The CEO Agenda 2026

Executive summary

How are the world’s top CEOs responding to the complex set of challenges and opportunities they face today, from geopolitics and artificial intelligence to growth and resilience? And what can they learn from one another in the process?

To answer these questions, the Oliver Wyman Forum and the New York Stock Exchange collected detailed survey responses from 415 chief executives around the world, the most extensive annual survey of its kind and the third in our series. The public and private companies represented here span all major sectors, with the public companies alone accounting for roughly 10% of global market capitalization.

Their responses, though varied, point to a common conviction among CEOs in 2026: This is the time to harness an unprecedented wave of disruption — before it reshapes them. That requires different thinking. Today’s leaders no longer have the luxury of tackling priorities one by one. Instead, they must execute in parallel across multiple vectors, from AI and M&A to talent and governance, making interlocking moves that inevitably create tradeoffs and tough choices.

The companies that are active across more of these vectors simultaneously are starting to pull ahead, in what could be the beginning of a great divergence.

Company size is one key factor. For example, the small and midsize companies in our set, facing consolidation pressure from larger rivals, are pursuing big, transformative M&A deals at a higher rate than the large and mega-size companies we tracked. Midsize companies, despite signaling strong AI investment intent last year, lag both their smaller and larger peers in scaling AI deployment. And size compounds AI advantages in some use cases: 45% of large and mega-size companies have deployed AI at scale in operational efficiency and customer service, roughly double the rate of small companies.

There are regional variations as well. In the Asia-Pacific region, 47% of companies qualify as AI deployment leaders, far ahead of Europe’s share (30%), with North America in between (37%). North America, meanwhile, remains the most growth-oriented region among our set. European CEOs, for their part, are most likely to be shrinking the workforce (38% are planning reductions greater than 5%) and are pursuing M&A for geographic expansion more aggressively than peers (54% versus 40% in North America) — with some noting that they see this as their defining moment to transform and pivot toward growth.

We launched this project in 2024 to provide CEOs with useful peer business insights, not just sentiment. Since then, everything has moved at hyperspeed: AI is shortening innovation cycles, competitors are making deals, and geopolitics are shifting quickly. Boards are becoming more engaged in strategy, risk, and leadership decisions and are heaping pressure on CEOs not just to ask the right questions but to answer them: How do we grow or position ourselves for advantage? How do we fund those efforts? What is the proper capital allocation? Do we buy or build speed and AI capabilities to capture opportunities? How do we respond to a new wave of AI-enabled and AI-first competitors? Are the new risk exposures we might add prudent or perilous?

How do we redesign our operating model around the realities of compressed time horizons, increasingly active governance, and shifting workforce structures?

CEOs’ approaches might vary by company size, sector, or geography, but these leaders are finding common cause in trying to solve one of the trickiest strategy puzzles in recent memory. 

In 2026, advantage comes from converting disruption and speed into performance — without creating fragility. The CEOs who get that balance right will do more than keep pace; they’ll shape what comes next. The chapters that follow show how.

Disruption and growth

Disruption and growth

Responding to disruption with growth strategies, business transformation, and M&A

Conditions are forcing CEOs to rewrite the rules of leadership practically in real time. Technological change, disruptive business models, and elevated geopolitical and macroeconomic uncertainty are roiling the competitive environment — while more assertive boards demand a faster pace of strategic decision-making. Most chief executives are taking advantage of the disruption with M&A, revenue growth, and business transformation.

Acquisitions are a preferred means of bolstering competitiveness, with most survey participants expecting M&A deals in the next year or two. It’s notable that CEOs who view competitive disruption as a top three opportunity are more than twice as likely to plan large-scale, transformative deals (39% versus 18% of their peers).

