Developed to celebrate the centenary of Cervezas Alhambra, Sosegá is a cultural and branded content project rooted in the brand’s unrushed philosophy, from which emerges the first flamenco style conceived to express calm; a new way of understanding flamenco after almost 100 years. Inspired by the rhythm of the city of Granada, the brand’s place of origin and one of flamenco’s historic cradles, the project goes beyond storytelling to build a narrative through creation itself.
Developed together with fourteen leading figures of flamenco under the musical direction of iconic producer Javier Limón, Sosegá was conceived as an original artistic expression with its own compás, technique, and emotional character, introducing unprecedented ideas within the genre, such as the absence of a final chorus.
Brought to life in collaboration with Casa Limón on musical direction and audiovisual production by Little Spain, the initiative blended tradition with new creative codes. In a second phase, artists such as Pablo López, Ana Mena, Dellafuente and Paper Citizen reinterpreted Sosegá through their own genres, expanding its reach and connecting with new audiences. The project has already been recognized at the Premios Nacionales de Creatividad (CdeC) and the BCMA Awards, where it received multiple awards.
In a context in which global platforms such as The One Club for Creativity increasingly highlight ideas that transcend formats, Sosegá can be understood as a creative exploration of how a brand philosophy can be translated into cultural expression, opening up conversations around the intersection of branding, art, and tradition.
Congratulations to all the teams and collaborators who made this project possible.
Aviation is entering a defining period. Demand for air travel continues to rise, while expectations around emissions, noise, and resource efficiency are rising just as quickly. For years, the industry has progressed through incremental innovation to proven aircraft architectures. What’s becoming clearer is that the next leap forward will require transformative innovation to meaningfully improve the efficiency of flight.
New propulsion and energy storage (fuel) will be essential to aviation’s long-term future. Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), hydrogen, and hybrid- and battery-electric systems each carry promise, but their practical constraints are hard to ignore. A single business jet can burn fuel at a rate of hundreds of gallons per hour. Today’s global SAF production still faces cost hurdles, and scaling it raises questions around feedstock availability and land use. Hydrogen is compelling, but liquid hydrogen requires cryogenic storage near -423°F and significantly more volume than conventional jet fuel. Batteries remain challenged by energy density: propulsion systems based on jet fuel are far more efficient at the aircraft level than today’s lithium-ion systems.
These realities don’t diminish the importance of new technologies. They clarify a prerequisite: without a step-change in aerodynamic efficiency, the pathway to lower emissions will remain more expensive and less efficient than it needs to be.
The adoption curve in aviation has always been shaped by economics. Operators embrace change when it improves performance, lowers operating cost, and maintains safety and reliability. Many “green” solutions today arrive with a cost premium and limited performance, which naturally slows adoption. The more durable unlock is to make sustainability the outcome of better economics, not an added expense.
The physics of efficiency
Drag is the quiet driver of both cost and carbon. Most of aircraft drag is skin friction (viscous drag), created as air moves across an aircraft’s surface. Most aircraft operate with a turbulent boundary layer, where airflow swirls and increases friction losses. Laminar flow is smoother, more orderly, and generates dramatically less friction drag.
You can see the difference in something as simple as a candle. Blow one out and watch the smoke: at first it rises in a smooth, straight ribbon. That’s laminar flow. A moment later it starts to curl, swirl, and break apart. That’s turbulence. The shift looks small, but the energy loss is real, and in aviation it adds up mile after mile.
If laminar flow can be sustained over meaningful portions of the wing and fuselage, the impact isn’t limited to an incremental improvement. It can trigger compounding benefits across the entire aircraft.
Aircraft design synthesis lives in a reinforcing loop: more weight and drag requires more lift and thrust; higher drag increases fuel burn; and more fuel adds weight. Meaningful drag reduction can reverse that cycle. Less drag means less thrust. Less thrust enables smaller, more cost-effective engines. Smaller engines reduce weight and fuel needs. The result is a “virtuous cycle” that improves both economics and sustainability while maintaining performance.
This is where the idea of essential complexity matters: delivering the performance, safety, and quality the mission demands, while avoiding unnecessary complication. In practice, that means letting physics do more of the work, so systems can be simpler, lighter, and more reliable because they’re optimized around what matters most.
Building what the physics requires
Achieving laminar performance isn’t only an aerodynamic design challenge. It’s also a manufacturing and operational challenge.
