Leadership in Times of Uncertainty
Not so long ago, many managers ran their companies as if they were driving along a familiar route. There was a map, there were checkpoints, there was a budget, there was a sales plan, and there were quarterly targets. Of course, sometimes there was traffic. Sometimes a detour was needed. Sometimes a customer changed their mind or a supplier delayed a delivery. But the general rule remained the same: the world was predictable enough to be managed through annual plans, budgets, spreadsheets, and presentations.
Today, business looks less and less like driving on a motorway. It looks more like sailing in thick fog, with the radar showing only part of the picture, the wind changing direction, and the weather forecast becoming outdated before the board meeting is even over. A leader cannot tell the crew, “We are stopping the ship until everything becomes clear.” The ship has to keep moving. Orders must be fulfilled. People must be paid. Customers must be answered. Suppliers must be challenged. Investments must be assessed. Costs must be controlled. And all of this is happening in a world that no longer asks companies whether they are ready for the next disruption.
Uncertainty is no longer an episode. It has become the natural environment of management. In April 2026, the International Monetary Fund described the global economy as operating “in the shadow of war,” pointing to the impact of the conflict in the Middle East, higher energy prices, elevated inflation, and trade tensions. In its baseline scenario, global growth is projected at 3.1 percent in 2026 and 3.2 percent in 2027, below the historical average of around 3.7 percent recorded between 2000 and 2019. Global inflation, meanwhile, is expected to rise to 4.4 percent in 2026 before falling to 3.7 percent in 2027. Source: IMF, World Economic Outlook, April 2026.
For an economist, these are figures. For a business leader, they are a message from the engine room: the engine is running, but under heavier strain; fuel is more expensive; the route is less obvious; and the crew is looking at the captain not for a perfect forecast, but for a sensible decision.
Profitability Stops Being a Boring Word from Finance
For years, some companies could afford the luxury of believing that growth was what mattered most. Rising revenues covered weaknesses in processes, costs, procurement, and margin management. If sales were going up, many problems could be postponed. Later, things were supposed to become calmer, cheaper, and easier. Later, there would be more time to put things in order.
But “later” has arrived, and it did not bring silence. It brought more expensive capital, higher energy costs, greater volatility, more difficult investment decisions, and customers who are under pressure themselves. In this environment, sales alone are no longer enough. A company can increase revenue and still lose its breath if margins melt faster than turnover grows.
Profitability has returned from holiday, taken off its sunglasses, and sat down at the boardroom table. Not as a topic for the finance department, but as a strategic question: does our business model still make money if the world becomes more expensive, slower, and more nervous?
This question is particularly important in Europe. High energy prices have become one of the central issues of industrial competitiveness. In February 2026, European business leaders called on the European Union to take action to reduce energy prices, arguing that without this, European industry would find it increasingly difficult to compete with the United States and China. They pointed, among other factors, to the loss of cheap gas from Russia, overloaded power grids, national taxes, CO2 emission costs, and an electricity pricing model often linked to expensive gas. Source: Reuters, February 2026.
For a manufacturing company, this is not an abstract topic. Energy is no longer just a bill to be paid. It becomes one of the parameters of competitiveness. If electricity is more expensive than it is for a global competitor, even the best sales team is running with a backpack full of stones. If gas prices jump, the production plan starts to resemble cooking on a stove whose flame sometimes goes out and sometimes burns the pot. If inflation returns through the side doors of fuel, transport, and raw materials, the annual budget is no longer a marble tablet. It is more like a map drawn in pencil.
In its March 2026 report, the OECD indicated that higher energy prices would prolong inflationary pressure. Inflation in G20 countries is expected to reach 4.0 percent in 2026, 1.2 percentage points higher than previously assumed, before falling to 2.7 percent in 2027, assuming energy pressure fades. Source: OECD, Economic Outlook Interim Report, March 2026.
This means that the fight for profitability cannot be reduced to the simple slogan: “Let’s cut costs.” That approach is like treating a fever by throwing away the thermometer. For a moment things become quieter, but the illness does not disappear. You can freeze recruitment, cut marketing, delay investments, squeeze suppliers, and ask everyone for “greater cost discipline.” But if this is done without understanding, the company may remove exactly the muscles it will need to survive the next turn.
True cost efficiency is not about spending as little as possible. It is about making sure every unit of currency knows why it came to work.