AI also is considered one of the leading opportunities, but with a fresh twist. It is rapidly evolving from a technology predicted to reduce costs into a growth driver by enabling companies to provide customers with AI-assisted products and services. Of CEOs who selected AI deployment among their top three opportunities, 62% said it is contributing equally to growth and cost efficiency while 17% see it primarily as a growth driver. Our conversations with CEOs reinforce this finding: Large enterprises increasingly see AI as a way to close the gap with tech-native startups that once held a clear technological edge. (In our analysis, we define large companies as those with annual revenue greater than $5 billion; midsize companies between $1 billion and $5 billion; and small companies less than $1 billion. Mega-size companies are those with annual revenue greater than $10 billion.)

But while many companies are still piloting AI internally, their customers are already ahead — 62% of consumers use AI to find and buy products, making shopping the second most popular use of AI after work tasks. And as customers shift to AI-mediated search, companies now serve two audiences: humans and AI agents. The winners will not just be the firms people remember; they will be the brands that machines trust enough to recommend.

The majority of CEOs expect the macroeconomic environment to be a leading threat for the next few years. They worry about inflation, interest rates, commodity prices, and financial market volatility. Interestingly, long-term planners (those spending at least 30% of their time on five-year-plus planning horizons) are more likely to see opportunity in the broader economy: 46% cite macroeconomic conditions as a top three opportunity, 12 points above the average, suggesting they are looking past near-term uncertainty and see favorable conditions in the future. Data collection for this report ran from January 12 to March 13, 2026, a period bookended by the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos and intensifying conflict in the Middle East.

Also notable is a sharp drop in concern about the regulatory environment, which could enable CEOs to pursue growth. Two years ago, 68% of NYSE-listed company CEOs said regulation was a top threat to their business; today, amid a pronounced trend toward deregulation, especially in the United States, that figure is 34% in North America (equal across NYSE-listed and private companies) and just 19% in Asia-Pacific. European CEOs remain the most regulation-conscious, with 42% citing it as a top threat even as deregulatory agendas gain traction across Europe. 

CEOs are self-funding growth with cost management strategies

The era of leverage-fueled expansion is giving way to a discipline-first growth model. With roughly one-third of all outstanding corporate bond debt maturing by 2027, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and potentially needing to be refinanced at materially higher rates, CEOs are prioritizing cost management to free up resources to drive growth.

Revenue uplift runs a close second to cost management as a top three priority for increasing shareholder value over the next one to two years, but 28% of survey respondents ranked it No. 1, more than any other option. By contrast, CEOs on average are minimizing emphasis on capital efficiency, cash flow management, and returning capital to shareholders (selected by 33% of CEOs this year, compared with 53% last year), though CEOs in financial services, chemicals, and energy continue to emphasize these areas.

The message is clear: Leaders are pursuing cost discipline and growth in tandem, treating operational efficiency as fuel as they grow through the disruptions ahead.

M&A boom whets appetites among CEOs to pursue consolidation

When organic growth is constrained and leverage is expensive, scale can be a potential solution, especially if it is the right type of scale. Ninety-four percent of CEOs plan to pursue M&A in the next one to two years, matching the appetite we found in our 2025 survey. That suggests continued strong momentum in a market in which worldwide M&A value reached $4.6 trillion in 2025. Dealmaking increased 48% over 2024, making for the strongest year since 2021, with activity targeting US companies hitting a 27-year high.

Today’s approach is surgical rather than speculative. Fifty-three percent of CEOs are pursuing bolt-on acquisitions to build scale incrementally, while 32% are targeting larger, transformative deals. Strategies vary by company size: Bosses of midsize companies lean into bolt-ons and scale-building (58%), while smaller companies, facing consolidation pressure from above, are pursuing larger deals at a higher rate (37%) than the 33% cited by CEOs of midsize companies and the 23% cited by CEOs of large companies. In general, though, the trend is to deepen positions rather than make cross-sector bets: Nearly two-thirds of would-be dealmakers plan to consolidate within their existing industry, up six points from 2025. 

