FRE.2026

Uncertainty has become an inescapable companion of modern leadership. Manyleaders today operate in environments shaped by economic volatility, geopolitical pressures,sudden policy shifts, and corporate transformations such as restructurings, mergers, ordivestitures. Often there is no clear roadmap, no detailed timeline, and sometimes not evenfull visibility into the forces shaping tomorrow.Yet leaders are still expected to deliver, to protect performance, and to guide teams who lookto them for orientation and reassurance. It is a demanding paradox: to create stability in aworld that offers very little of it.True leadership reveals itself not when conditions are predictable, but when thefuture is blurred and the context is volatile. It begins with the ability to remain grounded whileeverything around appears in motion. It begins with leaders understanding their ownemotional landscape, managing their energy, and cultivating resilience not as an act ofheroism, but as a disciplined and conscious practice.Resilience is not about pretending to be unshakable; it is about being adaptable. It isthe quiet confidence that one can bend without breaking, the willingness to face realitywithout losing hope, and the discipline to keep moving even when clarity is scarce. Resilientleaders recognise their own stress signals and adjust with intention. They nurture theirmindset, their physical wellbeing, their energy, and their recovery as interconnected pillarssupporting their ability to stay present, intentional, and calm under pressure.But leadership in uncertainty extends far beyond the individual. It is also about howleaders bring people together at a time when uncertainty tends to isolate. Doubt can erodeconnection and amplify fear. Leadership repairs this by fostering trust, strengtheningrelationships, and creating space for open conversations. When people feel seen andsupported, they rediscover their collective strength. When they feel safe to express theirconcerns, they contribute more ideas, take more initiative, and stay more engaged.Communication becomes the leader’s most powerful tool. In turbulent times,employees do not expect their leaders to possess all the answers, but they do expecthonesty, empathy, and presence. Silence fuels anxiety; clear communication reduces it.Leaders who openly acknowledge what is known and what is still unknown demonstratecourage and build credibility. Transparency becomes a source of psychological stability.Empathy becomes a source of human connection. When combined, they help people stayfocused, confident, and aligned even when the future remains unsettled. When Uncertainty Becomes Visible: Signals That Leaders and Employees AreStruggling Uncertainty does not only change strategy; it changes human behaviour. And beforepeople articulate their discomfort, they often express it through subtle signals that attentiveleaders can observe.Employees may begin to withdraw from conversations, participate less actively inmeetings, or hesitate to take initiative for fear of making the wrong move. Productivity mayfluctuate, not because of capability, but because mental preoccupation drains cognitive energy. Informal networks may weaken, and small misunderstandings may escalate morequickly than usual. You may observe rising cynicism, humour that masks anxiety, or anoticeable increase in escalations as people seek clarity they no longer feel empowered toresolve themselves.Leaders, too, show signs of strain. Some become overly rigid, clinging to control inan attempt to create certainty where none exists. Others may become less decisive,delaying choices because they fear missteps. Some leaders lose their habitual warmth,shifting into a more transactional mode of management simply to keep things moving. Andsome retreat into silence, believing they have nothing to say until clarity arrives unaware thattheir silence creates even more anxiety among teams.These signals are not signs of weakness; they are human indicators of psychologicaloverload. Recognising them early allows organisations to intervene with empathy, clarity,and support before disengagement takes root. The Unique Responsibility of the CEO In moments of deep uncertainty, the CEO holds a particularly symbolic andoperational role. The organisation looks to the CEO not only for strategic direction but alsofor emotional steadiness. More than any other leader, the CEO sets the tone, shapes thenarrative, and embodies the organisation’s resilience.A CEO must illuminate the vision at times when others struggle to see it. This visiondoes not need to be overly detailed or perfectly defined, but it must be purposeful. It mustexplain where the organisation is heading, why it matters, and how people can contribute toit. In uncertain times, a compelling and coherent vision becomes