Laminar flow is highly sensitive to aircraft surface finish quality. Small misalignments, steps, gaps, or waviness can trip airflow into turbulent flow and erase the advantage. That calls for exceptionally tight tolerances and a disciplined approach to how surfaces are designed, assembled, and maintained.
It also puts pressure on development timelines. The traditional aerospace cycle, design, build, test, redesign, is proven but slow and expensive. To bring next-generation efficiency to market at scale, iteration needs to be faster and more integrated across disciplines.
Concurrent engineering is one response: structural, aerodynamic, and manufacturing teams working from shared digital models and virtual twins of the aircraft and production environment. Changes become visible across functions in real time, reducing late-stage surprises and compressing redesign loops.
Advanced manufacturing methods can support this goal as well. Producing larger net-shape composite structures can reduce part count, fasteners, and bond lines, lowering opportunities for surface imperfections while also simplifying maintenance. While these approaches may raise upfront investment, in reality, recurring costs, rework, and production delays are what determine whether an aircraft program becomes commercially sustainable. Advanced manufacturing techniques improve them all.
The future efficiency enables
When energy required for flight drops, the door opens wider for every decarbonization pathway. SAF becomes more viable because each unit of fuel goes farther. Hydrogen integration becomes more achievable because volume and thermal requirements are easier to manage in an aircraft that needs less overall energy. Battery-electric propulsion becomes more plausible for specific mission profiles as the efficiency gap narrows.
And because the physics of flight do not change across borders, efficiency scales. A design that meaningfully reduces drag improves economics and reduces resource intensity whether it flies in North America, Europe, Latin America, or Asia.
The next era of aviation will not be defined by a single breakthrough. It will be defined by a new standard: aircraft that do more with less, designed with discipline, built with precision, and enabled by technologies that can finally deliver on their promise. If the industry aligns around efficiency as the foundation, flight can become not only cleaner, but more accessible, more resilient, and more responsible, expanding connectivity while easing its footprint. The future of aviation can remain ambitious and also become more practical: progress measured not only by speed or range, but by how intelligently we use the sky.
This interview is dedicated to how companies imagine and build the future from different dimensions: creativity, leadership, transformation, and brand identity.
In this context, TOUS represents an emblematic case of a family business that has managed to maintain its essence while reinventing itself, anticipating the trends that today redefine the accessible luxury industry.
TOUS is a leading jewelry company with over one hundred years of history. Founded by the Tous family in 1920, the company designs, produces, and distributes jewelry and accessories with a creative spirit that invites self-expression. Its origins date back to that same year when Salvador Tous Blavi began his career as a watchmaker apprentice in Montblanc (Tarragona). It was with his son, Salvador Tous, and Rosa Oriol, his wife, that TOUS laid the foundations of what it is today.
Currently headquartered in Manresa (Barcelona), the company has established itself as a global brand, with more than six hundred stores and presence in forty markets. It employs over 4,000 people and generates revenues of around 500 million euros. Alongside its main brand, TOUS also operates the high jewelry line TOUS Atelier and the experimental jewelry firm SUOT Studio.
How do you manage to maintain, for so long, that openness to change without losing the family essence of the brand?
In our case, the key has been understanding that tradition and evolution are not opposites but two forces that coexist. We are a family business with more than one hundred years of history and a craft, jewelry making, that is inherently part of our DNA.
However, we have cultivated a culture open to adapting to new times and incorporating innovative perspectives, and this balance is precisely what has allowed us to maintain our essence — craftsmanship, creativity, and respect for the craft — while evolving towards new ways of designing, producing, and engaging with our audiences.
What lessons does this gradual process of growth and global expansion leave?
Our growth has always been strategic and sustainable. Each new opening, each entry into a new market, has always aimed to bring TOUS closer to new audiences, connecting with their stories, but always maintaining our essence, based on jewelry savoir-faire, creativity, and innovation.
In this sense, our expansion strategy is not just about multiplying stores but generating authentic and meaningful experiences that allow people to feel close to the brand and discover the joy our pieces convey, something that has been key to the company’s solid and global growth.
How did you manage to anticipate that cultural transformation that today seems so natural?
Since our beginnings, at TOUS we have learned to listen carefully to what happens around us, not only in the world of jewelry but in people’s lives. In the 70s, my mother, Rosa Oriol, noticed that women wanted their own jewelry, versatile and accessible, and it was that intuition that taught us to anticipate their needs.
