10 types of ambidextrous leadership required in the AI era

10 types of ambidextrous leadership required in the AI era

In the world of corporate management, we face questions every day that don’t have easy answers.

• We want to accelerate digital transformation, but we absolutely cannot neglect security.
• We want to pursue company-wide optimization, but we also want to leverage the strengths of each business unit and the front lines.
• I want employees to take on new challenges, but we must also ensure thorough risk management.

If one option were right and the other wrong, decision-making wouldn’t be so difficult. What makes management challenging is that two conflicting demands are both correct.

In parts 1–7 of this series, we’ve explored a sense of urgency and curiosity, customer focus and vision, challenges and digital transformation, data, collaboration between people and AI, DX talent, and organizational culture. In this final, eighth installment, we’ll examine the leadership of the CIO — the role responsible for bringing all of these elements together and driving them forward.

I believe that what future CIOs need is not an OR mindset — choosing between A or B — but an AND mindset — embracing both A and B.

More importantly, it is not simply a matter of finding a middle ground between A and B. It is about leveraging the strengths of both A and B to create a new C on a higher plane that encompasses both.

I call this sublation.

In other words:

A or B (OR) ⇒ Both A and B (AND) ⇒ Toward a New C (Sublation)

This is the concept.

Isn’t this very ability — to reconcile these opposing elements and transcend them — the ambidextrous leadership required of CIOs in the AI era?

The CIO is an executive who stands at the boundary

Why is ambidexterity required of CIOs in particular?

It is because CIOs constantly stand at various boundaries.

• Management and the Front Lines
• Business and technology
• The entire company and individual departments
• People and AI
• Offense and defense
• Present and future

A CIO cannot do their job by focusing on just one of these worlds. They must understand and bridge the different logics and values of each, and work to derive better solutions for the company as a whole.

That is precisely why the value of a CIO lies not merely in choosing one of these two worlds.

It lies in standing at the boundary between these different worlds and transforming contradictions and conflicts into new values (sublation).

I believe this is where the unique role of the CIO of the future lies.

So, what kind of ambidexterity is specifically required? I believe the following 10 perspectives are crucial.

1. Deepening and exploration: Shaping the future while refining the existing

The first is deepening and exploration.

Deepening — refining existing businesses and operations to enhance quality, productivity, and profitability—is the foundation of corporate management. On the other hand, focusing solely on the extension of the status quo makes it impossible to respond to major environmental changes. Exploration—seeking out new technologies, customer value, and business models—is also indispensable.

Especially in an era marked by the emergence of disruptive technologies like AI, it is not enough to simply ask, How can we use AI to streamline our current operations? We must consider how to restructure our work and business itself, assuming AI is a given.

Through Deepening × Exploration, we strengthen today while creating tomorrow.

This is the first synthesis.

2. Overall optimization and individual optimization: strengthening frontline operations on a company-wide common foundation

The CIO is in a position to oversee IT architecture, data, security, and policies from a bird’s-eye view and pursue overall optimization.

However, this does not mean that everything should be standardized company-wide. Excessive standardization risks undermining the speed and strengths of individual business units and frontline operations.

The key is to discern what should be standardized and what should be left to the front lines.

Foundational elements that should be standardized company-wide must be firmly standardized. On the other hand, in areas that drive competitiveness and customer value, we increase the freedom of frontline operations.

By balancing overall optimization with individual optimization, we strengthen the front lines while building on a company-wide common foundation.

This is the CIO’s design capability.

3. Offense and defense: Strong guardrails enable full throttle

The third point is offense and defense.

We accelerate productivity improvements and value creation through DX, AI, and data utilization. At the same time, we rigorously enforce cybersecurity, personal information protection, AI governance, and stable system operations.

The CIO is responsible for both of these areas.

Here, I do not view defense as a brake.

Defense is a guardrail.

If you step on the brakes, the car stops. However, with sturdy guardrails in place, you can step on the gas with confidence.

Security and governance are the same. Rather than adding more things you must not do, we clearly define the boundaries within which we can take on challenges with confidence.

