Getting Senior Leaders to Optimal Performance and Sustainable Growth Without Burnout

You’re capable, experienced, and used to handling pressure. Yet certain moments quietly destabilise even strong leaders.
► When you step into a new role and realise the rules have changed
► When a restructuring, missed promotion, or sudden shift knocks confidence more than you admit
► When performance still looks “fine”, but decision-making feels heavier and slower than it should

These moments don’t look dramatic from the outside. 
They look like coping.

And this is where many leaders hesitate —
waiting for clarity to return on its own,
until the cost shows up as loss of judgment, credibility, or energy.

👉 This is where my work begins.
I partner with senior leaders and leadership teams during high-stakes transitions — where clarity, authority, and direction matter more than speed.

My clients typically come to this point when they need to:

✔️ Make clear, grounded decisions under pressure 
✔️ Re-establish authority and presence in a new or changing role 
✔️ Navigate career transitions or restructuring without loss of momentum 
✔️ Lead teams through complexity, transformation, or sustained change 
✔️ Perform at a high level without sacrificing health, focus, or integrity

I bring 17+ years of experience from Fortune 500 organisations (P&G, General Mills, GSK, Syngenta), combined with professional executive coaching and mentoring (ICF PCC, EMCC SP). 

I understand the realities of senior leadership — competing priorities, political complexity, and the expectation to “hold it together” while everything shifts.

My clients often describe the biggest shift not as improved performance alone — but as clearer thinking, steadier confidence, and the ability to lead without constantly operating in reactive mode.

If you’re navigating a meaningful transition — whether you’re still in role or between chapters — and sense that waiting is no longer the right strategy, you’re welcome to message me here on LinkedIn to explore whether working together makes sense.

— 
🌐 tatianarueff.com 
📩 tatiana@tatianarueff.com 

For organisations, I also design and deliver senior leadership workshops and keynotes on leading through high-stakes transitions — enabling sustainable performance, clarity, and resilience under pressure.

Tatiana Rueff

𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐚 𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞
𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐲 𝐞𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐜𝐭.

Most of the leaders I work with aren’t stuck 
because they are not thinking enough.

They see what’s no longer working.
They understand the implications.
They have ideas to test.
They’ve thought it through - repeatedly.

What’s missing isn’t insight.

It’s a space where clarity turns into decisions,
and decisions turn into movement -
without rushing, proving, or forcing outcomes.

Some moments don’t need more effort.
They need the right kind of containment.

P.S. If something you’ve been circling feels ready to be addressed, this is the kind of transition that benefits from the right container.

Partnering with Leaders through High-Stakes Transitions | Clear Decisions & Sustainable Growth under Pressure | Executive & Leadership Transition Coach (ICF PCC) | Ex-Fortune 500

Tatiana Rueff, Executive and Leadership Transition Coach, standing in a snowy mountain village, looking calmly at the camera, with alpine houses and snow-covered peaks (Mont Blanc) behind her on a clear winter day.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐚 𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧
𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞.

Between roles many leaders feel an invisible clock ticking.

They don’t want to rush.
They don’t want to repeat old patterns.
But they also don’t want to get stuck.

So they stay busy instead.

Networking.
Thinking.
Sending applications daily.
Scrolling LinkedIn.

Yet the discomfort isn’t really about time.
It’s about not having enough structure for the transition.

Without that, even thoughtful leaders start doubting themselves.

This is where transitions quietly stretch longer than necessary -
not because skills are missing,
but because support is.

P.S. Being between chapters isn’t a gap to fill. 
It’s a phase to take seriously.

A quiet home office with a wooden desk by a window, a beige leather chair slightly pulled back, an open laptop displaying emails, a notebook and pen, a coffee mug, and a digital clock showing 13:30, suggesting a paused workday and time passing.

𝐋𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐚 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐞𝐭 𝐥𝐚𝐤𝐞.
𝐈𝐭’𝐬 𝐚𝐧 𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐚𝐧.

And waiting won’t make it calmer.

Many people are waiting.

Waiting for the market to improve.
Waiting for work to slow down.
Waiting for life to feel easier before they finally breathe again.

They hope the waters will calm.

But life is rarely a quiet lake.
Most of the time, it’s a wavy ocean - 
unpredictable, demanding, alive.

And while you’re waiting for perfect conditions,
your life is still passing by.

Sustainable growth doesn’t come from hoping the waves disappear.
It comes from learning how to surf.

