Change Management

If you live in the Mid-Atlantic region and don't know what PJM Interconnection is, pay attention. PJM was founded 99 years ago to manage the distribution of electricity over Pennsylania (P), New Jersey (J), and Maryland (M). Since then, the nonprofit company has expanded to include Delaware, Virginia, West Virginia, Ohio, Washington DC, half of Kentucky, and significant parts of Michigan, Indiana, North Carolina, and Illinois (including Chicago). It is the largest single power grid in the United States. Headquartered in Valley Forge, PA, PJM provides electricity to 67 million Americans. PJM coordinates the movement of electricity between all the different power companies within its service area, such as PECO in Philly, Delmarva Power in Delaware, and all the other power companies listed in the graph. PJM operates as a traffic cop for electricity generators, making sure that power plants (gas, coal, nuclear, etc.) operating in its service area are distributing electricity as needed across the entire grid so that no area goes without necessary power. Think of what air traffic controllers do at airports, guiding the planes in and out, making sure there is order and no mistakes, 24 hours a day. PJM does that with electricity. The problem is the rapid proliferation of AI data centers, particularly in Northern Virginia and Maryland (around DC) which is the most concentrated collection of data centers in the USA. These data centers just plug into the PJM grid and started sucking up power to the point that PJM is running nearly all the time at max capacity. If you live here and haven't felt the impact of electricity price increases, you will soon. Many power companies have price caps in place, but that won't last. In capacity auctions, where power resources commit to be available in years ahead, prices have gone parabolic; from $2.2B to $14B (a 536% increase), largely due to forecasted load growth from data centers. It's a challenge to generate a political solution with governors of both parties in the service area. Plus, the Trump Administration is now getting involved. The Energy Secretary and Interior Secretary hosted 13 state governors involved at the White House 1/16 where there was an agreement on 2 key principles: 1- Emergency Power Auction - the idea is to compel data centers to participate in financing new power plants by buying 15 years of power in advance. Data centers would bid for these contracts, hence the auction. 2- Price Caps - to shield the 67 million Americans from exponentially higher electric bills, it is proposed to cap electricity bills for 1-2 years. It is unclear who will absorb the risk and cost to make this happen. In many states price caps are already protecting Americans. If a solution can't be reached soon, it is increasingly likely that rolling blackouts will happen across the service area during high-load periods (extreme heat or extreme cold). Be prepared. #riskmanagement #interestrates #fedpolicy

I was shadowing a coaching client in her leadership meeting when I watched this brilliant woman apologize six times in 30 minutes. 1. “Sorry, this might be off-topic, but..." 2. “I'm could be wrong, but what if we..." 3. “Sorry again, I know we're running short on time..." 4. “I don't want to step on anyone's toes, but..." 5. “This is just my opinion, but..." 6. “Sorry if I'm being too pushy..." Her ideas? They were game-changing. Every single one. Here's what I've learned after decades of coaching women leaders: Women are masterful at reading the room and keeping everyone comfortable. It's a superpower. But when we consistently prioritize others' comfort over our own voice, we rob ourselves, and our teams, of our full contribution. The alternative isn't to become aggressive or dismissive. It's to practice “gracious assertion": • Replace "Sorry to interrupt" with "I'd like to add to that" • Replace "This might be stupid, but..." with "Here's another perspective" • Replace "I hope this makes sense" with "Let me know what questions you have" • Replace "I don't want to step on toes" with "I have a different approach" • Replace "This is just my opinion" with "Based on my experience" • Replace "Sorry if I'm being pushy" with "I feel strongly about this because" But how do you know if you're hitting the right note? Ask yourself these three questions: • Am I stating my needs clearly while respecting others' perspectives? (Assertive) • Am I dismissing others' input or bulldozing through objections? (Aggressive) • Am I hinting at what I want instead of directly asking for it? (Passive-aggressive) You can be considerate AND confident. You can make space for others AND take up space yourself. Your comfort matters too. Your voice matters too. Your ideas matter too. And most importantly, YOU matter. @she.shines.inc #Womenleaders #Confidence #selfadvocacy

