takeaways: High-performing organisations link AI to mission, growth, and impact, which gives the technology a stronger direction.Leadership alignment helps reduce friction and gives AI a clearer place in the business.Learning speed becomes a more durable advantage as organisations move towards adaptive operating models. Impact gives AI a stronger direction than efficiency alone Mark’s view is that high-performing organisations use AI to ask a bigger question than how to do the same work faster. They focus on what more the organisation could achieve with the technology in place. That creates room for growth, new value, and stronger strategic choices. That mindset also changes the business case. The strongest performers still see major productivity gains, but those gains come through a broader ambition around mission, growth, and impact. In practice, that gives teams a more meaningful reason to adopt AI and helps leaders connect the technology to something the business already cares about. Leadership alignment shapes whether AI gets traction Mark also points to alignment as the main difference between organisations making progress and those stuck in inertia. Boards, CEOs, finance leaders, product leaders, and risk leaders may all believe AI matters, but each can still pull in a different direction if the organisation has not agreed on what the technology is there to do. That creates friction, slows decisions, and turns AI into a collection of disconnected efforts. The organisations moving faster are the ones where leaders agree on purpose, direction, and what AI means for the business. That shared understanding reduces ambiguity and helps teams act with more confidence. Learning speed becomes the real advantage Mark’s broader argument is that AI pushes organisations away from rigid operating models and towards more adaptive ones. In that environment, advantage comes from how quickly an organisation can sense change, respond, learn, and improve. That is why he frames the future organisation as an intelligence-centred enterprise. The goal is not simply to automate tasks. It is to build stronger feedback loops between people, systems, and AI so the business can learn faster than competitors and act on that learning sooner.

    High-performing organisations connect AI to impact before efficiency, says Alyve CEO
  5. Aug 24

    Better baselines and end-to-end measures improve AI ROI, says Teachers Mutual Bank’s CIO

    Many AI programs can show momentum, but not what actually changed for the business. In this ADAPT Insider conversation, Dan Chesterman, CIO at Teachers Mutual Bank Limited, argues that the issue usually starts earlier. Organisations need a clearer view of what they are trying to improve, how that process performs today, and which outcome would prove the investment worked.   Key takeaways: AI ROI becomes clearer when organisations start with a strong baseline and measure business improvement against it.Use cases, model choice, and governance need to match the decision or process being improved.End-to-end outcomes give a more useful picture of AI value than local productivity gains alone.  ROI starts with a baseline Dan’s view is that AI performance is hard to judge when the starting point is vague. If an organisation cannot describe current process performance, customer experience, or another measurable business outcome, it becomes much easier to celebrate implementation than improvement. That is why he puts so much weight on baselining. Once the current state is visible, AI can be measured against something real. That also makes it easier to separate activity metrics from business metrics. Token consumption, model usage, and go-live dates may show movement, but they do not show value on their own.   Clear use cases matter more than broad AI ambition Dan also points to overapplication as a common problem. AI can easily become a catch-all label for projects that have weak purpose, poor fit, or an inflated cost base. Organisations can end up applying more expensive models than the task requires and calling that progress. Start with the use case, the decision, or the workflow that needs to improve. Then choose the level of intelligence, cost, and governance that fits it. Some tasks need prediction. Some need precision. Some need human judgement at key points. Once that context is clear, AI becomes easier to apply with discipline.   End-to-end outcomes matter more than local gains Dan is equally clear that improving one step in a process does not guarantee a better result overall. A faster task can still create friction elsewhere, or save time that never becomes reusable because it disappears into other work. That is why he pushes leaders towards end-to-end measures. Completion rates, customer outcomes, process performance, and cost per successful outcome all give a better picture of whether AI is helping the system work better. In that sense, AI value comes from what changes across the journey, not from one isolated efficiency win.