From building balance, clarity, and resilience 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 you -
so you can navigate change without burning out
and even enjoy the ride.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦.
𝐖𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐭𝐨 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐩 𝐢𝐬.

P.S. Where in your life are you still waiting for “better times”?

Guiding Senior Leaders & Teams Through Transitions | From Pressure to Clarity, Confidence & Sustainable Growth | Executive & Leadership Transition Coach (ICF PCC) | Ex-Fortune 500

A split image contrasting two approaches to challenge: on the left, a person stands at the edge of a turbulent ocean, watching the waves; on the right, a surfer actively rides a large wave, moving with strength and balance.

𝐁𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐫𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐞𝐱𝐡𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. 
𝐈𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭.

Many senior leaders don’t collapse.
They continue performing.

What changes first is something quieter.

Decisions take longer.
Recovery takes more effort.
Quality thinking time disappears.
Weekends bring more screen time than joy.

They tell themselves it’s temporary.
That pressure comes with the role.

Sometimes that’s true.
Often it’s a signal.

Sustainable growth isn’t about pushing less.
It’s about noticing when the cost is no longer worth the output.

That moment is easy to rationalise away -
until it forces a decision later, 
under worse conditions.

P.S. If the price of “doing well” has been rising for a while, it might be asking for your attention now.

Tatiana Rueff, executive and leadership transition coaching, seated on a wooden balcony overlooking snow-covered mountains and alpine houses, appearing thoughtful and composed in a calm winter setting.

𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐦𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐚
𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐞𝐥𝐬𝐞 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐞𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐞.

Scroll through LinkedIn on any given day and you’ll see it.

New role announcements.
Promotions.
Bigger titles.
Public celebrations of progress.

Most people could make these updates invisible - 
but they don’t.

Because being seen, acknowledged, and validated matters.
That’s human.

What we don’t talk about enough is the other side of those posts.

The quiet comparison they trigger in leaders who are already carrying a lot.

𝘈𝘮 𝘐 𝘧𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘣𝘦𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘥?
𝘞𝘩𝘺 𝘢𝘮 𝘐 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘺𝘦𝘵?
𝘏𝘰𝘸 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘐 𝘦𝘯𝘥 𝘶𝘱 l𝘦𝘢𝘷𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘮𝘺 𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘦?
𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘴𝘢𝘺 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘮𝘺 𝘷𝘢𝘭𝘶𝘦?

These questions don’t stop early in a career.

I hear them from VPs, CEOs, and founders -
especially in moments of transition.

The problem isn’t ambition.

The problem is the false idea that there’s a universal success ladder we’re supposed to follow.

There isn’t.

Careers are not straight lines.
They pause, accelerate, reset, and sometimes fall apart - 
often for reasons far beyond effort or talent.

When you measure yourself against someone else’s highlight reel, you risk seeing personal failure where there is none.

You’re not late.
You’re not early.

You are where your life has brought you - 
and you still get to decide what comes next.

𝐏.𝐒.  Which “should” have you been carrying that no longer serves you?

Man lying in bed at night looking at his phone, reflecting on social media comparison and career self-doubt.

𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐫𝐨𝐥𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 
𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐚 𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐨𝐧.

It’s not because you’re unprepared.
Or lacking confidence.
Or suddenly less capable.

It’s because you’re stepping into a system that already exists -
with unspoken expectations, inherited dynamics, 
and histories you didn’t create.

You’re being read before you fully understand the context.
Your decisions matter before you’ve had time to see the full picture.

And the pressure to “add value quickly” is constant, 
even when no one says it out loud.

Most leaders respond by accelerating.

They work harder.
They say yes more often.
They try to prove themselves early.

But early overcompensation is how misalignment starts.

The leaders who land well do something different.

They slow their thinking before they speed up their actions.
They take time to understand what’s really being asked of them, 
not just what’s written.

They decide what not to change yet.

This isn’t about confidence.
It’s about orientation.

The first moves you make set patterns that last far longer than people expect.

P.S. If you’re stepping into something new and feel the pressure to get it “right” quickly, that’s not a flaw. It’s the moment.

A professional woman stands by a large window overlooking a lake and mountains, reflecting quietly before stepping into a new role.

𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐮𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐬.
Very few talked about what that reaction reveals about leadership.

When Emmanuel Macron wore sunglasses indoors at Davos, 
the world listened - and still speculated.

And this is the interesting part:
an explanation had already been given.

It was presented as a benign eye issue -
nothing strategic, nothing symbolic.