By strengthening our defense, we accelerate our offense.

This is the very essence of the synthesis of offense and defense.

4. Speed and quality: Creating a rapid learning cycle

The fourth point is speed and quality.

In the rapidly changing era of AI, if we wait until something is perfect, the underlying assumptions themselves may have changed by the time it’s finished. That is precisely why it is important to test in small, rapid increments.

However, speed does not mean sacrificing quality.

It’s not a choice between speed and quality; rather, it’s:

Test quickly → Get feedback → Learn → Improve

…and running this cycle at high speed.

It is crucial to combine speed and quality to create a high-speed learning and improvement cycle.

5. Challenge and risk management: Creating a system that enables risk-taking

DX is about taking on unprecedented challenges. Naturally, challenges carry the risk of failure.

However, if we try to eliminate risk, we will be unable to take on challenges at all.

Moreover, in an era of rapid environmental change, doing nothing itself becomes a major risk.

What a CIO should be considering is not whether or not to take risks.

• Which risks should we take?
• Which risks will you absolutely not take?
• If we fail, how much failure can we tolerate?

It is essential to clarify these points.

In other words, the purpose of risk management is not to stop people from taking on challenges, but to create a system that allows them to take risks with confidence.

6. Top-down and bottom-up: Strong direction, autonomous execution

When embarking on major transformation, a top-down approach—where management shares a sense of urgency and clearly articulates a vision—is essential.

However, if top management decides all the answers, frontline employees will not be able to take ownership of the initiative.

Management must address:

• Why the change is happening
• and where

and then:

• What we will work on
• and how we will achieve it

draws out the wisdom and ingenuity of the front-line staff to the fullest.

Strong direction, autonomous execution.

By combining top-down and bottom-up approaches, transformation evolves into a movement across the entire organization.

7. Control and autonomy: Running freely within guardrails

The seventh point is control and autonomy.

For example, when it comes to AI adoption, allowing employees to use it freely without any rules carries risks. On the other hand, if we restrict its use too much with strict rules, adoption itself will not progress.

This is where the concept of guardrails comes into play once again.

Clarify the minimum rules that must be followed. However, within those boundaries, grant the front lines a great deal of freedom.

In other words, rather than closing off the road, we create a road where people can drive quickly and with peace of mind.

Rather than using control to stifle autonomy, we use control to enable autonomy.

This is the synthesis of control and autonomy.

8. Short-term and long-term: Using short-term results as a catalyst for long-term transformation

In business management, short-term results are required. When it comes to DX investments, there is a responsibility to explain what kind of results they have produced.

On the other hand, if we pursue only short-term results, investments that build future competitiveness — such as talent development, data management, and IT infrastructure renewal — will be put on the back burner.

What is needed is to avoid separating the short term from the long term.

1. First, deliver small but certain results.
2. Use those results to earn the trust of management and frontline staff.
3. Use that trust and management resources to fuel the next round of long-term investments.
4. This, in turn, generates even greater results.

Turn short-term results into a flywheel that keeps long-term transformation moving.

This is the eighth example of ambidexterity.

9. Efficiency and value creation: From DX that reduces to DX that creates

In the early stages of DX, I believe it is common to start with efficiency improvements, such as reducing working hours and cutting costs.

Of course, these efforts have significant value in and of themselves.

However, DX must not end with efficiency alone.

For example, if AI reduces a task that used to take 10 hours to just 3 hours, we shouldn’t stop at simply saying, We saved 7 hours. Instead, we need to consider: What new things can we do with those 7 hours, and what kind of value can we create?

For example,

• Use it for interactions with customers.
• Develop new services.
• Use it for employee development.
• Work on solving social issues.
• Reinvesting the resources freed up through efficiency improvements into creating new value.

From DX that cuts costs to DX that creates value.

This is the synthesis of efficiency and value creation.

10. Psychological safety and high-performance expectations: Taking on lofty challenges with confidence

Finally, we have psychological safety and high-performance expectations.

