A leader who takes over a small business with 40 employees after a buyout discovers, within the first week, that their hierarchical authority is not enough. The teams expect quick decisions regarding the reorganization of positions, the implementation of a new ERP system, and the management of a latent conflict between two departments. Developing leadership skills in this type of situation is not a theoretical exercise; it is an operational urgency that conditions the survival of the company.
AI Governance: The Leadership Skill No One Saw Coming
Since February 2, 2025, Article 4 of the European regulation on artificial intelligence (EU) 2024/1689 requires organizations deploying AI systems to ensure a sufficient level of mastery of this technology among their staff. For a leader, this changes the game. We are no longer just talking about “digital transformation” in strategic meetings, but about a regulatory obligation for human oversight of AI tools.
In practical terms, leading a company that uses a customer service chatbot or a CV sorting tool requires understanding the model’s limitations, clarifying who is responsible in case of error, and organizing team training. Structured training programs, such as those offered on academie-dirigeants.org, allow leaders to structure this skill development without improvisation.
A common pitfall: fully delegating the AI topic to the IT department. Leadership here involves maintaining control over usage choices, not the code. Which processes to automate, what safeguards to put in place, how to inform the CSE before deployment (Article L2312-8 of the Labor Code): these decisions fall to the leader.
Driving Change by Involving Social Dialogue
The social aspect of leadership is often underestimated. Launching a restructuring project or deploying a new tool without consulting employee representatives is setting the stage for a blockage. In France, the introduction of new technologies that change working methods or conditions falls under the information-consultation of the CSE.
Involving teams in the change before imposing it is not a trendy managerial stance. It is a legal requirement and a lever for efficiency. Leaders who present the project, listen to objections, and adjust the timeline based on feedback from the field experience less resistance to deployment.
Concrete Steps for a Successful Consultation
- Prepare a concise document describing the tool, its scope of use, and the impacted positions before the CSE meeting
- Organize a pilot phase in a voluntary department, with a shared assessment after four to six weeks
- Formalize a usage charter (especially for generative AI) that specifies what is allowed, what is not, and the channels for reporting incidents
- Plan a quarterly follow-up meeting to adjust practices based on feedback
This process takes time. Feedback varies depending on the size of the company and the internal culture. In a structure with fewer than 50 employees, an informal meeting with the concerned teams may suffice. In a larger group, the formality of the CSE is required.
Leadership and Team Management in a Hybrid Context
Leading a team where half works remotely two days a week requires rethinking communication methods. In-person meetings no longer capture all the subtle signals. An employee in difficulty may not necessarily walk into the office to discuss it.
Hybrid leadership relies on short and regular rituals rather than large monthly meetings. A fifteen-minute individual check-in each week, a dedicated discussion channel for operational blockages, and a clear rule on expected response times structure better than an annual seminar on cohesion.
Managerial Skills to Strengthen for Hybrid Work
Active listening takes on a different dimension when one cannot see body language. Restating what one has understood at the end of an exchange, asking open-ended questions in writing, and providing specific feedback rather than general impressions: these micro-skills are developed daily. One is not born a hybrid manager; one becomes one through practice and by observing what works in their own context.
Ongoing Training for Leaders: Which Formats Yield Results
Reading a book on leadership once a year does not change much. What produces measurable results is the combination of three complementary formats:
- Peer mentoring (leadership clubs, co-development groups): confronting one’s decisions with those of leaders from other sectors forces one to step outside their biases
- Short and targeted training: modules of two to three days on a specific topic (crisis management, social negotiation, financial steering) with immediate practical application
- Structured feedback: after each major decision, taking thirty minutes to note what worked, what failed, and what one would do differently
Leadership development cannot be decreed in a strategic plan. It is built through the accumulation of micro-adjustments after each real situation. A leader who analyzes their hiring mistakes learns more about their management style than by attending a seminar on “DISC profiles.”
The best investment in leadership remains the time spent listening to employees about what is not working. Teams generally know where the dysfunctions lie. The leader’s role is to create the conditions for this information to flow unfiltered, and then to act on it. It is less spectacular than an inspiring vision, but it is what sustains a company over time.