Still -

Memes spread.
Commentary escalated.
The company behind the sunglasses saw its share price jump 28%.

Not because eyewear matters -
but because when a leader breaks an unspoken norm, 
explanation alone doesn’t stop interpretation.

This happens inside organisations every day.

A leader goes quiet.
Delays a decision.
Shows up differently than expected.

Even when there is a rational reason,
the system keeps reading signals.

Stories fill the gap:

– “Something’s off.”
– “A restructuring is coming.”
– “There must be more going on.”

The real risk for leaders isn’t deviation.
It’s assuming clarity has been received just because it was provided.

Strong leadership isn’t about over-explaining.

It’s about recognising when perception has momentum -
and choosing whether to actively frame it, hold it, or redirect it.

Because whether you intend it or not,
people are always reading the signals.

PS: Where have you seen a small, unintended leadership signal take on disproportionate meaning?

A pair of blue-tinted aviator sunglasses on a light background.

𝐈𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐞𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐬.

Many leaders value reflection.

They think deeply.
They notice patterns.
They see what’s no longer working.

And then… they wait.

They tell themselves they’re “not ready yet”.
That they need a bit more time.
That there’s something urgent to take care of first.
That they’ll figure it out.

But insight has a shelf life.

What starts as awareness slowly turns into friction.
The same questions resurface.
The same tension returns, just louder.

At some point, not acting costs more than acting.

The tricky part is that nothing breaks immediately.

You keep functioning.
You keep thinking about it.
You keep living your life.

But over time, the cost shows up elsewhere -
in energy, focus, and the quality of decisions.

That’s when waiting stops being a pause
and starts shaping the outcome.

P.S. If something has been unaddressed for a while, this might be the moment it’s asking for a different response from you.

A man at a home office desk looks at an hourglass as time passes, reflecting on decisions and waiting.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 90 𝐝𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐝𝐨𝐧’𝐭 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥 𝐥𝐨𝐮𝐝𝐥𝐲.
𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐝𝐫𝐢𝐟𝐭.

Most leaders prepare hard for interviews.
Very few prepare for what comes after.

They step into a role already moving.
With inherited dynamics they didn’t design.
And expectations that aren’t fully spoken.

So they compensate early.

They try to add value fast.
They change things quickly.

And sometimes… 
they lock in patterns they later have to undo.

The leaders who land well don’t rush alignment.
They create space to think before they accelerate action.

That window is brief.
And often underestimated.

P.S. If you’ve recently stepped into a new role and feel the pressure to move fast, this is the moment I help leaders slow their thinking before their actions lock in.
You don’t need to navigate it alone.

A silhouetted man standing indoors by a window, looking out at blurred car lights moving quickly through the night, suggesting contrast between stillness and speed.

𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐛𝐞 𝐝𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐨𝐧 𝐩𝐚𝐩𝐞𝐫
𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨𝐨 𝐡𝐢𝐠𝐡 𝐚 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐞.

Many senior leaders look like they’re doing fine.

They deliver.
They show up.
They keep things moving.

But privately, the cost is rising.

More effort to stay focused.
More recovery time after non-stop meetings.
Less space to think clearly.

They tell themselves:

“𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘩𝘢𝘴𝘦.”
“𝘐 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘣𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴.”
“𝘖𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘴𝘦𝘦𝘮 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘨𝘦.”

High performance can mask misalignment for a long time.

Until one day, the question shifts from

“𝘊𝘢𝘯 𝘐 𝘥𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴?”
to
“𝘋𝘰 𝘐 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘬𝘦𝘦𝘱 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘢𝘺?”

That’s not weakness.
That’s information.

P.S. Where has “pushing through” quietly become your default?

𝐓𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐬. 
Poor positioning is.

Most senior leaders don’t struggle because transitions take too long.
They struggle because they stay too broad for too long.

Time itself isn’t the problem.
Ambiguity is.

When your message sounds like:

“𝘐’𝘮 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘯.”
“𝘐 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘥𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴.”
“𝘐’𝘮 𝘧𝘭𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦.”

You make it harder for others to place you -
and easier for the wrong opportunities to absorb your energy.

At senior level, clarity isn’t a constraint.
It’s a service.

The leaders who land well don’t rush.
They narrow deliberately - often with support - 
long before urgency starts making decisions for them.

The right support doesn’t just protect the outcome.

It sharpens positioning 
and that’s what changes the timeline.

If this resonates, you’re already thinking at the right level.