    Better baselines and end-to-end measures improve AI ROI, says Teachers Mutual Bank’s CIO
  6. Aug 16

    What leaders in disrupted industries need to redefine first, according to Southern Cross Media’s Director of Data and Growth

    Disruption puts pressure on more than revenue.It puts pressure on how people inside the business understand value, relevance, and their own future in it. In this ADAPT Insider conversation, Andrew Brain, Director of Data and Growth at Southern Cross Media, argues that leadership in disrupted industries starts with helping teams and stakeholders see where the next version of the business can grow, rather than anchoring everything to the part already under pressure. Key takeaways: Leadership in disrupted industries starts with helping teams and stakeholders see where new value can come from.Data and AI create more impact when they support forward decisions tied to audience, customer, or revenue outcomes.Capability building, sharper priorities, and modern tools help people stay engaged through change. Disruption changes the conversation leaders have to lead Andrew’s experience has been shaped by businesses moving through digitisation again and again, from publishing to out of home, audio, and streaming. A legacy model comes under pressure, people worry about what is being lost, and the business has to decide whether it will defend the old definition of value or broaden it. In media, that means moving the discussion beyond linear television alone and toward the value of total TV across broadcast and streaming.  For teams and stakeholders, that shift creates a more useful frame. It helps people understand where the business can grow, how new channels support the commercial model, and why the work still matters in a changing market. Data becomes valuable when it helps shape the next decision Andrew’s approach to data and AI starts with a simple question: what decision becomes possible when you stop only reporting what happened yesterday? At Seven, that meant using machine learning to forecast audience behaviour across devices and days ahead, then acting on those signals before audiences dropped away. That shift changed the value of the data function.Instead of producing hindsight, the team could help shape programming, re-engagement, audience growth, and advertising outcomes. The use cases then became easier to prioritise because they were connected to a commercial goal. For a broadcaster, that meant audience scale and revenue.  In other sectors, the shape may differ, but the principle holds.  Data matters more when it changes what the business does next. Capability and focus help people stay with the change Andrew is also clear that transformation depends on whether people can see the commercial value of their work and build skills that keep them relevant. That is why his teams were encouraged to challenge work that had no clear business outcome, focus on initiatives that could move the organisation forward, and learn through modern platforms that expanded their own career value. That matters in disrupted businesses because pressure can easily turn into anxiety or drift. Clarity around priorities, visible links to commercial outcomes, and investment in better tools all help give people a stronger reason to stay engaged. In that environment, transformation becomes easier to sustain because it creates both business momentum and individual growth.

    What leaders in disrupted industries need to redefine first, according to Southern Cross Media’s Director of Data and Growth
  7. Aug 10

    Why retail teams need sharper trade offs between speed, cost, and quality

    In retail, speed only becomes useful when it helps move a business metric without creating a bigger operational problem somewhere else. Sakshee Kohli, Head of Technology - Store Customer Experiences at Coles, says technology earns its place when it helps move a real business number, gets into customers’ hands quickly without degrading experience, and stays useful beyond the first release. That makes the challenge less about chasing the newest tool and more about building systems that keep creating value over time. Key takeaways: Technology becomes more useful when teams start with the business metric that needs to move, whether that is loss, freshness, affordability, or personalisation.Speed only matters when quality, cost, and customer experience stay under control. That requires clearer trade offs around risk appetite, perfection, and release discipline.The strongest retail platforms are built to solve more than one problem. Reusable, extensible technology creates more long term value than one off fixes that become expensive to maintain. Business alignment is what makes retail technology useful Retail technology decisions improve when they start with the commercial problem, rather than the architecture or the tool. That changes the conversation straight away because it forces teams to focus on the number or outcome they are trying to shift. That is the lens Sakshee applies to business engagement. She explains that retail teams are trying to reduce skip scans, improve freshness, protect affordability, or create more relevant customer experiences. In that context, AI, computer vision, and other technologies matter only insofar as they help solve that problem. The value comes from aligning around the shared business goal first, then deciding how technology, process, and workforce change each contribute to the outcome. Speed creates value only when quality and cost stay in balance Moving fast is easy to talk about and much harder to do well at scale. In retail, there is a difference between deploying quickly inside engineering and releasing quickly into the hands of customers without damaging their experience. Sakshee makes that distinction clearly. She tracks both deployment speed and release speed, but ties them back to confidence, quality, and cost. That is why simpler architectures and stronger quality engineering matter in her model. They help teams move faster without creating downstream friction. She is also clear that perfection can become a distraction. Safety, security, and compliance are non negotiable, but beyond that, teams need a sharper view of what truly has to be perfect on day one and what can be managed through process as the product matures. In practice, that is where risk appetite becomes a useful operating discipline rather than an abstract leadership phrase. Future ready retail technology has to outlive the first use case Large retailers do not get much value from solving one problem once. The bigger payoff comes from building technology that can evolve, scale, and unlock value repeatedly across the business. That is why Sakshee talks about creating for the future. She argues that solving only for today can create a longer term cost if the platform lacks scalability or extensibility. That mindset matters even more in a complex retail environment with diverse systems, store infrastructure, and many teams contributing to change at once. Her example of skip scan technology shows the point well. The business problem was loss, but the challenge was to get the capability live at scale across 550 stores, at speed, in a way that could keep supporting future value. Looking ahead, she expects AI to play a larger role in targeted use cases such as loss analysis and consumer behaviour, while lifecycle management and technology sustainability remain critical operational pressures. The underlying lesson is that future readiness comes from building technology that keeps paying back, rather than technology that solves one problem and leaves the business with another.

