Does Every Company Need to Become a Tech Company? And What Does This Mean for Leaders Navigating AI?

Developing the leadership capabilities required for implementing AI responsibly and at scale.

The question of whether every company today must become a “tech company” is no longer rhetorical. It seems to have become a pressing reality.

From banking to automotive, from retail to energy, leaders everywhere are grappling with how to integrate AI and other frontier technologies into their organisations. But the challenge is not simply technological; it is fundamentally about leadership and culture.

Tradition vs. Disruption

In Silicon Valley, the recognized tech capital of the world, the tech adoption mindset is extreme.

Mark Zuckerberg’s mantra at Meta has been to “move fast and break things”, and it is celebrated as the only way to survive in an exponentially accelerating environment. Meanwhile, Sam Altman at OpenAI keeps a sticky note on his desk that simply reads: “No one knows what happens next.”

In “Guns, Germs, and Steel”, Jared Diamond argues that when technology collides with tradition, technology almost always prevails. Ray Dalio echoes this in his recognition of “The Changing World Order.”

This creates paradoxical ambiguity for many companies. Should they focus on maintaining tradition, or on rapidly adopting new technologies?

History is full of companies that excelled at tradition but failed to pivot at the moment of disruption, so how can we respond to the challenges successfully?

Vision Over Application: A Systemic Approach

Bill Gates aptly observed: “Banking is necessary, banks are not.”  Consider the implications.

Perhaps most importantly, these companies are learning to shift from identifying as producers of specific products and services to identifying and operating as tech companies, which can pivot more rapidly to meet market demands.

It might be tempting for organizations to simply rebrand themselves as “tech” companies. Yet this shift in language is insufficient without a deeper transformation in vision, culture, and execution.

Over the 10+ years we worked with Daimler Mercedes‑Benz, for example, we saw them evolve from describing themselves as a 100‑year‑old “car” company to embracing a broader identity around “tech” and “mobility”. The hardest shift, however, was cultural – moving beyond the legacy identity to embrace new ways of thinking and leading. This required a deep leadership transformation program that spanned a number of years.

Visa underwent a similar transformation. Although Mastercard was once its main rival, the fiercest competition has more recently come from Google, Apple, WeChat, Alipay, and Tencent. Again, we worked with Visa on a leadership development program that would help them identify and embrace their core vision and, once again, differentiate themselves based on it.

The most forward-looking companies are now focusing on the core vision rather than specific applications. This enables radical innovation and paves the way for technology to become a central enabler of future iterations of that vision, rather than being tied to products that quickly become obsolete.

Dr Gaia Grant challenging a the leaders of a large bank: Tradition vs. Technology — which defines you?

China as a Case Study on Technology Adoption

We recently spent time in China on an intensive engagement with senior leaders from the country’s largest bank. These leaders were acutely aware of the need to adopt new technologies—particularly AI—yet remained uncertain about how to adopt them in a traditionally conservative sector.

Many Chinese companies have been rapidly embracing new technologies, with firms like DeepSeek and Tencent now rivalling their global counterparts in performance breakthroughs and model releases. The government has even adopted an ‘AI Plus’ strategy, which aims to integrate AI into daily life and work, ultimately reshaping the economy.

Alan Kohler article: recent ABC News analysis reinforced this perspective. The article called ‘China’s global technology and engineering ascendancy continues‘ highlights how China now leads in nearly every frontier technology, from AI to advanced materials, robotics, and energy.

A centralized, government-driven approach that ensures the rapid implementation of government initiatives is a key factor. However, this may also indicate a more important point: the need for a more strategic ecosystem approach.  Also see our article “Is the Innovation Race at a crossroads – best practices from China, USA and Europe”

Disrupting the More Conservative Sectors

For leaders everywhere, the challenge is clear. The organisations that thrive will be those whose leaders can integrate innovation into strategy, culture, and global context while successfully navigating the competing demands.

We have facilitated a Harvard Case Study discussion on JPMorgan Chase (USA) to provide our clients with inspiration on how the competing demands of tech adoption can be navigated in a heavily regulated sector.

In this case study, we examined how a leading bank, JPMC, is adapting to integrate AI across its operations. The case shows that successful adoption isn’t just about investing in technology. It’s about leaders being able to switch easily between the competing demands of maintaining tradition and embracing disruption.

JPMC has aimed for rapid adoption through democratisation and ‘contextual ambidexterity’, or ensuring everyone at all levels develops the skills to navigate the competing demands. At the same time, they have provided clear guardrails for implementation. This has involved piloting new AI-driven solutions while embedding those solutions into risk-managed, scalable systems.

The Implications for Leaders

So, how do more regulated industries, such as banks, adapt to the radical shift to becoming technology-driven?

The leaders we worked with from the finance sector reveal how difficult it can be to keep pace with the demands of an AI-driven world while also ensuring security and consistency. This has been especially challenging for compliance-focused industries. Many of these leaders report feeling both optimistic and measured as they attempt to strike this balance.

As part of our work with leaders, we explore how to develop leadership capabilities to navigate the competing demands of innovation and rapid change—a critical foundation for implementing AI responsibly and at scale.

Leadership in this context is not about adopting tools—it is about aligning vision, culture, and execution to lead transformation.

This approach can ensure that AI is a positive driver of deep transformation rather than an unwelcome disruption.

RELATED PROGRAMS & RESOURCES

Embracing Technology and AI in Your Organization:
Taking The Case Study Approach

We don’t view AI as just another skill to be taught. We see it as a transformational lens—one that can amplify human ingenuity, challenge assumptions, and reveal new pathways to solve complex problems. But only if it’s introduced in a way that aligns with how people think, learn, and lead. This means the technology doesn’t hijack the conversation; it enhances it.

As AI accelerates across industries, leadership development faces a critical question: How do we integrate AI meaningfully into learning—without letting it overshadow the human experience? At Tirian, we believe AI should amplify strategic thinking, deepen reflection, and spark innovation—not derail sessions into tool training. That’s why we’ve designed a multi-framework approach for activating AI in workshops that aligns with diverse audience needs, organizational goals, and the ever-evolving AI landscape.

JPMorgan Chase: Leadership in the Age of GenAI

Andrew and Gaia Grant can deliver the Harvard Business School case study JPMorgan Chase: Leadership in the Age of GenAI using the Case Study method, guiding executives through structured analysis and discussion to generate actionable insights.

This case study highlights how executives can lead and implement generative AI through ambidextrous leadership—balancing exploration and exploitation—to transform decision‑making and organizational strategy.

The Case Study method engages participants in analyzing real-world business dilemmas through structured discussion, debate, and decision‑making to develop practical insights and leadership skills.
– Integrate this case study session with: Leading Innovation on the Edge: Navigating the AI Adoption Divide

Andrew & Gaia Grant have facilitated executive education programs in partnership with a number of institutions including: Harvard Business School, Duke Corporate Education, Sydney University Business School.