Hidden Costs Are Like a Draft in an Old House
The most dangerous costs rarely stand in the middle of the room with a sign saying: “I am destroying your margin.” They are usually more discreet. They are like a draft in an old house. The radiators may be working, everyone may be wearing sweaters, and the bills may be “just high,” but nobody knows exactly where the heat is escaping.
In a company, such a draft may be excessive inventory that looks safe but actually freezes cash. It may be an overly long supplier list that gives the illusion of flexibility while increasing complexity and administrative cost. It may be a manual process everyone knows, so no one questions it, even though it consumes hundreds of working hours. It may be a high-volume customer who, once discounts, claims, non-standard service, and long payment terms are included, turns out to be less profitable than a customer half their size.
In stable times, such leaks are irritating. In uncertain times, they are dangerous. When the cost of capital rises, inventory is no longer just a “safety buffer.” It is capital locked in boxes. When freight becomes more expensive, a poorly planned delivery is not a logistical inconvenience. It is a blow to margin. When energy is volatile, inefficient production is not a technical manager’s issue. It is a board-level matter.
This is why cost efficiency must stop being an Excel exercise and become a way of looking at the company. A spreadsheet will show the numbers, but it will not always show the cause. It may show that transport costs have increased. It is harder to see that the source of the problem is a fragmented supplier base, lack of order consolidation, weak demand forecasting, or commercial promises made to customers without checking the operational consequences.
It is a little like water in the basement. You can pump it out every week and report that the team is working efficiently. But the real question is: where is the water coming from?
Cost Leadership Is a Culture of Decisions, Not Just Budget Control
In many companies, costs are treated as the domain of finance. This is convenient, but false. Finance measures the organization’s temperature, but the fever often starts elsewhere: in sales, procurement, logistics, production, HR, IT, marketing, customer service, and the daily decisions of managers.
If sales is measured only by revenue, it will naturally tend to give margin away through discounts. If procurement is measured only by unit price, it may generate savings that later return as delays, claims, or supply risk. If production is measured only by capacity utilization, it may produce inventory the market does not need. If managers are measured only by speed of execution, they may generate costs faster than value.
Cost leadership, therefore, is not about sending an email on the need to save money. Nor is it about throwing a spreadsheet with red fields into the organization and adding the comment “please complete by Friday.” That may collect data, but it will not build accountability. A real cost culture emerges when people understand the economic consequences of their decisions.
In a good organization, profitability is not a mysterious word uttered once a quarter by the board. It is a language spoken by departments. Sales understands that revenue without margin is sometimes just noise. Procurement understands that the lowest price does not always mean the lowest cost. Production understands that efficiency without flexibility may lead to overproduction. Marketing understands that a lead without quality is just a pretty number in a report. HR understands that employee turnover also has a price, even if it does not immediately appear on an invoice.
A leader in times of uncertainty should therefore ask questions that are simple but uncomfortable. Not: “How much can we cut?” Rather: “What truly creates value?” Not: “Which budget should we reduce?” Rather: “Which activities no longer defend themselves economically?” Not: “How do we force people to save?” Rather: “How do we make cost decisions visible where they are actually made?”
This is the moment when management stops being the issuing of orders and becomes the building of a system. Because a company that saves only when the board raises its voice is not efficient. It is frightened. And fear is a poor business adviser. It can close the wallet quickly, but it rarely distinguishes between an unnecessary expense and an investment that will save the company’s market position six months from now.
The World Is Pressing on Margins from Many Sides at Once
In the past, many companies could analyze risks in separate drawers. Here is currency risk. Here are energy costs. Here are suppliers. Here are regulations. Here is logistics. Here is trade policy. Today, those drawers have started sliding out at the same time, and sometimes they fall out of the entire cabinet.
Trade tensions are a good example. On May 1, 2026, it was reported that U.S. tariffs on cars from the European Union could be raised to 25 percent. The next day, Reuters reported that according to estimates from the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, such a move could cost Germany almost 15 billion euros, or around 17.6 billion dollars, in output, with the long-term impact potentially even greater. Source: Reuters, May 2026.
For the average reader, this is news from the “world” section. For a business leader, it is a lesson in management. A political decision can suddenly change export costs, production profitability, investment plans, supply structures, pricing strategies, and customer negotiations. Even if a company does not produce cars, it should see the warning: the boundary between politics and the profit and loss account is now as thin as invoice paper.