    Why retail teams need sharper trade offs between speed, cost, and quality
  8. Aug 4

    How Australian government agencies can get more from AI through smaller bets than big programs

    Government is under pressure to do more with less, and AI is now part of that conversation. That does not mean moving fast. In government, the cost of getting AI wrong is higher, which makes caution a strength rather than a weakness. In this ADAPT Insider conversation with Anthony Saba, Managing Director – Transformation Services at ADAPT, David Heacock, ADAPT Executive Advisor, former Chief Digital Innovation Officer and BCG Partner, argues that public sector leaders are right to take a measured approach. The gap between vendor hype and real-world performance is still too wide, and in government that gap can damage trust, disrupt services, and create harm.  Key takeaways: Move carefully where the risk of AI failure is high.Treat governance and decision-making as the main delivery challenge, not the technology alone.Break large programs into smaller, outcome-driven pieces and build more capability internally. Government is right to be cautious on AI He argues that AI should be introduced carefully in public sector settings. Unlike traditional systems, generative AI is probabilistic, which means it does not always produce the same answer in the same way. That creates a different risk profile, especially in government environments where decisions can affect people’s lives. This is why a slower pace makes sense. Government does not need to lead the market on AI adoption. It needs to understand where the tools are useful, where precision matters, and where experimentation is safe. The bigger problem is organisational frictionHe is clear that technology is no longer the main constraint. The harder problem sits in governance, decision-making, and organisational design. Faster tools do not remove those bottlenecks. They hit them sooner. He points to executive choke points, where delivery teams move quickly but decisions still stall further up the chain. He also warns that uncertainty often leads to more governance, more scrutiny, and more delay. In practice, that usually makes delivery slower rather than safer. Smaller internal bets will work better than large programsHe also argues for a different delivery model. Rather than packaging large problems into single vendor-led programs, agencies should break work into smaller pieces with tighter accountability and clearer outcomes. He sees strong potential in building more capability internally and focusing on use cases that sit between personal productivity tools and large enterprise systems. Areas like policy analysis, legislative synthesis, and information-heavy work are a better fit for small, targeted AI projects that can prove value early without creating unnecessary risk.

    How Australian government agencies can get more from AI through smaller bets than big programs

About

This is ADAPT Insider. Proudly A/NZ first. For more than 15 years, ADAPT has empowered Australia and New Zealand’s executive community with trusted data, insights, and connections so leaders can make better decisions with confidence. Because this region is different. Our markets are unique. And the challenges facing enterprise leaders from legacy technology to transformation are only getting bigger. Each year, through in-depth research, benchmarking and executive-only events, ADAPT engages with over 2,000 senior leaders across the region’s most influential enterprise and government organisations. ADAPT Insider brings you inside those conversations. Real perspectives from technology and business leaders. Independent research grounded in local data. And practical intelligence you can actually use. This is not theory. It is insight for leaders driving modernisation. Welcome to ADAPT Insider. Built for A/NZ leaders. Backed by data. Designed to help you move with confidence.