a stabilising force, acompass that helps teams maintain perspective and a sense of meaning.Presence is equally essential. A visible CEO walking the floors, listening, answeringquestions, engaging in dialogue becomes a source of reassurance. Visibility signalscommitment. It shows that the CEO is not detached from the challenges but walking throughthem alongside the organisation. When the CEO embodies calm resilience, others follow.When the CEO demonstrates openness, transparency spreads across the leadership chain.And when the CEO shows courage, the organisation draws strength from that example. CEO’s Direct Reports must embrace fully CEO messages and act withAuthenticity If the CEO is the organisation’s anchor during uncertainty, the executive leadershipteam (the CEO’s direct reports) are the stabilising bridge between the vision at the top andthe lived reality throughout the company. Their role is not merely to cascade messages; it isto embody the leadership culture the organisation needs.Authenticity becomes their most powerful tool. Employees quickly sense when seniorleaders do not believe in the messages they share, or when they are projecting confidencethat feels artificial. Authentic executive leaders acknowledge challenges without dramatizingthem, express confidence without pretending to have all the answers, and speak frompersonal conviction rather than rehearsed corporate language.Their behaviour creates cultural alignment. When executive leaders visibly supportthe CEO’s direction, the organisation aligns. When they remain present, available, and connected to their teams, the organisation feels held. When they uphold transparencysharing what they know, what remains uncertain, and how they are working toward claritythey reinforce trust at every layer of the company.In times of uncertainty, employees assess leadership not only on competence, but oncongruence. Do words and actions match? Do leaders embody what they ask of others?Authenticity turns senior leaders into anchors rather than amplifiers of anxiety How HR Can Support Leaders and Employees ? Human Resources plays an indispensable role in helping organisations navigateuncertainty. HR becomes the stabiliser, ensuring that leaders are equipped, employees aresupported, and communication remains aligned. When uncertainty threatens to fragment theorganisation, HR helps keep it connected.HR can

Recently, I was told two stories that made me reflect on how companies design and applytheir travel policies, and more broadly on what those policies signal about culture, trust, andpriorities.The cases :The first story involved a young talent sent abroad to a major city for an important executivemeeting. The company recommended a specific hotel group, but the available rate exceededthe internal budget by three euros per night. The employee requested an exception. It wasrefused. To comply with policy, he booked a cheaper hotel outside the city. This resulted inlong taxi rides to attend meetings. In the end, taxi costs exceeded the original difference.The situation deteriorated further when the hotel check-in failed, forcing him to call customerservice to gain access to his room. The total cost for the company increased, time was lost,and unnecessary stress was created before a key meeting. More importantly, a youngemployee began questioning the logic and flexibility of the organization.The second story concerned a C-level executive asked to take an intercontinental flight ineconomy class. The company was performing well, but business and premium economywere outside policy. In principle, that is a legitimate company decision. However, thisexecutive had known back problems that made long-haul travel without a reclining seatphysically difficult. He raised the issue with his manager and HR, requesting an exception. Itwas denied. Eventually, he had to obtain a medical certificate in order to book a business-class ticket at the last minute. This increased costs and administrative burden. Beyond thefinancial impact, the message he received was that policy compliance outweighed trust andcommon sense. For a senior leader, that perception is not neutral.The game has changedSince the end of 2021, business travel has decreased significantly. Communicationplatforms such as Zoom Video Communications, Microsoft and Cisco have become standardtools. At the same time, sustainability goals and carbon footprint reduction have rightlygained importance.Travel remains, however, a significant cost category. For many CFOs, it appears to be one ofthe few expense lines that can be tightened year after year. Better tracking systems, stricterapproval processes, narrower class eligibility these measures are often introduced in thename of discipline.Commercial and marketing teams tend to see things differently. Even in a