The term psychological safety is sometimes misunderstood as referring to an organization that aims to be lax or too lenient.

However, the reality is quite the opposite.

• People feel safe expressing their opinions.
• You can feel safe saying, I don’t know.
• You can feel safe asking for help.
• You can feel safe taking on challenges and sharing your failures.

It is precisely because this kind of environment exists that people can take on difficult challenges.

Our goal is not to be an organization that merely prioritizes psychological safety, nor one that focuses solely on performance demands.

It is an organization where people feel safe taking on the highest peaks.

Take on a challenge → Fail → Learn → Share → Take on the challenge again

I believe that a learning organization where this cycle turns rapidly is the one that can establish a competitive advantage in the VUCA era.

What emerges when we synthesize the 10 Ambidextries?

Summarizing the 10 points discussed so far, we arrive at the following:

Binary oppositions	The result of sublation
Deepening vs. exploration	Strengthening today while building tomorrow
Overall optimization vs. individual optimization	Strengthening the front lines on a shared foundation
Offensive vs. defense	Management that lets you step on the gas with confidence
Speed vs. quality	Rapid learning and improvement cycles
Challenge vs. risk management	A system that allows you to take risks with confidence
Top-down vs. bottom-up	Strong direction, autonomous execution
Control         vs. autonomy	Autonomy within the guardrails
Short-term vs. long-term	Leveraging short-term results to drive Long-term transformation
Efficiency vs. value creation	From DX that eliminates to DX that creates
Psychological safety vs. High-performance expectations	An organization where people feel secure enough to take on challenging goals

What I want to emphasize here is that being ambidextrous does not mean striking a 50-50 balance.

Depending on the situation, there are times when speed should be prioritized, and there are areas where quality must be given absolute priority. There are situations that require a top-down approach, and others where decision-making should be left to the front lines.

What matters is not which to choose or striking a balance between the two.

It is about understanding the intrinsic value of both, leveraging the tension between them, and creating a better third solution.

Generate a rapid learning cycle from speed and quality.

Create autonomy within guardrails from control and autonomy.

By combining psychological safety with high-performance expectations, we create an organization where people feel secure enough to take on challenging goals.

Rather than compromising between A and B, we create a new C from A × B.

This is precisely what I mean by sublation.

A CIO is not someone who resolves contradictions, but someone who reconciles two conflicting demands at a higher level.

Contradictions are an inevitable part of business management.

And the higher one rises in rank and the broader one’s scope of responsibility becomes, the fewer single correct answers there are.

That is precisely why what is required of a CIO is not to eliminate contradictions. Rather, it is to accept them.

Understand both sides’ perspectives. Consider the essence underlying the conflict. And transform that tension into energy that generates new value.

I believe that an outstanding CIO is not someone who resolves contradictions and quickly arrives at a binary choice, but rather someone who can thoroughly think through ways to reconcile two seemingly contradictory demands at a higher level.

In that sense, a CIO is not merely an IT manager.

They are expected to be ambidextrous executives.

In conclusion: And onward to the ‘New C’

In this series, we have examined the key principles for accelerating DX and achieving sustained results from various angles.

Looking back, the essence of DX is not digital technology itself.

• It is about transforming management.
• Transforming work.
• Developing people.
• Transforming organizational culture.
• Delivering new value to customers and society.
• Create a new future.

I believe transformation is what connects all of these.

The more AI evolves, the more it will take on the role of gathering and analyzing information and presenting options.

That is precisely why human leaders will be required — more than ever before — to have the ability to tackle questions that cannot be answered with a simple either/or choice.

• Management and IT
• People and AI
• Offense and defense
• Logic and empathy
• Present and future

Standing at that boundary, we bridge differing values, embrace contradictions and choose a better future.

And from there, we create new values that have never existed before.

Isn’t that the role of a CIO in the age of AI?

Not either A or B, but both A and B. And then on to a new C beyond that.

Reconciling and synthesizing opposing forces. This powerful ambidextrous leadership is precisely the kind of leadership required of a CIO in the AI era.