Today, we continue with that same spirit: we observe how people live and express themselves, connect with their emotions and stories, and use creativity and innovation to transform those ideas into pieces and experiences that make sense in their daily lives.
transform those ideas into pieces and experiences that make sense in their daily lives.
What role does humanization play today in the emotional connection with consumers?
Humanization is at the heart of TOUS. As I mentioned, each jewel tells a story, a moment, a memory. It’s not just about creating a piece but offering experiences that accompany people’s everyday lives.
Through this closeness, we ensure that those who enjoy our jewelry feel connected to the brand. In this context, jewelry ceases to be just an accessory and becomes a vehicle for expression, joy, and connection with those who wear it.
Do these changes respond to an evolution of the sector towards territories closer to fashion or to the needs of new generations?
The changes we are experiencing respond both to the sector’s evolution and the new expectations of current generations. The State of Fashion 2026 report, published by The Business of Fashion and McKinsey, shows that
consumers seek more value, authenticity, and self-expression, driven by the desire to make lasting investments, express themselves freely, and indulge themselves.
This naturally fits with our jewelry DNA and the way we understand creativity and emotional connection with people. The durability of jewelry is intrinsic, and at TOUS we are experts in reusing, recycling, and reviving pieces through our technical service, thus reinforcing the value and emotional relationship each client has with their jewelry.
What advantages and challenges does maintaining family ownership imply in such a competitive global context?
For us, being a family business is a privilege and a source of energy. Working with my sisters means sharing passion and enthusiasm, with different perspectives but the same vision, and this is a great advantage because it allows us to make decisions from the heart of the brand, caring for our essence and values.
Of course, the challenge is to combine that closeness with the demands of a global company like TOUS, incorporating external talent and solid organizational structures, and having efficient corporate governance to ensure excellence in all business areas.
In this issue of UNO, we analyze how companies imagine and build the future. In that sense, how do you envision the future of TOUS? In what areas do you believe the brand should continue innovating to remain relevant in the jewelry, fashion, and accessible luxury industry?
At TOUS, we want to keep evolving true to our jewelry soul and craftsmanship, which is the cornerstone of the company, projecting it toward new ways of relating to our customers. We want to continue growing, exploring markets, and connecting with new generations.
For this, innovation stands as a key lever, not only in product but also in aspects like sustainability, material traceability, and responsible processes. In this line, at TOUS we seek to integrate technology to create more personalized and close experiences under what we call ‘technocraft,’ blending technological precision with artisanal mastery to keep our jewelry essence alive while connecting with new audiences.
What challenges do you anticipate for the coming years and how do you plan to face them from leadership and brand culture?
The world is changing at an enormous speed, and as a global company, we will have to keep adapting to new consumer expectations, uncertain economic contexts, and an increasingly demanding industry, especially in terms of sustainability and responsible development.
Another challenge we at TOUS keep in mind is ensuring the jewelry craft. Transmitting this knowledge, attracting, and training new generations of artisans is a company priority, so we will continue promoting training programs through our TOUS School and spaces where that savoir-faire coexists with new perspectives.
Looking beyond the sector, how do you think companies will transform in the next decade? What role will they play in society, talent management, and their relationship with communication?
The companies of the future will be even more aware of the need to positively impact people and their communities. Their role will go —and indeed already goes— beyond economic results, so they must generate real value, contributing positively to society.
In this context, talent management will be fundamental: attracting, training, and motivating people who share the company’s values will be key, and communication will play a central role, allowing companies to connect genuinely with their audiences and convey their purpose coherently.
Finally, how will the bond between brands, their purpose, and consumer expectations evolve in an increasingly demanding and changing world?
I believe brands and consumers will be increasingly connected through shared values and clear purposes. Today, people seek authenticity, coherence, and commitment: they want to relate to brands that have real meaning, convey trust, and align with their expectations and way of life.
At TOUS, this means that each jewel, each collection, focuses on emotionally connecting with people, evoking moments and memories that are part of their daily lives, celebrating their style, emotions, and way of expressing themselves. Each piece is an invitation to enjoy, share, and feel part of something close and authentic.