more data-drivenworld, relationships still matter. In many industries and cultural environments, physicalpresence builds trust in ways that digital tools cannot fully replicate. Video conferences areefficient for follow-up and coordination, but they do not always replace the depth of in-personengagement.The outdated prejudiceThere is also a persistent misunderstanding: some still consider business travel a privilegeor a reward. That perception no longer reflects reality. Today’s business trips are short,intense, and highly focused. In Europe, for example, many involve early departures and latereturns on the same day. Agendas are dense, expectations high, and informal time limited. Classification – FOR INTERNAL USEONLYCompliance rules have increased while allowances have often been reduced. Travel hasbecome more professional, but also more demanding.The impact of travel on employeeThis is where wellbeing enters the conversation. Travel affects sleep, nutrition, stress levels,and physical health. Long-haul flights disrupt biological rhythms. Early departures and latereturns reduce recovery time. Repeated exposure to such conditions without adequateconsideration accumulates fatigue. When policies ignore these human factors, they createsilent costs: reduced performance, increased irritability, health deterioration, and eventuallydisengagement. A travel policy is therefore not just a financial instrument. It is a contributorto employee wellbeing. Or it can be a detractor.Is one size fit all policy the answer ?Most companies differentiate policies by hierarchy, function, or geography. Somedifferentiation can be justified. Senior leaders often have compressed schedules and areexpected to perform immediately upon arrival. However, the human body does notdifferentiate by title. A long intercontinental flight impacts a junior manager and an executivein similar physiological ways. Personally I can support some differentiation based onhierarchical levels due to the fact that travel at senior level can be shorter and people mustbe immediately plug and play when landing. However when it goes to from office or backoffice roles or countries differentiations, the rational for me is far less obvious and I wouldrather recommend to treat everybody in the same manner when it goes to transcontinentalmoves and keep specific on domestic policy factoring then the cola differences.If travel policy is perceived as rigid, unfair, or disconnected from real working conditions, iterodes trust. Employees may not resign because of a seat category or a hotel budget. Butthese decisions accumulate. They shape how employees feel about the organization’srespect for their comfort, health, and judgment. In many cases, travel policy becomes thelast drop in a broader disengagement process.The benefit of an effective travel policyConversely, a well-designed travel policy can act as a retention tool. When employees seethat the company balances cost control with common sense and health considerations, itreinforces psychological safety. When exceptions are handled pragmatically rather thanbureaucratically, it strengthens trust. When the total cost of a decision including productivityand wellbeing is considered, the organization behaves rationally, not mechanically.Corporate wellbeing is not limited to gym memberships or wellness programs. It alsoincludes everyday operational choices. A policy that saves small amounts but generatesfrustration, medical consultations, last-minute rebookings, and reduced commitmentultimately harms the organization’s wellbeing. It creates hidden friction in the system.On the other hand, a policy that supports reasonable comfort for long-haul travel, proximityto meeting locations, and transparent exception processes contributes to sustainedperformance. Employees arrive prepared rather than exhausted. They feel trusted ratherthan controlled. They focus on delivering results instead of navigating constraints. Classification – FOR INTERNAL USEONLYThe objective is not unlimited flexibility. Cost discipline remains essential. But disciplineshould be intelligent. Travel policy should optimize total value, not only visible expense lines.It should support health, performance, and engagement not undermine them.In a competitive talent market, companies increasingly compete on culture and experience.Travel policies may seem like operational details, yet they send powerful signals. Theycommunicate whether people are viewed primarily as costs or as contributors whosewellbeing matters.In that sense, travel policy is more than an administrative framework. It is a strategic lever.Properly designed, it supports employee wellbeing and, by extension, company wellbeing.Mishandled, it does the opposite.The real question is therefore not how much can be saved on travel each year.

