Change doesn’t fail at the start. It fails at the exit The plan is delivered. The work is done. Momentum is visible. Then the engagement ends and that’s when you find out whether anything actually stuck. Does the organisation pick it up and run? Or does it quietly drift? Is a contract extension a sign of genuine appetite, or is it filling a gap that nobody wants to name? The honest version of this is that exit design rarely gets the attention it deserves. From either party. I

In law firms and hospitals around the world, a quiet crisis is unfolding. Real estate should pay attention. When AI document review arrived in law firms, the efficiency gains were celebrated. Junior associates were freed from tedious e-discovery work. What nobody noticed was that the work also taught junior lawyers how to think. Recent research confirms the damage: 72% of legal professionals now cite deep legal reasoning as the biggest skills gap among junior lawyers. Radiol

In most boardrooms, the issue isn’t capability. It’s the decision no one quite wants to take while everything already feels stretched. There may be a structure that isn’t working, but changing it feels disruptive. A strategy that sounds coherent but isn’t translating into action. A senior performance issue everyone can see, yet the timing never feels quite right. Each delay is understandable. Taken together, they alter the organisation. Deferral rarely feels risky in the mome

Over the last few years, moving between executive roles, advisory work and trusteeship has changed how I experience decision-making. In senior settings, decisions are usually sound. Financial implications are modelled. Risk is documented. Trade-offs are articulated. The logic is rarely casual. A few weeks later, in operational meetings, that same decision often shows up as an additional reporting cycle, a new approval step, a tighter deadline or a resource assumption that