From Creating Awareness to Generating Positive Impact
More than two decades ago, I had the privilege of being part of LLYC, where I learned that communication not only tells stories and creates awareness: it moves conversations, shapes perceptions, and can transform collective behavior. During those years, I opened the firm’s operation in Colombia and understood that when communication is combined with the power of marketing, it becomes a strategic engine for business growth and trust-building.
Today, at AB InBev, we apply that same principle from a different perspective: how social norms marketing—a methodology that uses marketing to reinforce positive behaviors and make them the social norm—can become a powerful tool to generate impact and promote moderation, creating shared value among companies, consumers, and communities.
Why Moderation Matters More Than Ever
The global context has changed. Consumers are seeking a more active lifestyle, and with that comes the desire for more balanced options. In this new paradigm, we combine our long-standing moderation messages with a broader beverage offering: from sugar-free, gluten-free, and lower-alcohol options to now even alcohol-free beer, to better meet consumer demand and more accurately reflect today’s culture.
At AB InBev, we understand moderation as a smart, modern, and aspirational choice that reflects how most people already enjoy beer responsibly and moderately. Presented this way, it becomes a driver of reputation, trust, and growth.
“Moderation inspires more when presented as a positive choice, not as an obligation.”
Social Norms Marketing: When Marketing Drives Positive Behaviors
Social norms marketing is based on a simple and powerful principle: people tend to behave according to what they believe others consider normal or desirable.
This approach is not about telling people what to do but highlighting and amplifying the positive actions that most already practice, reinforcing common behaviors and inspiring others to follow. Through behavioral science and marketing tools, it turns positive behaviors into the new social norm.
At AB InBev, we apply this concretely: since 2015, with our global Smart Drinking Goals program, we have promoted moderation through innovation, communication, evidence-based initiatives, and strategic partnerships. Ten years later, the results show far-reaching transformation.
The Georgetown University case study (LINK) confirmed that marketing based on social norms is a multiplier of positive change: it not only reinforces brand preference but also generates tangible value for communities.
AB InBev promotes beer as the drink of moderation and develops its global program through three pillars: consumers, brands, and communities. This approach creates shared value: what is good for people is also good for business. When people choose moderation, the result is a win–win–win: more conscious consumers, safer communities, and stronger brands.
For more than 100 years, AB InBev has promoted moderation and now incorporates moderation and responsibility messages into major platforms, brands, and global mega-events such as the FIFA World Cup and the Olympic Games, among others, through creative campaigns like “Cheers to Moderation” or “Choose Beer, Choose Moderation.” These initiatives present moderation as something positive and aspirational, not as an imposition, and promote socialization.
The results are clear: moderation messages generated three times more social media engagement, and 44% of consumers said they would prefer beer on certain occasions after seeing the ads. In addition to strengthening brand equity and favorability toward the brands.
The Power of Behavior and Science
The impact of these campaigns is amplified thanks to behavioral science. Through studies and testing, AB InBev teams have identified that messages highlighting moderation and responsibility—such as Budweiser’s campaign “Drink Wiser, Cheer Better, Plan Your Ride Home”—are much more effective than prescriptive messages like “don’t drink and drive.” This shift makes moderation and responsibility a desirable and socially valued choice, strengthening the emotional connection between people and brands.
Collaboration and Partnerships to Scale Impact
Sustainable social change only happens when there is collaboration. That is why AB InBev works with the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR), Together for Safer Roads, the Inter-American Development Bank, Georgetown University, and the AB InBev Foundation, among other regional and local partners. These alliances allow programs to scale, measure impact, and ensure solutions are tailored to each local context. Beyond the beverage sector, this model demonstrates how companies, partners, and their value chains can generate shared value.
“When companies, in their essential role as commercial actors, find ways to use their marketing assets and capabilities to reinforce positive social norms associated with the consumption of their products—as AB InBev is doing to promote moderation—they create value both for their brands and for society, ensuring their impact goes far beyond business.”
The Future: Normalizing the Positive
The future of brands will depend on their ability to align growth with collective well-being. Companies that integrate social norms marketing into their DNA will not only lead conversations but also shape behaviors. When communication reinforces the positive and brands promote moderation, the impact transcends business.
In recent years, the word “talent” has become the mantra of many organizations and companies. Everyone is looking to attract the best, in a kind of global competition that often translates into improvements in people management practices and public policies aimed at workplace well-being. However, it is worth asking: do we all understand the same thing when we talk about talent?