This is the HR challenge that keeps me awake at night. We ask HR to change the engine. Then we don’t give them the keys. That's exactly what we're doing to HR leaders across every industry, every day. Last month, I sat across from a brilliant CHRO who looked defeated. She'd just been handed her third "culture transformation" mandate this year. The brief was crystal clear: Fix engagement, reduce turnover and build a high-performance culture but… Her budget? Unchanged.  Her authority? Non-existent.  Her seat at strategic decisions? Still fighting for it. "They want me to drive change," she said, "but I can't even change the coffee brand without three approvals." Four decades in this industry, and this conversation haunts me more than any other. We've created a fundamental paradox that's destroying HR effectiveness across organisations. Leadership expects HR to: + Transform toxic cultures overnight + Attract top talent in impossible markets + Drive engagement without addressing root causes But denies them: - Decision-making authority - Strategic budget allocation - Real influence over business direction It's like asking someone to architect a building while handing them only a paintbrush. The result? HR professionals burning out faster than the talent they're trying to retain. Organisations wondering why their "people initiatives" keep failing. Executives frustrated that their "people investment" isn't paying off. And the worst part? We blame HR for it. I’ve mentored some of the brightest HR minds in this country…sharp, driven, deeply committed to impact. But they often carry this quiet frustration: “We’re asked to deliver change, but not empowered to lead it.” This isn’t just unfair. It’s ineffective. We're wasting brilliant minds on impossible missions. The CHROs I know aren't just order-takers. They're strategic thinkers who understand that people performance drives business performance. They see connections between culture and revenue that most leaders miss. But we've reduced them to administrative executors of someone else's vision. The companies getting this right have figured out something fundamental: HR isn't a support function that implements people policies. It's a strategic driver that shapes business outcomes. So, to every founder, CXO, and board member reading this: If you want your people strategy to succeed, stop asking HR to drive change from the passenger seat. Give them the steering wheel, or accept that you'll keep going in circles. Because the future of your culture depends on it. #leadership #hrchallenges #hrstruggles

70% of change initiatives fail. (And it's rarely because the idea was bad.) Here's what actually kills transformation: You picked the wrong change model for the job. It's like performing surgery with a hammer. Sure, you're using a tool. But it's the wrong one. I've watched brilliant CEOs tank their companies this way: Using individual coaching (ADKAR) for company-wide transformation. Result: 200 people change. 2,000 don't. Running a massive 8-step program for a simple process fix. Result: 6 months wasted. Team exhausted. Nothing changes. Forcing top-down mandates when they needed subtle nudges. Result: Rebellion. Resentment. Resignation letters. Here's what nobody tells you about change: The size of your change determines your approach. Real examples from the field: 💡 Startup pivoting product: → Used Lewin's 3-stage (unfreeze old way, change, refreeze) → 3 months. Clean transition. Team aligned. 💡 Enterprise going digital: → Used Kotter's 8-step process → Created urgency first. Built coalition. Enabled action. → 18 months later: $50M in new revenue. 💡 Sales team adopting new CRM: → Used Nudge Theory → Made old system harder to access → Put new system as browser homepage → 95% adoption in 2 weeks. Zero complaints. The expensive truth: Wrong model = wasted months + burned budgets + broken trust Right model = faster adoption + sustained results + energized teams Warning signs you're using the wrong model: • High activity, low progress • People comply but don't commit • Changes revert within weeks • Energy drops as you push harder • "This too shall pass" becomes the motto Match your medicine to your ailment: Small behavior change? Nudge it. Individual performance? ADKAR it. Cultural shift? Influence it. Full transformation? Kotter it. Enterprise overhaul? BCG it. Stop treating every change like a nail. Start choosing the right tool for the job. Your next change initiative depends on it. Your team's trust demands it. Your company's future requires it. Save this. Share it with your leadership team. Because the next time someone says "people resist change," you'll know the truth: People don't resist change. They resist the wrong approach to change. P.S. Want a PDF of my Change Management cheat sheet? Get it free: https://lnkd.in/dv7biXUs ♻️ Repost to help a leader in your network. Follow Eric Partaker for more operational insights. — 📢 Want to lead like a world-class CEO? Join my FREE TRAINING: "The 8 Qualities That Separate World-Class CEOs From Everyone Else" Thu Jul 3rd, 12 noon Eastern / 5pm UK time https://lnkd.in/dy-6w_rx 📌 The CEO Accelerator starts July 23rd. 20+ Founders & CEOs have already enrolled. Learn more and apply: https://lnkd.in/dwndXMAk

Climate Risks Are Financial Risks An alarming USD 1.14 trillion in corporate value, linked to the world's largest stock markets is exposed to severe socio-economic impacts from #climatechange by 2050. Data from the Climate Hazard and Vulnerability Index (CHVI) highlights a critical blind spot for many businesses: 📌 48 countries will be highly vulnerable to socio-economic climate impacts by mid-century, double today’s figure. 📌 Major emerging markets are expected to face significant climate-related disruptions. 📌 India alone accounts for over USD 1 trillion of the at-risk corporate assets, dramatically impacting global markets and supply chains. 🚨Companies must place dedicated climate leadership at the highest level to proactively identify risks, anticipate market disruptions, and strategically invest in long-term resilience. 🚨 Businesses should move beyond physical hazards to systematically report and manage socio-economic climate vulnerabilities. Transparent, detailed disclosures help stakeholders understand risks and encourage informed investments. 🚨 Corporates must prioritize investment in resilient infrastructure, diversified supply chains, and sustainable practices, particularly in vulnerable regions. This strategic foresight protects operational continuity and market valuation. The globalized nature of corporate operations means that climate vulnerability anywhere becomes a financial risk everywhere. 🌱 Is your company equipped with climate leadership at board level? Read more here 👇 https://lnkd.in/eFnsnjyY #ClimateRisk #ClimateLeadership #SustainableGovernance #ESG #BoardGovernance #InvestmentStrategy #Resilience #ClimateAction