Institutional Investors, private equity, family office and owners are looking for havingin place “performing board” meaning, beyond representing and protecting their interests,setting the company’s direction and ensuring strong governance, overseeing and supportingthe CEO while holding leadership accountable, monitoring performance and ensureslongterm value creation.The First Revolution: Diversity Became a Corporate Governance ImperativeThose boards for long time were not diverse. Boards were long homogenous, bothdemographically and cognitively. Investors and society eventually recognized that this lack ofdiversity limited oversight quality, reduced perspective variety, and increased groupthink risk.Then the investors and owner realized that their boards needed to represent more thediversity of the society and of the workforce to better understand the dynamic of the worldsaround their businesses. Boards began acknowledging the need for more diversity around2017, driven by investor pressure from groups like State Street, Vanguard, and BlackRockcalling for more women on boards. Momentum accelerated after 2020 with U.S. socialmovements and regulatory actions like California’s diversity laws and Nasdaq’s disclosureand “comply or explain” requirements. In Europe, the push came earlier and was moreregulatory: the EU required companies to have 40% women among nonexecutive directorsor 33% among all directors by 2026, driving faster gender diversity progress than in the U.S.The rationale across regions was similar: diverse boards bring better perspectives, reducegroupthink, strengthen governance, and improve transparency and accountability.Overall, societal pressure, investor expectations, and regulatory action especiallystrong in Europe made board diversity a core part of modern corporate governance. Nowwith the ESG standards and reporting the requirements and visibility will be even strongerThat was the first revolution concerning the structure of the board.Looking at Today’s Boardrooms: What Do We See?Despite progress on diversity, the professional backgrounds of board membersremain strikingly homogeneous. Most boards are still populated by: Former CEOs, FormerCFOs Often from the exact same industry. At first glance, this seems logical. Familiarity withthe sector can accelerate understanding and facilitate productive debates with executives.But three issues deserve careful consideration. Classification – FOR INTERNAL USEONLY Experience matters but outdated experience can be dangerous. Classification – FOR INTERNAL USEONLY continuity risks related to leadership pipelines or succession. However, the skills on boardsoften do not match the human capital oversight they are expected to provide: Boards areexpanding oversight into human capital, culture, talent, AI impact and workforce risks, butvery few directors have HR expertise. Leadership and manager development with AI is nowthe 1 priority for HR leaders globally, reflecting increasingly complex workforce challengesthat boards also need to understand. Nearly all CHROs globally plan to strengthenorganizational culture, acknowledging its centrality to performance yet boards rarely havethe expertise to challenge or guide this. And yet, HR professionals occupy less than 2% ofboard seats today, a striking mismatch given how central people are to strategy executionand long-term value.Why HR Must Be on the Board: The Value CaseA modern board cannot credibly govern a company without deep insight intoworkforce dynamics, especially when: Employee burnout is widespread, with over 40%reporting high levels of stress. ] Employee experience and culture stagnation are major risks,with only 60% of employees feeling the right people are recognized for their effortsLeadership pipelines are shrinking, with half of Gen Z avoiding middle management roles.Trust is declining, with employee trust dropping sharply in multiple regions. Boards withoutHR expertise struggle to ask the right questions, evaluate organizational health, or foreseepeoplerelated risks that jeopardize strategy.In contrast, a Chief People Officer on the board brings among other points: Expertise in culture, leadership, and succession, critical to continuity and strategy. Understanding of workforce risks, now recognized as governance issues. Datadriven insight into engagement and organizational performance. Ability to translate organizational signals into strategic implications A people-first lens in discussions dominated by financial and operational metrics.The Second Revolution: Make HR a Standard Board Competency, appoint moreCHROsAfter improving gender and demographic diversity on boards, the next step is todiversify professional expertise and the most urgent gap is human capital. Given theoverwhelming evidence that people are the primary drivers of both success and failure, HRleaders must move from occasional presenters to full board members.Today, with HR professionals making up less than 2% of board directors, we are leaving acritical dimension of governance unaddressed.It is time to correct that.Conclusion :If the first revolution made boards look more like society being more diverse, the secondrevolution will make boards think more like the organizations they govern. Strategy is writtenin the boardroom but it is executed by people. Until boards bring human capital expertise tothe table, they will continue to oversee the future with only half the instruments required tonavigate it. The companies that win the next decade will be those whose boards finally put

