4 minute read.
For senior leaders, September has always functioned as a kind of second January when the pace of business returns, priorities sharpen and the final stretch of the year comes into view. Here we consider two consequential questions executives should be asking right now: what do I need to further strengthen my leadership and, what does my organisation need to do differently to deliver the strategy?
The first half of 2026 has provided plenty of evidence. AI has moved rapidly from experimentation towards production. Geopolitical uncertainty is becoming an operating condition rather than an exceptional disruption. Boards are demanding greater evidence of transformation and execution. And for executives considering their next career move, the leadership market is becoming more selective about the experience it values.
In 2026, the traditional September reset matters for executives considering a transition more than ever because the leadership market has changed immeasurably in a matter of months.
The UK labour market remains subdued. Vacancies fell to around 707,000 in the three months to July, their lowest level outside the pandemic period since 2014.
For an executive considering a transition, this is not a market to sit out until conditions improve. The opportunity is to become much clearer about the problem a board would hire you to solve.
The first H1 trend to consider is executive hiring becoming more selective, not simply tighter.
Boards continue to use external appointments but are increasingly discriminating about the experience they buy. External CFO hiring hit a global high for the first quarter of 2026, at 47% of appointments, and boards recruiting externally are increasingly choosing candidates who have already held the title elsewhere: 42% of newly appointed CFOs in Q1 2026 had prior public-company CFO experience against a historical average of 35%.
“Experienced commercial leader” is no longer a compelling proposition. “I have led two international restructurings, rebuilt an underperforming operating model and taken a business through an acquisition” is much more useful to a board facing one of those situations.
The second lesson is that when boards do go outside, they are increasingly paying for directly relevant experience rather than for outside perspective alone. Anyone preparing for a leadership transition should therefore define their market by the business problems they can credibly solve, rather than by their current or previous job title.
Aside from the geopolitical and wider economic concerns which we examine in our regular quarterly executive outlooks, arguably the biggest developments over H1 2026, which should now be snapping into focus and into action across all sectors, were:
By mid-2026, leading organisations are building towards having agentic AI systems running in full production and making or directly influencing operational decisions across supply chains, HR processes and strategic planning.
The key strategic question has now moved on to whether organisations have the governance, oversight and accountability structures to manage what is already running.
External auditors reviewing AI systems have repeatedly found meaningful gaps between what boards believe is running and what actually is, with evidence that a portion of deployed systems may not be formally registered, owned or governed at all.
Almost three-quarters of boards have only moderate or limited AI expertise, according to KPMG’s Global AI Pulse Survey. So, the first priority of the autumn board cycle should therefore be a detailed audit of what AI is running in the organisation across every function, who owns the governance of each system, and what the oversight framework looks like.
The next question is more fundamental: does the organisation have the leadership capability and change-readiness to turn these technologies and strategic ambitions into results?
Any company can buy the tech, but transformation programmes will only deliver value with leaders who can translate strategic intent into organisational action.
That requires a different kind of leadership capability: the ability to make difficult decisions with incomplete information, redesign operating models, and maintain accountability when the organisation is under pressure. That makes change-readiness a strategic capability, not an HR initiative.
Boards and executive teams should therefore be asking: do we have the leadership capability required to deliver the strategy we have approved? The organisations that answer these questions honestly will be better placed to convert AI investment, operating-model change and strategic ambition into measurable outcomes. Those that do not risk accumulating transformation programmes without transformation.
Read the download to see what leadership capabilities will matter most in H2 2026.
The most valuable thing an executive can pack this summer is permission to stop. For many, the summer months bring…
3 minute read Global growth is slowing, AI is reshaping what boards need from their senior leaders, and executive mobility…
3-minute read Amid tumultuous geopolitical issues, fluctuating energy prices, inflation worries and AI disruption causing a human workforce crisis, the…