Scale is not simply a function of size. For the largest companies, it is equally a matter of depth. Fifty-four percent of mega-size companies are pursuing M&A to acquire new capabilities and intellectual capital — 18 percentage points more than CEOs of large companies, who remain more focused on geographic expansion.

Where some see scale as a matter of reach, the biggest players are increasingly betting on expertise and capabilities. 

That instinct is not confined solely to the largest balance sheets. The share of CEOs pursuing M&A to acquire capabilities and intellectual capital climbs sharply in industries where technological change is moving fastest — 64% in technology, media, and telecom; 56% in transportation and automotive, and 58% in industrials, aerospace, and defense. In each case, the logic is the same: Buying is faster than building, and is sometimes more effective, setting companies up to leapfrog the competition.

Speed and complexity

Speed and complexity

Time horizons are compressed but long-term planners outperform on resilience, AI

At a time when economic and geopolitical uncertainty, rapid technological change, and market volatility cloud the future, CEOs are focused on the short term. Half of planning time is now dedicated to horizons of less than one year, up from 43% in 2025. Volatility is no longer primarily a macro phenomenon but is idiosyncratic, with winners and losers emerging within every industry and investors increasingly focused on the gap between companies prepared for AI and those exposed.

Small-company CEOs are the most constrained, spending 54% of their time on sub-one-year planning, compared with 42% for leaders at the largest companies. That short-term pressure has a mirror image: Large-company leaders spend 26% of their time on horizons of five years or more, versus just 16% at small companies. Technology, media, and telecom bosses operate on the most compressed timelines of any industry, dedicating only 16% of their time to horizons of five years or more — five percentage points below the average — even as they drive much of the innovation that is accelerating change for everyone else. Energy, natural resources, and utilities CEOs are the most long-term-oriented industry cohort, devoting 27% of their time to horizons of five years or more.

The CEOs who take the longest view see the most opportunity — a pattern that held in both 2025 and 2026. Compressed time horizons, while understandable, might come at the cost of strategic clarity. Our data show that long-horizon planners are making markedly different choices, from supply chains to dealmaking to AI.

For one thing, they prepare for shocks differently: They are nearly twice as likely as short-horizon planners to deepen visibility beyond direct suppliers (48% versus 26%) and more than twice as likely to run geopolitical scenarios (27% versus 12%). They are further ahead on AI in risk, controls, and compliance, with 46% piloting AI in these areas versus 27% of short-horizon peers. They are more expansive in dealmaking, with 51% planning geographic expansion versus 36%. Among CEOs who already cite technology and AI as a priority, long-horizon planners are twice as likely to treat it primarily as a growth lever (22% versus 11%).

Boards are expanding involvement in strategy, succession, and risk

As planning horizons compress, CEOs are not carrying the burden alone. Boards are expanding their involvement precisely where and when the pressure is greatest.

The top increases are in areas core to the board mandate: strategy and governance (61%), executive performance and succession (35%), and risk management (34%). This may help some CEOs succeed, but it also is a moment when leadership continuity is under pressure: 11% of CEOs were replaced in 2025, producing the youngest cohort on record in data from Spencer Stuart. New CEOs were 54 years old on average (down from 56 in 2024) and average tenure for departing CEOs in this database was 8.5 years (down from 9.2 years in 2024).

AI strategy and oversight came in sixth place among 10 categories of increasing board priorities. That suggests many boards already feel adequately briefed on AI and trust executive leadership teams to hold the steering wheel.

Board priorities vary by company type. Public company boards are focusing more on strategy oversight and risk mitigation, with 65% of CEOs reporting increased engagement on strategy and 38% on risk and compliance. Private boards are more likely than their public peers to be involved in operations (21% versus 12%) and organizational transformation (33% versus 26%), though this is likely due to private companies’ smaller size. CEOs at private-equity-owned companies saw their boards increase involvement in engaging external stakeholders at a notably higher rate than non-private-equity-owned peers (25% versus 14%). Boards at companies reporting high ROI on AI (more than 10% total cost savings or revenue generation) are the most active across all dimensions and have increased board involvement in AI strategy at nearly twice the average rate (42% versus 23%). The companies farthest ahead on AI appear to be treating governance as the infrastructure required for scaled innovation in high-stakes environments rather than as a constraint on speed.