The EU Pay Transparency Directive (2023/970) must be implemented by all EU Member States by 7 June 2026 on the principle but situation will differ from country to country. It introduces mandatory transparency measures including salary ranges in job postings, bans on salary-history questions, employee rights to pay information, and structured gender pay-gap reporting for companies with 100+ employees. Before examining its implications, it is essential to understand why this directive is being introduced, the benefits it offers, and the risks it creates for employers. What are the benefits of the this directive? Strengthens fairness and gender equality The directive aims to ensure equal pay for equal work or work of equal value, addressing persistent unexplained pay gaps in Europe. By making pay structures visible, companies can reduce hidden inequalities and improve internal trust.  Enhances employer brand and talent attraction Transparent salary ranges increase candidate confidence and reduce negotiation biases. They respond directly to workers’ demands for fairness and clear information. Drives better HR governance and data quality The reporting obligations force companies to clarify job architecture, harmonize pay structures, define objective compensation criteria. This aligns with the directive’s obligations for companies to provide employees with objective, non-gendered pay criteria. Reduces legal exposure through proactive compliance Clear, documented criteria reduce the risk of discrimination claims particularly important because the directive shifts the burden of proof to the employer in pay-dispute cases.  What are the Risks and Operational Drawbacks ? Risk of employee relations tension Once pay information becomes transparent, employees may compare their compensation and challenge perceived inequities. Many companies are not yet structurally ready: in December 2025, 93.8% of companies were not prepared to meet key requirements.  Potential for increased payroll costs If unexplained gaps exceed 5%, companies must justify or correct them through structural adjustments. This may lead to unplanned compensation increases.  High administrative and data-quality burden Companies must generate detailed pay indicators, maintain consistent job classification structures, and provide annual employee notifications of their pay-information rights.  Complexity of multi-country compliance The directive sets minimum standards, but implementation varies widely by Member State in terms of reporting formats, pay-gap thresholds, data submission processes, enforcement mechanisms. Countries progress at different speeds, as highlighted in EU transposition monitoring.  Impact on HR Organization (Operating Model & Capabilities) Implementing the Directive impacts structure, processes, tech, and skills across HR: How to Work with Works Councils / Employee Representatives For companies with works councils or employee representatives, proactive social dialogue is essential: A Single Directive, but Different National Implementations While the Directive creates a common European standard, Member States are implementing it differently because some already have strong equality laws (e.g., France, Spain, Germany’s existing frameworks),others need to build new mechanisms from scratch, some countries will impose stricter thresholds (e.g., 50 employees instead of 100).  However, once transposition is complete, every company operating in the EU regardless of size, sector, or country will fall under the scope of at least part of the directive. What applies to all companies (even below 100 employees): salary ranges in job advertisements, ban on salary-history questions, transparency of pay-setting criteria, right for employees to request pay information. What applies depending on company size mainly around reporting: 100–249 employees: reporting every 3 years, 250+ employees: annual reporting. Some national laws will reduce thresholds to 50 employees. What Companies Should Do Now to Prepare Regardless of where they operate, companies should take proactive steps ahead of the 2026 deadline. Build or refine your job architecture The ability to justify pay relies on clear definitions of job families, levels, skills and responsibility criteria, work-of-equal-value comparisons. This directly supports the directive’s requirement for objective, non-gendered criteria.  Conduct an internal pay-gap analysis which might have been done already proactively as part of ESG initiative for example Ahead of mandatory reporting, companies should analyze current gender pay gaps, identify >5% unexplained gaps, document legitimate factors (experience, skills, performance), plan corrective actions. This is important because gaps above 5% must be justified or corrected under the directive.  Review and update compensation policies Policies must standardize pay progression criteria, articulate how decisions are made, be accessible to employees (as required by the directive).   Prepare to publish salary ranges Companies must ensure market benchmarks are up-to-date, ranges are consistent across countries and job families, recruitment teams are trained to use and communicate ranges. This requirement applies to all employers.  Strengthen HR information systems and data quality Large parts of the compliance process rely on accurate data. Companies should ensure their HRIS can produce at minimum: gender pay-gap indicators, compensation distributions by job category, pay-progression reporting. Train leaders and HR teams Managers and HR business partners must be ready to explain pay decisions transparently respond to employee requests for information, manage internal tensions resulting from transparency. This is essential given the directive’s expanded employee rights.  Conclusion The EU Pay Transparency Directive represents one of the most significant shifts in compensation governance in decades .Although implementation differs from country to country and thresholds may vary, the end result is the same. All EU employers will have to adopt transparent pay practices. Companies that prepare now with the right HR operating model, robust data, and constructive social dialogue will reduce legal risk, avoid cost shocks, and strengthen their employer brand.