Then there is energy. In April 2026, the OECD noted that Brent crude oil prices had risen by more than 70 percent between the end of February and March 31, 2026, due to disruptions and the limited ability to quickly activate alternative sources of supply. Source: OECD, April 2026.
If energy becomes more expensive, production costs rise. If production costs rise, price pressure appears. If prices rise, customers start looking for alternatives. If the company cannot pass costs on to customers, margins fall. If margins fall, the board cuts costs. If costs are cut without strategy, the organization becomes weaker. And so begins a spiral that looks harmless until someone notices that the company is working harder and earning less.
In this sense, the world is no longer pressing only on revenues. It is pressing on the quality of management. On the precision of decisions. On reaction speed. On the ability to say “let’s check” before a problem grows into a fire.
Resilience Is the Ability to Move
When we talk about resilience, we often imagine a company surrounded by a thick wall. It has large financial reserves, inventory, alternative suppliers, insurance, and crisis procedures. All of this matters. But true resilience is not only about building a wall. A wall can protect, but it can also limit movement. In today’s world, the winner is not the one who stands the firmest, but the one who can change position before the wave hits the side of the ship.
A resilient company recalculates scenarios faster. It sees faster which products are losing margin. It recognizes faster when a supplier is becoming unsafe. It moves volume faster. It talks to customers faster about changes in terms. It stops projects that have ceased to make sense faster. It invests faster in areas that increase productivity instead of merely looking good in a strategy document.
Resilience, then, is more like a muscle than a shield. A muscle needs regular training. It is not enough to hold a risk workshop once a year, stick colored notes on a wall, and decide that the organization is prepared for crisis. Crisis does not read workshop notes. Crisis arrives on a Friday afternoon, when a key supplier reports a delay, a customer threatens contractual penalties, and finance asks why cash is frozen in the warehouse.
A resilient company does not improvise from scratch. It has developed reflexes. It knows who makes the decision. It knows what data is needed. It knows where the alternatives are. It knows when it is worth paying more for security and when the risk is acceptable. It also knows that a cheaply purchased problem is still a problem.
The Worst Cuts Are the Ones That Look Good Only for a Quarter
During periods of cost pressure, quick and spectacular decisions are very tempting. Spending freezes. Budget reductions. Training cuts. Marketing cuts. Tougher terms for suppliers. In a presentation, this usually looks very good. Cost bars go down. The quarterly result breathes again. The board can say that it reacted.
The problem is that a company is not a spreadsheet. It is a system of connected vessels. If we cut training, we save today, but tomorrow we may have weaker managers. If we cut marketing, we improve costs today, but in a few months sales may complain about an empty pipeline. If we reduce inventory without analyzing risk, we free up cash, but at the first supply disruption we lose sales. If we force a supplier below a healthy price level, we win the negotiation on paper, but may lose quality, punctuality, or availability.
Cost efficiency requires surgery, not chopping with an axe. A leader must know which costs are fat, which are muscle, and which are the nervous system of the organization. Fat can be reduced. Muscles must be strengthened. The nervous system must not be damaged, because the company will stop feeling what is happening to it.
This is especially important at a time when technology, automation, and artificial intelligence tempt businesses with the promise of productivity. Not every technology investment makes sense. But it is equally dangerous to believe that in difficult times everything new should be stopped. Sometimes the greatest cost is not implementing a tool, but continuing to do the same work manually, slowly, with errors, and without data.
A wise leader therefore does not ask only: “How much does this cost?” They also ask: “How much does the absence of this change cost?” This question often opens a completely different conversation.
Leadership in Uncertainty Requires the Courage to Say “Let’s Check”
Every company has its internal legends. “This customer has always been strategic.” “This supplier is the cheapest.” “This product has a good margin.” “This market is stable.” “This process cannot be changed.” “This is how we have always worked.” Such statements are like old furniture in an office. Nobody remembers who put them there, but everyone has learned to walk around them.
In times of uncertainty, a leader must have the courage to say: “Let’s check.” Let’s check customer profitability. Let’s check margin after logistics costs. Let’s check slow-moving inventory. Let’s check critical suppliers. Let’s check indexation clauses in contracts. Let’s check whether discounts truly build loyalty or merely teach customers to wait for a promotion. Let’s check whether transformation projects generate results or simply look good on slides.
This phrase – “let’s check” – is one of the most important tools of modern leadership. It does not mean lack of trust. It means maturity. A company that does not verify its own assumptions starts managing by memory. And memories may be warm, but they are rarely a good controlling system.
