WHY SHOULD ANYONE CHOOSE YOU?

I analysed 25 start-ups, 25 mid-sized tech firms, 25 enterprise software companies and 25 IT services firms to see how tech companies explain who they are, what they do and why they matter? What I found was that tech companies suffer from ‘sameness’. Is this a problem? And if so, should you do something about it in an era where AI slop is turning ‘sameness’ into commercial risk. I invite you to read my analysis and download the research report, access below.

The Executive Voice

Are You Struggling to Change Direction, Fast?

Unless you’re an AI-native tech company, you’re likely trying to transform into an AI-enabled one from within, while also racing to create AI products and IP. The thing is, we’ve all read the statistic that “50% to 70% of organisations that undertake a reengineering effort don’t achieve the dramatic results they intended.”

And then there is Boston Consulting Group’s research over the past 20 years which found that 70% of companies fail to outperform their industry peer group in the short and long term after a performance downturn.

Traditional tech companies are at crossroads, challenged to take a hard turn into AI without losing speed. It’s difficult. Screeching tyres, skid marks, and the real danger of crashing weighs heavily. Yet before the end of 2026, many hard turns need to happen regardless of the risk.

The question to ask then, is, “How do we beat the statistics and join the 20% to 30% of companies that successfully reinvent, reset, reposition or change direction?

Fix Leadership Dysfunction & False Alignment

According to research one of the main reasons for a company’s inability to course correct “can be traced to dysfunction at the top. Members of the leadership team often fall into a behavioural trap: false alignment around the transformation they’re attempting to implement.”

The first issue is that executive teams confuse alignment with agreement. Leaders may say they’re ‘aligned’, but often that only means they broadly support the idea, have only discussed it once, or are not openly standing in each other’s way.

Real agreement is much harder. It means leaders have made explicit decisions about:

False alignment usually happens in three ways:

Putting off hard decisions and vaguely agreeing to plans causes problems. Teams either freeze, run in too many directions, or make progress on the wrong thing. This means change stalls, and you fall behind in the race to relevance and profitability.

Winning the Race

At the time of publishing this issue, we’re just over two weeks away before the clock starts ticking on the second half of 2026. No one expects the AI race to slow down. If anything it’s accelerating.

The stands are getting noisier, the track is getting crowded, the engines are revving, and the intensity is building as tech companies race to get ahead. But are you even in the race? The only way to participate is to get your leadership team on the same page, moving in the same direction.

Read how in the ‘Something Extra’ section below. 👇

Research and key points on false alignment are summarised from this HBR article.

Why the COO Deserves Your Attention

Many sellers underestimate the COO because they mistake operations for the back office.

Here’s the thing though, the COO is often one of the most influential people in the room, especially when the decision affects productivity, workflow, service delivery, customer experience, risk, workforce design or whether a major transformation will actually work.

The COO sits close to the CEO because they’re usually responsible for turning strategy into operational reality. If the CEO is asking, “Can we move faster?”, the COO is often asking, “Can the business absorb this without breaking something important?”

According to McKinsey, the COO is also now a strategic partner to the CEO, working alongside them to deliver the organisation’s vision and strategy. And increasingly for many COO’s, it’s a pathway to the CEO role.

All of this is why formulating a message strategy for COOs matters especially when selling larger technology investments.

Key Message Framework for COOs

A conversation with the COO needs to steer away from features or benefits. It’s all about helping them feel confident that their business can run better and deliver change without creating operational mess.

SpaceX Sells the Future

The biggest tech story this week: SpaceX has completed the largest IPO in history, raising US$75 billion and pushing its market value beyond US$2 trillion in early trading. “The IPO is drawing controversy, particularly for its valuation, which many investors and analysts are saying is much too high for a company that is far from achieving profit.” Yet the anticipation in the last few days hit a fever pitch with headlines like ‘blockbuster’ and ‘record-breaking’. Fast Company breaks it down neatly.

What’s really being communicated?
First, the market is being asked to value what SpaceX could eventually control. And that future is much bigger than rockets. The company is positioning itself as essential infrastructure across satellite communications, defence, launch capability and potentially AI. The underlying message is that the most valuable technology companies will own the systems that other companies, governments and economies depend on. That shifts the investor’s question from “Is this valuation justified?” to “Can I afford not to be part of it?”

Anthropic Sounds the Alarm On AI. Again.

Anthropic, valued at almost US$1 trillion and preparing for a major float, is calling for a nuclear arms control-style treaty to pause AI development before systems capable of recursively improving themselves become too difficult for humans to control. More in The Australian. Following on the heels of this story, covered by Wired and others, is Anthropic’s walk back on a policy “that would have covertly limited competitors from using its new AI model, Claude Fable 5 to develop other AI models. The company changed course after the move received significant backlash from the AI research community.”

What’s really being communicated?
Anthropic is positioning itself as both a builder of frontier AI and one of the few organisations responsible enough to restrain it. Safety and commercial interest aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive. Anthropic may genuinely believe that unrestricted model development presents a serious risk. But when the proposed safeguards also impede competitors, the line between protecting humanity and protecting market position become blurred.

Phrase of the Week

Technological Determinism is a theory that suggests the course of a society's culture, history, and future is largely shaped by the technology it develops and utilises. Proponents of this theory argue that technological advancements drive changes in economic, political, social, and cultural structures in ways that are often beyond societal control.

Here are three steps to get alignment before executing on new goals or direction. They may seem obvious, but many companies skip these steps when they’re moving fast, and end up mistaking polite agreement for real commitment.

WHY SHOULD ANYONE CHOOSE YOU?

I analysed 25 start-ups, 25 mid-sized tech firms, 25 enterprise software companies and 25 IT services firms to see how tech companies explain who they are, what they do and why they matter? What I found was that tech companies suffer from ‘sameness’. Is this a problem? And if so, should you do something about it in an era where AI slop is turning ‘sameness’ into commercial risk. I invite you to read my analysis and download the research report, access below.

If this helped you think differently about communication, forward this newsletter to someone who leads, sells or explains complex ideas in tech.