Macro and geopolitical risks drive crisis management and supply-chain resilience

Macroeconomic conditions are the most prominent threat among CEOs globally, with 57% ranking it in their top three, followed by geopolitics and trade policy (41%) and the competitive environment (38%). But the risk radar varies sharply by geography, especially when CEOs rank their top threat.

North American CEOs are most worried about macroeconomic conditions, with 30% flagging it as their No. 1 threat — well ahead of 23% in Europe and 19% in Asia-Pacific. European CEOs are disproportionately preoccupied with domestic politics and the regulatory landscape, with 20% citing these as their biggest concern versus 8% in Asia-Pacific.

For leaders of mega-size organizations, whose international exposure amplifies every shock, geopolitical risks register seven points above the global average. Cybersecurity is also climbing the agenda: 39% of AI deployment leaders (companies with at-scale AI deployment in at least two use cases) now rank it as a top-tier threat, seven points above the average — reflecting the heightened security risks and the trust at stake that come with moving AI past the pilot phase. Companies are responding: 65% of large-firm CEOs are strengthening business continuity and crisis management, with 45% planning to reconfigure supply chains. Proactive preparedness has become table stakes as politics and interconnectedness shape markets.

Artificial intelligence

Artificial intelligence

Most firms are planning or piloting with AI while large firms lead on deployment

Three and a half years after the launch of ChatGPT changed how people work, shop, and compete, the question is no longer whether companies should bet big on AI but how quickly they can move from experimentation to deployment at scale.

More than 90% of companies are at least piloting AI in key areas, including employee productivity, operational efficiency and back office, and analytics and insights. Yet 67% remain primarily in pilot or planning stages. Per use case, on average less than 3% of companies have deployed autonomous agents at scale and 18% on average have deployed AI-assisted tools at scale.

Deployment is most advanced in the more straightforward use cases: operational efficiency, employee productivity, and customer service, where a quarter of companies are using AI at scale. It lags by 10 percentage points in risk and compliance and strategic planning — high-stakes domains where the cost of error is significant and regulatory scrutiny is elevated.

Progress also varies substantially by company size. Roughly 45% of large companies have scaled AI deployment in operational efficiency and customer service, compared with about 20% of small companies. The one area of relative parity is employee productivity, where cheaper off-the-shelf tools are enabling smaller organizations to keep pace. Midsize companies appear behind, reporting less AI deployment than small and large companies despite high investment intent (86%) in 2025. One explanation is that they might lack the capital firepower of the largest companies and the agility of smaller peers, a gap that could narrow as AI tools become more accessible and deployment playbooks mature.

Private-equity-backed companies are moving faster to deploy AI at scale than their non-private-equity counterparts, outpacing peers across most categories, even after controlling for company size. This reflects the consensus among private equity firms that AI can move the needle for their portfolio companies, especially on cost-cutting — and this conviction is often paired with operational control.

Larger firms invested more aggressively over the past two years in pursuit of market leadership and now report higher at-scale AI deployment, particularly in efficiency and productivity use cases. Scale drives investment, and investment drives deployment.

AI's return on investment has a back-to-earth moment among CEOs

Companies are getting more realistic about the pace of AI deployment and the value they’re getting from the technology. The share of CEOs who say it is too early to assess the return on AI investment actually increased during the past year to 53% from 41% in 2025. And only 27% say ROI has met or exceeded expectations, down from 38% a year ago. Nearly a quarter of respondents report zero revenue impact so far. The recalibration is not a crisis of confidence — it is a recognition that redesigning work at scale is slower and more difficult than early enthusiasm suggested.