At the same time, checking must not become a hunt for blame. If every cost analysis ends with looking for someone to punish, people will quickly learn to hide problems. And a company that hides problems loses the most important advantage in uncertainty: the ability to learn quickly.
A mature leader protects people, but does not protect illusions. This distinction is crucial. You can have empathy for the team and at the same time clearly say that some activities have stopped making sense. You can build a culture of trust and at the same time require hard data. You can respect the company’s history and at the same time refuse to let history turn into a handbrake.
Procurement and Supply Chains Are No Longer the Back Office
One of the biggest shifts of recent years has been the rise of procurement and supply chains to the center of strategic discussion. In the past, a supplier was often seen mainly as a source of price. Today, a supplier is also a source of risk, flexibility, innovation, security, or problems.
Transport disruptions, geopolitical conflicts, sanctions, tariffs, currency volatility, ESG pressure, energy prices, and regulatory uncertainty mean that the question “who do we buy from?” is no longer operational. It is strategic. A supplier can help a company survive turbulence or become the first crack in the hull.
In a mature organization, procurement is not the department responsible for “getting it cheaper.” It is a radar. It sees changes in raw material prices. It hears early signals about supplier problems. It understands cost structures. It can compare unit price with total cost of ownership. It knows where an alternative is worth having and where scale creates advantage. It can talk to finance about cash, to operations about standardization, to sales about the impact of costs on prices, and to the board about risk.
In times of uncertainty, a company that does not understand its procurement is like a person who knows their bank balance but does not know what the bills are for. It may function for a while, but it is difficult to call that control.
It is especially important to move away from simplistic thinking about savings. Procurement savings should not be only the difference between the old price and the new one. They should include quality, punctuality, supply risk, inventory costs, claim costs, impact on cash flow, payment terms, regulatory compliance, and flexibility. Because in an uncertain world, the cheapest supplier may become the most expensive one if they fail at the worst possible moment.
A Leader Must Maintain Two Rhythms at Once
The hardest part of management today is that a leader must run the company in two rhythms at the same time. The first rhythm is short-term: cash, margin, costs, orders, deadlines, prices, payments, availability of raw materials. This is the rhythm of daily breathing. Without it, the company starts to suffocate.
The second rhythm is long-term: competencies, technology, brand, relationships, culture, innovation, resilience, customer trust. This is the rhythm of fitness. It can be neglected for a few months without immediate disaster. But over time, the organization becomes weaker, slower, and less able to respond to change.
Companies that see only the first rhythm live from quarter to quarter. They can cut, squeeze, and react, but they often lose the ability to grow. Companies that see only the second rhythm create beautiful strategies, but sometimes forget that vision does not pay invoices.
A good leader is like a conductor leading an orchestra in a hall with difficult acoustics. They must hear the double bass of daily costs and the violins of future opportunities. If one drowns out the other, the music falls apart.
That is why leadership in times of uncertainty is not about choosing between saving and growth. It is about wisely distinguishing where savings are necessary, where investment is essential, and where the company has simply become accustomed to spending money without asking questions.
Scenario Planning Instead of Falling in Love with One Plan
In stable times, strategy resembled building railway tracks. A route was set, tracks were laid, a timetable was prepared, and everyone made sure the train was not late. Today, strategy is more like sailing. The destination may be known, but the course must be adjusted regularly. The wind changes. The waves differ from the forecast. The port we are sailing toward may suddenly be closed.
This does not mean that planning has lost its meaning. Quite the opposite. In uncertainty, planning matters more than before, but it must look different. Not one rigid budget, but scenarios. Not one sales forecast, but a range of possible outcomes. Not one energy cost assumption, but several sensitivity levels. Not one critical supplier, but a map of alternatives. Not one pricing policy, but a mechanism for responding to cost changes.
A plan in uncertainty is not a promise that reality will adapt. It is a tool for discussing what we will do if reality moves in another direction.
The best organizations do not fall in love with their own plans. They treat them as hypotheses. They check what works. They correct. They learn faster than competitors. They do not wait for the end of the year to reveal that the budget was fiction. They look at data more often, speak across departments more openly, and make decisions faster.
This requires courage, because in many companies adjusting the plan is treated as admitting a mistake. Meanwhile, in a changing world, sticking to the wrong plan only because it was approved in December is like driving straight into a closed road because it was still open on last year’s map.
