Tirian: Innovation Consultancy and Facilitation

15/09/2026

This week, some technology leaders called for slowing AI down. The President of the United States pushed back, arguing that America needed to move faster. The debate will continue.

But I'm not convinced that's the most important question. Over the years, I've noticed that many failures don't come from poor ex*****on. They come from solving the wrong problem exceptionally well.

That's why I believe critical thinking is becoming more important, not less.

As AI makes it easier to analyse, optimise, automate, and accelerate, our ability to question assumptions, examine evidence, and challenge our own thinking becomes even more valuable.

Critical thinking isn't about slowing progress. It's about ensuring we're heading in the right direction before we accelerate.

Which is why I keep coming back to a simple question:

Are we solving the right problem in the right way?

Our latest article explores why critical thinking may become one of the most important leadership capabilities of the AI era. Andrew Grant
Gaia Grant
https://andrewgaiagrant.substack.com/p/when-ai-broke-the-rules?r=o972c&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true

25/08/2026

One idea sits at the heart of this conversation with Gaia Grant

People don't behave according to strategy. They behave according to systems.

As autonomous AI agents interact, adapt, and form emergent behaviours, they reveal something we've long observed in organisations: incentives matter, architecture matters, and culture is often a downstream consequence of system design.

The AI Mirror reflects the hidden assumptions, trade-offs, and incentives embedded in the way we lead and organise.

That's confronting because the mirror doesn't lie.

It's also hopeful because systems can be redesigned.

In this episode, Gaia and I explore what autonomous AI simulations can teach us about leadership, culture, and organisational design. Listen on: Substack Apple and Spotify.

Why behaviour—human or machine—is driven by incentives, not intention, and what that means for leadership and culture.

16/07/2026

My latest article looks at a viral AI game-theory experiment that reveals a glaring truth about corporate culture: systems drive behaviour.

When researchers posed a "life-and-death" dilemma to different AI models, the models reacted completely differently—some choosing high-risk selfishness, others choosing cooperation. The variation wasn't about intelligence; it was about their training. They did exactly what their underlying systems shaped them to do.

Gaia and I see the exact same pattern in our corporate consulting work, a phenomenon we call the "collaboration deception."

Many leaders publicly champion teamwork, yet maintain reward systems, individual KPIs, and promotion pathways that implicitly condition people to look out for number one. If your team defaults to self-interest, the solution isn't to urge them to "collaborate better." It’s to fix the conflicting structures.

Read the full piece to see how to audit your organization's "training data" and design for genuine collaboration https://andrewgaiagrant.substack.com/p/what-the-ai-mirror-reveals?r=o972c

09/07/2026

If dogs look like their owners, do AI agents act like their creators?
There’s a well-known psychological phenomenon that people unconsciously choose pets that reflect aspects of themselves.
Could we be seeing something similar in enterprise AI—but with far higher stakes?

When organisations deploy a large language model, they're not simply adopting neutral software. Through training data, reinforcement learning, and human feedback, AI companies embed assumptions, values, and behavioural preferences into their models.

Whether it's the more provocative posture associated with Grok, ChatGPT's highly polished agreeableness, or Claude's emphasis on thoughtful collaboration, each model exhibits distinct tendencies that reflect different design philosophies.

Are we conducting the largest culture change experiment in history by deploying AI agents without considering their behavioural influence?

The real question isn't whether your teams are using AI. It's whether you've considered what kind of organisational culture your AI is helping to create.

>> I'd love your perspective:
If every AI model reflects the biases and values of its creators, which AI personality would you want scaling across your company?
What behavioural traits would you want amplified across your organisation—and which would you avoid?

[Read the full article here to explore how to audit your AI strategy for behavioral alignment. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/four-ai-archetypes-might-reflecting-your-culture-behavior-grant-zdegc/

02/07/2026

I recently came across an experiment that I haven't been able to stop thinking about. Researchers placed autonomous AI agents into simulated societies and left them to operate independently. Some developed collaborative, stable communities. Others spiraled into competition, conflict, and eventual collapse.

What fascinated me wasn't the technology itself. It was how clearly the simulation revealed the risks of pushing any one behavioral archetype too far. The agents' behavior reflected what they had been trained to optimize for—often revealing the values, incentives, and assumptions embedded by their creators.

What I found most unsettling was watching strengths become weaknesses: cooperation became conformity, competition became conflict, and consensus became complacency. The simulation wasn't just a story about AI. It was a reminder that every strength can become a weakness when taken to an extreme.

This is why organizations need an ambidextrous leadership approach, as researched by Gaia Grant. One that balances exploration with ex*****on, challenge with alignment, and innovation with stability.

It made me wonder: If AI systems inherit the values, incentives, and biases of their creators, what exactly are we training into our future digital workforce?
In this article, I explore four AI archetypes and the organizational behaviors they may be reflecting back to us.

Looking at your own organization, which behavior is most rewarded today: curiosity, conformity, competition, or agreeability?
I'm increasingly convinced that the answer tells us as much about our future AI workforce as it does about our human one.