A narrow mountain path running along a green ridge under a clear blue sky, with steep slopes on both sides, symbolising focus and deliberate career progress.

𝐓𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐬. 
𝐈𝐭 𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐞𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐦 𝐝𝐲𝐧𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐜𝐬. 

When an organisation goes through transition - 
a leadership change, restructuring, strategy shift - 
the impact isn’t limited to roles or org charts. 

Team dynamics change first. 

What I often observe is not open resistance, but subtle shifts: 

– Decision-making slows 
– Ownership becomes blurred 
– Informal leaders go quiet 
– High performers start self-protecting 

On the surface, work continues. 
Underneath, alignment erodes. 

This isn’t a people problem. 
It’s a leadership transition problem. 

Teams need clarity on: 

– what still matters 
– what has changed 
– where decisions now sit 
– and what “good performance” looks like in the new context 

Without that, leaders spend months compensating with more meetings, more pressure, and more effort - 
often burning out their best people in the process. 

Sustainable leadership in transition isn’t about pushing harder. 
It’s about stabilising the system so people can perform again. 

That’s the work I do with leaders and organisations navigating change.

An empty leadership meeting room in a modern office with panoramic views over Zurich, representing organisational transition, decision-making, and the need for leadership clarity.

𝐌𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐝𝐨𝐧’𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐠𝐠𝐥𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭.

They notice when something starts to feel off.
When the role demands more than it gives back.
When effort increases but clarity doesn’t.

What’s harder is knowing how to respond in that moment.

Do you pause and think it through alone?
Do you give it time, hoping the pressure will ease?
Do you reach for an external perspective or structured support early enough?

I see very capable leaders make very different choices at this point.

And those choices quietly shape how long transitions last and how costly they become.

I’m curious what tends to be true for you in practice, not in theory.

When you realise something in your career is no longer sustainable, what do you tend to do first?

The author can see how you vote. Learn more

You have a strategy. It's not working the way it should.

Progress is slow. Teams are misaligned. Small inefficiencies are compounding into major slowdowns. Critical processes take too long or don't work as intended. You know something's broken - you just can't pinpoint where.

I solve this because I've lived it. For over 15 years, I've worked inside Fortune 100 companies, including 7 years at Northrop Grumman leading global teams of 150+ and untangling the exact complexity that stifles progress across business functions.

My role is to diagnose the root cause of the friction and then lead the implementation of the fix. Unlike traditional consultants, my work doesn't end with a PowerPoint deck. I partner with your teams to redesign processes, implement better systems, and ensure the changes stick.

The goal is always measurable improvement: faster cycle times, better quality, reduced waste, and sustainable competitive advantages.

If you suspect inefficiency is costing you momentum, let's have a confidential conversation. 

Schedule a call here: https://tidycal.com/mike-herak

Mike Herak

New to AI tools? Start with context documentation, not prompt engineering.

That recommendation surprises people. Crafting better prompts seems like the logical first step and the one everyone recommends. But the pattern across effective AI implementations is consistent: context-first delivers better results faster.

Here's why:

Better prompts improve one interaction. Better context improves every interaction.

When you spend hours perfecting prompts, AI still lacks organizational context. Each query requires re-explanation. Revision time stays high. You're manually providing context every time instead of systematically once.

The context-first approach:

Document how you and your organization actually makes decisions. Capture the criteria you apply, trade-offs you consider, constraints you navigate. Organize past examples showing what works versus what you've rejected.

Now AI can access that organizational intelligence for every interaction.

Result: Outputs that sound like your organization immediately. Revision time dropping from 70% to 15-20%. Strategic investment paying compound returns.

Don't get me wrong...prompt engineering still matters. But it amplifies prepared context instead of compensating for missing foundation.

~

I build Organizational Intelligence Libraries for organizations - structured interviews that capture decision logic and organize it so AI tools can apply your methodology consistently.

New to AI and want to start effectively? Let's discuss context documentation as a foundation.

I fix operational inefficiency | 15+ years Fortune 100 supply chain and operations leadership

65% of organizations either don't have AI-ready data or are unsure if they have AI-ready data.

Gartner's January 2026 CIO Survey revealed this disconnect. Organizations are deploying AI tools without the data infrastructure that makes them effective.

The readiness gap Gartner documented isn't about AI platform capabilities. It's about organizational foundation.

Here's the operational reality behind that 65% statistic:

AI-ready data means information structured for both human comprehension and AI effectiveness. Most organizations have extensive documentation. But it's organized for people to read, not for AI tools to apply.