Profitability Without People Is Just a Spreadsheet
In conversations about costs, it is easy to lose sight of people. Words appear: optimization, reduction, productivity, discipline, efficiency, restructuring. These are necessary concepts, but when used without sensitivity, they can hit an organization like a cold shower at six in the morning. People then hear not an invitation to responsibility, but a warning that something unpleasant is coming.
And yet a company does not become resilient because employees are afraid of costs. It becomes resilient when people understand the meaning of decisions and have influence over their quality. A leader who enters the organization with a machete and cuts everything equally may improve the result for a moment. But along the way, they often cut engagement, trust, and initiative. And these resources are very difficult to rebuild.
That is why leadership in times of uncertainty requires communication that is honest but not panicked. If the company needs to look for savings, it is worth explaining why. If priorities change, this must be explained. If some projects no longer make sense, it is better to say so directly than to pretend that “we will return to them at the right moment,” when everyone knows that moment will never come.
People can often handle difficult decisions better than leaders assume. What they tolerate far less well is chaos, ambiguity, and the feeling that someone at the top is playing a game whose rules have not been revealed.
Profitability should therefore be described not as a whip, but as oxygen. Without profitability, there is no investment. No development. No security. No better tools. No stable jobs. No room for experiments. An unprofitable company quickly loses freedom of decision. Its strategy begins to be written by banks, creditors, suppliers, customers, regulators, and chance.
A profitable company has a choice. It can invest, negotiate, wait things out, accelerate, change suppliers, enter a new market, attract people, and build an advantage. Profitability is not an accounting obsession. It is a condition of agency.
Fewer Sacred Cows, More Courage
Every organization has its sacred cows. Products nobody analyzes because “they have always been important.” Customers nobody questions because “they generate high turnover.” Suppliers nobody touches because “we have known them for years.” Processes nobody changes because “the system does not allow it.” Budgets that renew every year like a subscription to a magazine nobody reads anymore.
Uncertainty has one advantage: it removes the protective foil from such topics. Suddenly it turns out that a large customer may be unprofitable. A popular product may have a weak margin once logistics and energy costs are included. A cheap supplier may be expensive when delays and risk are added. An old process may cost more than a new tool that everyone was afraid to implement.
A resilient company has fewer sacred cows and more honest conversations. This is not about turning everything upside down every month. It is about ensuring that no assumption is untouchable simply because it is old.
A good organizational culture is not one in which difficult topics are avoided. It is one in which they can be discussed without immediately looking for someone to blame. In a resilient company, the question “why do we do it this way?” is not an attack. It is a hygiene tool. Just as windows are opened at home to air out a room, assumptions in an organization must also be aired out regularly.
Resilience Begins with an Honest Examination of the Company
If I had to reduce this entire topic to one thought, I would put it this way: in times of uncertainty, the winners are not the companies with the most beautiful strategies, but those that learn the truth about themselves fastest.
The truth about costs. The truth about margins. The truth about customers. The truth about suppliers. The truth about inventory. The truth about processes. The truth about competencies. The truth about which activities are investments and which are merely expensive habits.
The world will not become calmer just because companies badly need it to. Geopolitical conflicts, energy prices, trade tensions, inflation, technological changes, and competitive pressure will continue stirring the business pot. But a company can decide whether it will bounce around helplessly inside that pot or learn to cook its own soup.
Leadership in times of uncertainty is not heroism from a motivational poster. It is daily practice. Better data. Braver questions. Shorter reaction time. Greater cost awareness. Smarter investments. More honest communication. Less management by email and Excel, more conversations about accountability, value, and the consequences of decisions.
Because an organization does not grow from simply forwarding instructions. It does not become resilient because someone added a new tab in a spreadsheet. It does not improve profitability because an email contains the word “urgent.” A company grows when leaders create the conditions for good action: they remove obstacles, show direction, measure what matters, and have the courage to change what has stopped working.
In business, as at sea, a storm does not ask whether the crew is ready. It simply arrives. The difference between average and mature companies is that the latter do not start learning how to sail only when water is already pouring onto the deck. They practice earlier. They check the ropes. They know the weak points of the hull. They know who is holding the wheel. And they understand that sometimes the course must be changed not because the destination is less important, but because it is the only way to reach it.
Kind regards
Grzegorz Olechniewicz
GOODMAN GROUP