Somewhere along the way, maintenance became a checkbox. A calendar event. A cost to control. But the factory floor is evolving. And so must the mindset. We don’t just repair anymore... We predict. We prescribe. We optimize. And when you optimize consistently, you stop reacting to problems…and start unlocking performance. That’s the real promise of Maintenance 4.0. Not just fewer breakdowns, but smarter resource planning, tighter production schedules, and data-driven capital decisions. It’s maintenance, yes. But not as you know it. To appreciate the significance of Maintenance 4.0, it's essential to understand its evolution of maintenance strategies: • 𝐌𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝟏.𝟎 focused on reactive strategies, where actions were taken only after a failure occurred. This approach often led to significant downtime and high repair costs. • 𝐌𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝟐.𝟎 introduced preventative maintenance, scheduling regular check-ups based on time or usage to prevent failures. However, this method sometimes resulted in unnecessary maintenance activities, wasting resources. • 𝐌𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝟑.𝟎 saw the advent of condition-based maintenance, utilizing sensors to monitor equipment and perform maintenance based on actual conditions. This strategy marked a shift towards more data-driven decisions but still lacked predictive capabilities. • 𝐌𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝟒.𝟎 builds upon the foundations laid by its predecessors by leveraging advanced predictive and prescriptive maintenance techniques. Utilizing AI and machine learning algorithms, Maintenance 4.0 can anticipate equipment failures before they occur and prescribe optimal maintenance actions. In addition, the data-driven insights provided by Maintenance 4.0 can facilitate strategic decision-making regarding equipment investments, production planning, and innovation initiatives through better integration with other programs and systems, such as Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) and Asset Performance Management (APM). 𝐅𝐨𝐫 𝐚 𝐝𝐞𝐞𝐩𝐞𝐫 𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐞: https://lnkd.in/djjfivw8 ******************************************* • Visit www.jeffwinterinsights.com for access to all my content and to stay current on Industry 4.0 and other cool tech trends • Ring the 🔔 for notifications!

For years, the biggest players in CPG and FMCG—Unilever, Nestlé, Kraft Heinz—built their empires on food. But now? They’re making a massive pivot..if you had told me 5 years ago that these brands would be pulling back from food, I would’ve raised an eyebrow. -Unilever is cutting loose its $8 billion ice cream division, choosing to focus on higher-margin beauty and wellness. -Nestlé is doubling down on health-science-based nutrition as food brands struggle with pricing power. - #CPG giants are seeing stronger growth in self-care, supplements, and skincare than in traditional food categories. The global personal care market is expected to hit $758 billion by 2030, while processed food growth slows. Why This Shift? 1. Margins in food are shrinking. Consumers are trading down, private labels are winning, and inflation-wary shoppers aren’t absorbing cost hikes like they used to. 2. Health & wellness are driving premiumization. Customers will pay more for skincare, supplements, and functional beverages—but not for basic pantry staples. 3. Brand loyalty in food is eroding. Over 50% of consumers are comfortable switching food brands based on price, but loyalty remains strong in beauty, healthcare, and wellness. Winning Brands Are Already Moving: -L'Oréal’s skincare division posted 9.1% revenue growth last year, while traditional CPG food brands saw single-digit declines. -The Coca-Cola Company is investing in functional drinks and non-carbonated wellness categories to stay relevant. -PepsiCo’s biggest success? Gatorade’s expansion into hydration and performance-based drinks, not soda. CPG Leaders: ✅ Stop thinking of food as the core driver of growth. Instead, align with evolving consumer behavior. ✅ Invest in personalization, self-care, and functional health. That’s where demand (and pricing power) is strongest. ✅ Rethink your brand mix. Is your portfolio weighted toward categories that will still be relevant in 5-10 years? So, here’s my question to FMCG execs: Are you future-proofing your brand strategy—or just managing decline? Let’s talk. #FMCG #CPG #ConsumerTrends #GrowthStrategy #Beauty #Wellness #RevenueShift #BrandEvolution "