The ranks of AI ROI leaders — those reporting enterprise-level cost savings or revenue gains above 10% — also have declined, dropping to 12% from 17% in 2025. The decrease primarily reflects less progress than expected on revenue. At our CEO roundtables last year, that 17% number generated skeptical feedback. This year’s more modest number appears to be another sign of CEOs adjusting their AI timelines and targets.

Size appears to be a major factor in generating returns to date: Nearly five times as many mega-size companies and twice as many large companies report AI-driven cost savings above 10% compared to their midsize counterparts. Revenue generation remains elusive across the board, though, with just 5% of CEOs globally seeing gains above 10%.

Performance varies significantly by sector, too, with technology, media, and telecom companies pulling decisively ahead on ROI. Twenty-three percent of these tech respondents report cost savings above 10%, while 9% have unlocked revenue gains of more than 10% — both almost double the global average.

Insurance and asset management is a standout on scaling AI tools for analytics, forecasting, and insights (39% of those companies, outperforming tech’s 32% rate). This makes sense: Asset management and insurance are both data-intensive industries in which decisions — from portfolio allocation to underwriting — depend heavily on accurate forecasting and analysis using large amounts of available data. Those competitive pressures make AI-driven productivity gains critical for survival amid a consolidation wave that Oliver Wyman and Morgan Stanley project will eliminate up to one in five wealth and asset managers by 2029. 

AI deployment drives ROI among an elite group of companies

While most companies are still finding their footing on AI, an elite group continues to set the pace. Deployment leaders — those scaling AI in at least two categories — are generating returns at a very different rate. Forty-nine percent of deployment leaders report ROI meeting or exceeding expectations, compared with 28% of all CEOs. These leaders are also redesigning workflows at a higher rate (49%) than those stuck in pilots (32%), showing that organizational change and AI returns are mutually reinforcing. It is the single clearest finding on AI in this year’s survey: Deployment drives ROI.

In terms of geography, Asia-Pacific is setting the pace. Forty-seven percent of companies in that region qualify as AI deployment leaders, 17 percentage points greater than Europe. Asia-Pacific’s edge is particularly pronounced in strategic planning, where 17% have deployed AI at scale, outpacing North America (12%) and Europe (7%) by significant margins. The region’s lead is not accidental: Asia-Pacific operates in a more cost-competitive environment, shaped by the rise of powerful open-source models that have reduced the cost of enterprise-wide AI adoption. The pattern across size, sector, and geography points to the same conclusion: The AI divide is compounding, with each quarter of delayed or botched deployment widening the gap between leaders and the rest of the field.

Workforce

Workforce

Shift toward more midlevel roles turns talent pyramids into diamonds

Corporate workforces tend to evolve slowly in normal times, but today’s disruptive environment is anything but normal. The planned shift in workforce composition is among the most dramatic year-over-year changes in the survey. The share of CEOs planning to shift away from junior roles over the next two years has more than doubled, from 17% in 2025 to 43% today. Thirty-three percent of CEOs are shifting toward midlevel roles in particular.

Regional preferences diverge sharply. Europe and Asia-Pacific are leading the retreat from junior hiring, with 69% in Asia-Pacific and 50% in Europe looking to shift away from junior roles. North America is resisting the trend somewhat, shifting toward junior staff at twice the rate of its European and Asian counterparts — a divergence that likely reflects North America’s strong growth orientation.

Yet even North American CEOs plan a pronounced pivot away from junior roles (13-point decrease) and toward midlevel roles (19-point increase) since last year.

The debate about the bottom of the pyramid is hardly uniform, though, with some opting to invest in their future talent pipeline and hire digitally native, AI-fluent juniors.

Interestingly, AI ROI leaders are shifting toward junior workers at a relatively higher rate (24%) than those still struggling to see returns (17%), suggesting that a contrarian subset of the most advanced AI adopters see the technology increasing the value of entry-level talent rather than replacing it. Still, the dominant trend holds: Twice as many AI ROI leaders overall are shifting away from junior workers (50%) as toward them. 