The answer is probably “no.” Or, at least, not to the same extent. In fact, the perception and availability of talent vary significantly depending on the country, culture, and economic context. In regions with near-full employment rates, organizations struggle to find professionals with the specific skills they need and end up recruiting employees from each other in an endless back-and-forth. But it is also true that even in places with high unemployment rates, companies find a notable lack of prepared people in certain professions. In both scenarios, it is evident that we are living in an era of fierce competition for available talent.
This competition has driven an evolution in people management practices, reflected in increasingly attractive working conditions and processes that prioritize both the candidate’s and the employee’s experience. Organizations invest in improving their value proposition to attract and retain the talent they so desperately need, understanding that human capital is a differentiating asset in the modern world.
Transformations in Talent Management
From attraction to retention, companies have adopted more people-centered approaches, promoting a culture of internal development and mutual commitment:
- In talent attraction, companies take care of the candidate experience and use innovative tools, with an increasing use of artificial intelligence, to attract and prepare future employees.
- In onboarding processes, organizations have devised multiple ways to support (with technological tools or coworkers) new employees so that their initial entry and future integration are successful.
- In professional development, clear growth paths are designed, personalized counseling tools are available, and there are multiple resources to help each person identify their greatest strengths and opportunities.
- Regarding retention, companies analyze data on employees’ skills, interests, and engagement to anticipate possible turnover decisions and act accordingly before they happen.
These changes and many others in talent management have generated substantial benefits for both organizations and employees, who now have greater development opportunities, can assess whether their organizations align with their expectations and aspirations, and have the possibility to compare their company with others in the environment.
Talent and Future Strategies: “Right People” and “Exceptional People”
Leaders know that sustainable success depends not only on a solid strategy and organizational structure but also, and fundamentally, on people. As Jim Collins points out in his book Good to Great, “People are not your company’s most important asset. The right people are.” This nuance, simple in appearance, has profound implications because, if well understood, it forces organizations to focus on identifying the people who best fit them and who contribute most significantly to achieving their mission. This is important in the initial selection process (where there is some risk of success because not all candidates turn out to be as they seem), and it is critical when making decisions related to the development and growth of people once they are part of an organization.
Organizations should prioritize identifying and developing a few people who, in the long term, can exponentially multiply the results and value of the entire company.
Choosing to have the “right people” is as much as deciding to implement the strategy to achieve it. And it has enormous implications if the commitment is truly embraced decisively. Although many organizations talk about this, fewer put it into practice continuously over time and fully assume what this means. In manual work, having or not having the “right people” has an impact: the difference between a job well done and an exceptionally well-done job can be 1 to 2, or 1 to 3, or 10 times better. Or perhaps more. However, in creative or intellectual work, the difference can be much greater: the contributions of the “right people” and a few “exceptional people” can exponentially multiply the results. This leads to the need for people management policies for intellectual or creative work to be based on identifying those individuals who contribute very highly or exceptionally highly compared to others and acting accordingly.
In other words, to attract and retain exceptionally capable people, companies must avoid “one-size-fits-all” strategies and have planned greater rewards and faster career paths than normally considered for a certain number of people, in line with their contributions to the business.
How many companies really do this?
No one doubts anymore that a company’s success depends not on talent in general but on having the “right people” for each company and each position. Within this context, my opinion is that organizations should prioritize identifying and developing a few people who, in the long term, can exponentially multiply the results and value of the entire company. And that requires a brave and coherent strategy that recognizes, incentivizes, and rewards those “right people” and “exceptional people” who are so difficult to find and keep and who, in the end, make the difference.
In Latin America, technology doesn’t arrive like a wave. It arrives like a rumor. It spreads from chat to chat, from neighborhood to neighborhood, from person to person. It is a region where digitalization doesn’t happen on servers, but on phones; where change is not dictated by algorithms, but by conversation. That’s why I believe the greatest challenge is not to innovate faster, but to innovate with more empathy. Technology is not imposed: it is discussed.
For years, the debate about digital inclusion focused on infrastructure: how many people have access to the Internet, an account, or a smartphone. But the deepest gap is not access, it is language. It’s not enough to be connected if technology still doesn’t speak to us in our language. That is why many of the advances we celebrate in the capitals still don’t transform life in the neighborhoods.