Here's the difference between the 65% struggling and the 35% succeeding:

Data accessibility: AI can locate and retrieve relevant context when needed, not search through unstructured document repositories.

Decision framework capture: AI understands how your organization makes choices, not just what procedures exist.

Context organization: Information tagged by usage patterns and decision types, not just by department or document type.

When AI tools have access to properly structured organizational context, adoption changes completely. Teams use AI more frequently. Outputs require minimal revision. Business impact becomes measurable.

Same AI platforms. Different foundation. The 35% with AI-ready data aren't using special technology - they're preparing organizational context systematically before expecting AI to use it.

~

I help organizations build Organizational Intelligence Libraries - the data infrastructure that bridges AI capability and business readiness.

AI deployed but adoption remains low? Let's discuss what foundation enables effectiveness.

Source: Gartner 2026 CIO Survey

AI represents you based on what it finds online. Unfortunately, that may also include outdated, inaccurate, or missing information.

Most professionals assume Google search defined their online presence. AI fundamentally changes that dynamic.

When someone asks ChatGPT or Claude about you, these tools synthesize from:
- Your LinkedIn profile (often outdated)
- Company websites you've worked for
- Conference presentations from years ago
- Articles you've written or been mentioned in
- Social media activity (or absence)

If that information is sparse, outdated, or misrepresents your current expertise - AI fills gaps with assumptions. You get represented based on incomplete data.

The solution isn't privacy avoidance. It's strategic presence.

Establish accurate information where AI tools can access it - then maintain it as your expertise evolves:

Updated your LinkedIn profile reflecting current expertise and positioning. Published content demonstrating thought leadership. Conference talks showing speaking topics. Professional website with clear capability statements.

This isn't a one-time setup or for vanity. It's ongoing responsibility to ensure AI pulls correct information when prospects research you, clients brief their teams, or opportunities emerge from unexpected conversations.

The professionals controlling their AI representation aren't hiding from technology. They're proactively establishing accurate information so AI represents them correctly.

~

Your online presence is now your AI representation. Make sure it's accurate.

Quick diagnostic: Is your organization ready for AI?

Three questions that reveal whether your knowledge infrastructure supports AI effectiveness:

1. Can new hires find answers in your systems, or do they ask veterans?

If they're asking, knowledge exists in heads, not systems. AI tools have the same gap - they can't access expertise that isn't systematized.

2. When you feed documentation to ChatGPT or Claude, do outputs improve or get worse?

If worse, you're overwhelming AI with unstructured information. More data doesn't mean better results without proper organization.

3. Does AI-generated work require 20 minutes or 2 hours of revision?

If hours, AI lacks access to organizational decision patterns and defaults to generic recommendations requiring extensive translation.

The pattern across these answers reveals your context infrastructure gap.

All three point to issues = You don't have a documentation problem. You have a structure problem. Knowledge exists but isn't organized for both human teams and AI tools.

Quick weekend exercise: Score your organization on these three questions.

~

I help organizations assess context readiness and build Intelligence Libraries that work for both teams and AI tools.

Curious about your organization's context infrastructure gap? Let's discuss what assessment reveals.

What's your biggest context engineering challenge in 2026?

For me: Helping organizations understand that AI effectiveness isn't about choosing better platforms - it's about building better context infrastructure.

I'm curious what others are experiencing:

Succession planning? = Critical knowledge walking out when people leave.

AI disappointment? = Platforms deployed but outputs still require extensive revision.

Team inconsistency? = Same question answered differently depending on who's available.

Onboarding drag? = New hires taking months to absorb knowledge that should transfer in weeks.

Agency client handoffs? = Account transitions consuming 15+ hours rebuilding context.

Consultant methodology? = Expertise trapped in your head instead of systematized.

The common thread across these challenges: organizational knowledge exists but isn't structured for effective transfer - to new people or to AI tools.

Looking forward to hearing which resonates most with the community.

~

Building context infrastructure that works for 2026 and beyond.

taplio

The Battle

Tatiana Rueff

Mike Herak

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance ScoreTatiana Rueff's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreMike Herak's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

The Battle

Tatiana Rueff

Mike Herak

Followers

Posts

Engagements

Likes

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Tatiana Rueff's LinkedIn Performance

Performance ScoreMike Herak's LinkedIn Performance

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Performance ScoreTatiana Rueff's LinkedIn Performance