Read & Listen to the full article:

SUBSTACK https://open.substack.com/pub/andrewgaiagrant/p/four-ai-archetypes-shaping-organizational?r=o972c&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true

LINKEDIN https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/four-ai-archetypes-might-reflecting-your-culture-behavior-grant-zdegc

24/06/2026

Why is this newly published research by my partner Gaia Grant (PhD) so important? I think it's because while we face increasing complexity, it's challenging to manage competing demands simultaneously. We expect leaders to navigate complex, non-linear "wicked" problems, yet we are only preparing them for a linear world. Gaia's study has now been published by Sage in the and has been featured in Kudos.

The paper challenges the myth that innovative problem-solving is an innate talent. Through an evidence-based "paradox pedagogy" model, the study proves that ambidextrous thinking - the ability to balance competing demands - is a learnable capability.

I’ve had a front-row seat to how much thought, care, and rigour has gone into this research so it’s incredibly exciting to see it published.

A new teaching approach helps individuals balance creative and practical thinking for addressing complex challenges. By working directly with real problem-solving tensions, workshop participants build confidence and generate more innovative solutions faster. They develop the 'ambidextrous' skills ne...

09/06/2026

Great to be featured in Speakers Associates’ 2026 buyer’s guide to AI keynote speakers!

As organizations accelerate AI integration, leaders face a critical challenge: navigating the strategic friction between rapid technological adoption and core cultural stability.

True resilience isn't built on short-term technical hype. It is forged by mastering the explore-preserve tension at the core of every sustainable AI program. To move beyond generic tools and drive practical ex*****on, our work focuses directly on these organizational paradoxes.

Being able to co-present with my partner, Gaia Grant (PhD), whose rigorous academic research anchors our frameworks, allows us to prepare executive leadership teams to manage structural ambidexterity and effectively lead in an AI-shaped world.

Read the full 2026 Guide from Speakers Associates:

Choosing an AI keynote speaker for 2026? A buyer's guide to fee bands, briefing pitfalls, and 42 of the world's most-booked AI speakers, grouped by programme type.

28/05/2026

Is your corporate event still relying on the traditional, single-voice monologue? In our latest article, “Beyond the Monologue: Why the Single-Presenter Keynote Is Failing Modern Audiences,” we explore why the traditional keynote format is falling short and why a multi-perspective approach has become the new benchmark for high-impact corporate learning. True innovation and leadership cannot be modeled through a singular lens; they require a dynamic tension between diverse viewpoints. By breaking the old broadcast model, we bring a fresh, podcast-style dialogue to the stage—blending Gaia Grant’s research with Andrew Grant’s practical, real-world strategic facilitation.
Watch our brand-new promotional video to see this dual-keynote presentation format in action, and discover how bringing a powerful duo to your next event can spark real-time insight, engagement, and transformation.

Read the full article here:

Why Multi-Perspective Delivery is the New Benchmark for High-Impact Corporate Events

13/04/2026

Critical Thinking for 5,000 Leaders at ANZ Bank
Gaia Grant (PhD) and I are looking forward to working with the ANZ Academy, in partnership with Saxton Speakers Bureau, to deliver a session and follow-up learning journey for a masterclass series for up to 5,000 of their leaders. Our focus will be on supporting the development of Critical Thinking - particularly in an AI-augmented world.

To address the disconnect between broad enterprise strategy and individual professional effectiveness, we are focusing on two critical dimensions:

A) The Organizational Blueprint: We are analyzing how global financial leaders have successfully navigated the transition of 200,000+ employees into a culture of rigorous, human-led oversight. This demonstrates how massive institutions can integrate Generative AI while maintaining the structural integrity of the enterprise and avoiding "fast-and-reckless" implementation.

B) The Individual Challenge: We are addressing the core of professional survival. This involves reclaiming your cognitive agency—ensuring that human intelligence remains the primary architect and driver of innovation, rather than being relegated to a passive user of automated outputs.
The core challenge? AI provides the speed, but humans must provide the oversight and direction. We’ll be using Tirian’s frameworks to ensure leaders move from being "output validators" to the "pilots" who determine and drive high-stakes decisions.

What we will focus on in this Masterclass:
1) Practical Models & Frameworks: We provide a toolkit of proprietary models, including our 'Strategies for Innovative Development' design thinking model, to turn abstract critical thinking into repeatable, everyday habits.
2) Escaping the "Auto-Pilot" Trap: Identifying where individuals and teams become susceptible to cognitive biases and default to automated outputs without scrutiny.
3) Forensic Critical Thinking: Developing the personal mastery to expose the logic gaps AI misses, ensuring human judgment remains in control.

In an era of cheap intelligence, the ultimate competitive advantage isn't the tech you use - it's the depth of your thinking. If you’d like to see how we can support your team's critical thinking and help you navigate the AI landscape, please reach out. We’d love to discuss how our frameworks can be tailored to your goals.

See more about this session here: https://tirian.com/key-topic-suites/create/the-creative-process/

27/01/2026

AI has reset the baseline for "average." If your leadership team is relying on LLMs for strategy, you may be falling into the "Fixation Effect." Our latest investigation uses the CSI framework to reveal why human Creative Intelligence (CQ) is now the ultimate strategic differentiator. Is your team leading the machine, or is it leading you? https://open.substack.com/pub/andrewgaiagrant/p/the-death-of-average-creativity-lessons