The ‘So What?’ Rule How to Make Senior Leaders Listen You have less than 3 minutes to make an impression. That’s how long senior executives take to decide whether to engage with you or move on. If your message isn’t clear, concise, and compelling, you’re forgettable. Here’s how to command attention in high-stakes conversations with senior leaders: 1. Start with the End in Mind ↳ Before you speak, define the exact outcome you want. ↳ This keeps you focused, prevents detours. 2. First 30 Seconds: Get to the Point ↳ Don’t bury your message - start with the ‘so what?’ ↳ Lead with the key insight or ask, then expand. 3. Structure Your Message Using the 3C Framework ↳ Clear, Concise, Compelling - cut unnecessary details. ↳ Use bullet points, data, short narratives. 4. Frame It from Their Perspective ↳ Senior leaders value impact, risk, and RO - focus there. ↳ Speak their language - align with their priorities. 5. Energy > Words ↳ Confidence isn’t just what you say - it’s how you say it. ↳ Pace yourself, lower your pitch slightly. 6. Anticipate and Address Pushback ↳ Think ahead - what objections might they raise? ↳ Have clear, direct responses ready for challenges. 7. Don’t Over-Explain ↳ After making a key point, pause. ↳ Choose that over nervous rambling. 8. Stories & Data > Opinions ↳ Senior leaders trust evidence - not personal opinions. ↳ Use metrics, industry insights, real-world examples. 9. Handle Pressure Tactically ↳ Need time to think? Avoid filler words. ↳ Instead, say: "That’s a great question - here’s how I’d approach it…" 10. Lead with Solutions ↳ Senior leaders value problem-solvers, not complainers. ↳ Pair every issue you raise with solutions or trade-offs. 11. Close with a CTA ↳ End with clear next steps or a call-to-action. ↳ Avoid vague endings - be specific on what's next. The clearer you are, the faster they trust you. You already have the expertise, now make it impossible to ignore. What’s one thing everyone should do before speaking to executives? Let me know in the comments. ♻ Repost to help your network master executive communication. ➕ Follow me (Meera Remani) for high-impact leadership strategies

We're moving away from charging for *access* to software and toward a model of charging for the *work delivered* by a combination of software and AI agents. Let’s dive into what’s happening and what it means for you ⤵️ 1. The rise of disruptive AI pricing models Tech companies are realizing they can't solely rely on seat-based subscriptions in an age of AI, automation and APIs where value is disconnected with how many people are logging in. Perhaps Salesforce going all-in on Agentforce (and charging $2 per conversation) was the push the industry needed. Each product category has its own flavor of disruptive pricing. - Legal AI products might charge for a demand package generated by AI or an AI-generated summary. - Creator AI products might charge for the content that gets produced such as a video generation or amount of video created. - GTM products might charge for specific tasks completed or workflows executed by the AI. 2. Selling work, not necessarily success As a customer, I wish I only had to pay for software when it delivered results. But the reality is that true success-based billing won’t work for the vast majority of today’s products. Most products should charge for work output instead. The issue is attribution. You want the customer to get a fantastic outcome — and you want them to recognize that your product powered that outcome. As soon as you start charging for success, the customer begins to rethink the results. 3. Goodbye ARR as we know it? Shifting to these newer value-based pricing models isn't a simple pricing change you can just announce in a press release. It's a business model evolution that looks a lot like the shift from on-prem to SaaS in the first place. These new AI pricing models might mean greater volatility in both usage and spend. Variable margin profiles across products and customers. Seasonal revenue fluctuations. The potential for project-based, non-recurring use cases. Put simply, annual recurring revenue (ARR) continues to get dethroned. — Full post in today’s Growth Unhinged newsletter: https://lnkd.in/ea5eTrVD Things are about to get interesting 🍿 #ai #pricing #saas

Just out in Harvard Business Review, summary of the Hybrid Experiment results and lessons on how to make hybrid succeed. Experiment: randomize 1600 graduate employees in marketing, finance, accounting and engineering at Trip.com into 5-days a week in office, or 3-days a week in office and 2-days a week WFH. Analyzed 2 years of data. Two key results A) Hybrid and fully-in-office showed no differences in productivity, performance review grade, promotion, learning or innovation. B) Hybrid had a higher satisfaction rate, and 35% lower attrition. Quit-rate reductions were largest for female employees. Four managerial lessons 1) Hybrid needs a strong performance management system so managers don’t need to hover over employees at their desks to check their progress. Trip.com had an extensive performance review process every six months. 2) Coordinate in-office days at the team or company level. Schedule clarity prevents the frustration of coming to an empty office only to participate in Zoom calls. Trip.com coordinated WFH on Wednesday and Friday. 3) Having leadership buy-in is critical (as with most management practices). Trip.com’s CEO and C-suite all support the hybrid policy. 4) A/B test new policies (as well as products) if possible. Often new policies turn out to be unexpectedly profitable. Trip.com made millions of dollars more profits from hybrid by cutting expensive turnover.