Nearly three-quarters of CEOs are keeping workforce levels on hold or cutting

Beyond junior roles, the broader workforce is in a holding pattern. Forty-five percent of CEOs are keeping headcount flat, up 14 percentage points from 2025, while 29% are reducing it by more than 5% in the next one to two years. Together, that means 74% of CEOs are freezing or reducing headcount (up from 67% last year). Where cuts are happening, they are concentrated and deliberate: 39% of mega-size companies plan reductions versus 28% of smaller ones. Europe leads on reductions, with 38% of European CEOs planning cuts, consistent with the region’s more value-oriented posture, followed by 33% in Asia-Pacific and 23% in North America. By sector, tech, media, and telecom are the most aggressive (43% are cutting), with banking and materials both close behind at 39%. 

Notably, the CEOs with the longest planning horizons are the most likely to plan headcount reductions. That suggests they expect a structurally leaner organization not as a cost measure but as the destination — the endpoint of an AI-augmented operating model that requires fewer people, deployed differently. But this calculus carries risk. Headcount reduction that outpaces meaningful AI deployment can leave organizations exposed, and overreliance on systems that are still maturing introduces its own vulnerabilities. The harder question — one with which many CEOs are still grappling — is what their talent pipeline and company culture will look like in three years if the investment in junior employees is not made today. That is doubly hard to answer when many CEOs are also trying to turn their traditional triangle-shaped workforce pyramid into more of a middle-heavy diamond. The timing and extent of workforce reshaping also varies by industry and job function. In the tech sector, for example, some large-scale headcount reductions already have occurred, leaving a surplus of AI-savvy workers available to the wider economy.

Redesigning roles and workflows for AI and prioritizing succession planning

As AI reshapes business models, 38% of CEOs are prioritizing the redesign of roles and workflows, including 49% at large companies, 51% at mega-size companies, and 58% in the insurance and asset management industries. There is a direct connection to expected returns: AI deployment leaders, who excel on ROI, are significantly more likely to be redesigning workflows (49%) than the global average (38%).

Succession planning leads all workforce priorities at 59%, followed by culture (55%) and cross-functional collaboration (48%). By contrast, adapting the employee value proposition sits at the bottom of the priority list, cited by just 17% of survey respondents.

The disconnect is significant. In the Oliver Wyman Forum’s 300,000 Voices report, just 24% of employees said they believed they could build a meaningful career at their current company, and only 31% agreed they were gaining the skills needed to develop their career. CEOs prioritizing culture in the abstract may risk underinvesting in the tangible commitments — such as development pathways, evolving value propositions, and skills investment — that make culture more credible. Companies best positioned for the next phase of AI-driven transformation will approach their people strategy with the same rigor they apply to their technology roadmap.

Leadership continuity has moved up the agenda, with 68% of midsize-company CEOs and 60% of large-company CEOs prioritizing succession planning. CEOs in energy and natural resources (79%), banking (73%), and industrials (71%) prioritize this most — consistent with their above-average senior hiring rates and signaling a desire to build leadership depth in industries navigating significant structural changes. Long-term thinkers also stand apart here: 69% prioritize succession planning and leadership development, versus 60% of shorter-horizon planners.

Taken together, these workforce findings suggest the central talent question is no longer how many people companies will employ but what skills portfolio is needed and what shape the organization should take to cultivate it.

Today’s CEO challenge demands urgency on AI and M&A, longer view on work redesign

Across crucial dimensions of this survey — AI deployment, M&A, workforce redesign — the gap between the companies acting decisively on multiple fronts and those moving tentatively is becoming harder to close. The data paint the portrait of the CEO best positioned for what comes next. Long-horizon thinkers — those who resist the gravitational pull of short-term planning — see more opportunity, prepare more rigorously for shocks, and invest more deliberately in succession. AI deployment leaders who have moved beyond pilots into scaled implementation are generating roughly twice the average returns and are redesigning workflows at materially higher rates. And the companies treating cost discipline not as an end in itself but as an engine to fund growth and investment are the ones turning today’s volatility into competitive advantage. These are not separate strategies. The CEOs pulling ahead are managing the interactions between all of them, simultaneously and at speed.

That is what makes this moment so demanding and so consequential. Tenures are shrinking, board oversight is expanding, and the pace of technological and geopolitical change leaves little room for sequencing one priority at a time. Our view, based on three years of surveying and convening the world’s top chief executives, is that the leaders who will define this era are those who pair urgency with thoughtfulness: moving faston AI and M&A, but also taking the long view on talent, leadership continuity, and redesigning work. The puzzle has never been more complex, but the CEOs who solve it will turn the odds in their favor.

Research methodology

Research methodology

The 2026 Oliver Wyman Forum and New York Stock Exchange CEO Survey is the largest annual survey of large-company chief executives, capturing the perspectives of 415 CEOs — 266 from public companies and 149 from private companies. The public companies alone represent an estimated $12 trillion in market capitalization — approximately 10% of all global listed equity at the time of publication. The full sample, including private companies, represents a combined equity value of approximately $13 trillion.

Fielded from January 12 to March 13, 2026, the survey spans 11 industry categories and reaches CEOs across the entire size spectrum: 59 companies with annual revenues exceeding $10 billion (each with a market capitalization between $30 billion and $1 trillion), 41 with annual revenues between $5 billion and $10 billion, 128 with annual revenues between $1 billion and $5 billion, and 187 with annual revenues below $1 billion.

Respondents are concentrated in North America (231) and Europe (132), with additional coverage across Asia-Pacific (36) and other regions (16). Every respondent was either a parent company (group-level) CEO or the CEO of a subsidiary business with at least $1 billion in annual revenue. All companies below $1 billion in revenue participated at the group CEO level only.

All forward-looking figures refer to CEOs’ plans, decisions, and priorities over the next one to two years unless otherwise stated. Year-over-year comparisons were validated against a matched sample of NYSE-listed public companies to confirm the global trends reported still held.

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgments

Authors

Ana Kreacic is Partner and Chief Knowledge Officer of Oliver Wyman, and COO of the Oliver Wyman Forum.

John Romeo is a Managing Partner at Oliver Wyman and CEO of the Oliver Wyman Forum.

Arran Yentob is a Senior Partner and serves as the leader of Oliver Wyman's Canadian market.

Jose Lopez is a Senior Fellow at the Oliver Wyman Forum and a principal in Oliver Wyman’s Government and Public Institutions and Digital practices.

Maggie Lavoie is a Manager at the Oliver Wyman Forum.

Lulu Smith is a Senior Analyst at the Oliver Wyman Forum.

Contributors

Emmanuel Amiot, Ashik Ardeshna, Patrick Barlow, Laurent Bensoussan, Andreas Berlin, Chris Bernene, Carole Bouchard, Tom Buerkle, Jocelyn Cao, Robert Chedid, Larissa De Lima, Bruno Despujol, George Doster, Christian Edelmann, Susann Eisenegger, Elie Farah, Aaron Fine, Charlotte Fuller, Barbara Galli, Ricardo Gomeza, Neve Gong, Tim Hoyland, Robert Hunter, Rupal Kantaria, Dan Kleinman, Ugur Koyluoglu, Nick Liptak, Marissa Lynch, Jilian Mincer, Ted Moynihan, Anders Nemeth, Ben Paik, Mark Pellerin, Tejas Porwal, Rutger von Post, Silvia Sanz, Dimitri Schweiger, Til Schuermann, Vivek Sen, Athan Siah, Tom Stalnaker, Heather Stern, Vanessa Webb, and Michael Zeltkevic

Art and Design

Anne-Laure Chauvin, Kaori Hayama, Karolina Jaworska, Karen Lara, Cynthia Perez, Ramona Pillai, Nina Takahara, Weronika Talaj, and Melissa Ureksoy