At dale!, we learned that true innovation doesn’t always look sophisticated. Sometimes it resembles the everyday: a WhatsApp conversation, a nickname lovingly written on a storefront window. That’s why Nombres con Calle was born, an initiative that seeks to make visible the popular businesses that sustain the economy of our neighborhoods. Through the Tag Aval key, any store, stand, or enterprise can have its own digital name (@DonaMartaStore, @FloresDeInes) and use it to charge or receive money. Identity is the first step toward inclusion.
The next step was natural: bringing the possibility of receiving payments to the place where daily life already happens. Today, businesses can receive payments directly through WhatsApp, using their Tag Aval Key within the interoperable Bre-b ecosystem. This is not just a technical alliance, but a simple conviction: if most Colombians live, converse, and trust WhatsApp, then that must also be the space for their financial inclusion. We don’t need people to move to technology; we need technology to move to the people.
This approach aligns with what we defend in our 2024 Sustainability Report: technology must have a measurable and social purpose. It is not a responsibility accessory; it is the essence of the business. Incorporating ESG criteria means understanding that inclusion is not measured by downloads, but by trust, by more transparent relationships, and by tools that dignify work.
Sustainability is not achieved by adding users, but by multiplying opportunities.
Latin America is a land of ingenuity. Across the region, unique forms of digitalization arise that combine creativity, collaboration, and closeness. Brazil demonstrated this with Pix, Peru with its community wallets, and Colombia with its network of local businesses that make service and trust a form of living economy.
The neighborhood is the region’s first innovation laboratory.
Not because it lacks, but because it creates: because it transforms every conversation into possibility.
I have seen the look light up in a merchant’s eyes when they see their name printed on their Tag Aval Key. There, in that small gesture, something profound happens: recognition. What was once invisible now has identity. And that, on a continent where progress is often measured in numbers, is a human victory. At dale!, we will continue building technology that is not only used but understood.
Because when innovation is discussed (not imposed), it not only transforms businesses: it transforms cultures.
Philip Tetlock is a Canadian psychologist who, in 1987, asked a question that we all often ask ourselves: to what extent are expert predictions reliable? To try to answer it, he started a fascinating scientific experiment: over 18 years, he collected predictions about the political and economic future; by the end of the process, he had 27,500 predictions from nearly 300 of those experts. In 2005, he looked back, compared the predictions with what had actually happened during that long period, and came to a conclusion: experts are often wrong. But he was not satisfied with the result.
Consequently, he decided to take his experiment further and called it the Good Judgment Project. He gathered other psychologists and together they contacted 20,000 experts on political and economic issues, asking them to make precise predictions expressed as probability percentages about very specific questions, such as: what was the likelihood that a particular country would declare bankruptcy? Or that there would be a coup d’état in another? Some of these experts were given precise instructions on what was expected of them, and others were not. Some made predictions alone; others chose to work in teams, deliberate among themselves, and agree on their predictions.
After years of work, Tetlock and his team reached three logical and, at the same time, fascinating conclusions. First, people who received some training on the art of making predictions—such as how to neutralize their biases or how to use probability percentages—tended to be more accurate than those who did not. Second, they discovered that there are people, whom Tetlock called “superforecasters,” who have an extraordinary ability to correctly predict what will happen in the future, with a much higher and more sustained accuracy rate than others. But thirdly, Tetlock and his team discovered that, when making predictions, teamwork works.
Gather people with some talent for forecasting, tell them what you expect from them, invite them to talk, share information, and discuss, and generally their predictions will be much better than those who work alone. The future, indeed, is a conversation.
The Rise of Foresight
Tetlock has had a huge impact on the field of foresight. This is not a new discipline. But in the 1970s, understood as a tool for businesses and governments, it became more systematic and ubiquitous, incorporating scientific elements. Both the private and public sectors wanted future scenarios on issues such as fossil fuel reserves, lifestyle changes and consumer preferences, or the possibility of a nuclear war breaking out among the major Cold War powers. However, in the years following the fall of communism, largely due to the political optimism of the time, which assumed relative stability, the dominant branch of foresight was economic and focused on macro scenarios, market trends, and the potential impact of both on a particular sector or brand.
In recent years, however, with the return of geopolitical instability, fragmentation, and polarization, companies are paying more and more attention to political foresight. “The volatility and complexity of the current geoeconomic environment force both banks and the entire business fabric to strengthen and broaden the angles of prospective analysis,” says Alicia Coronil Jonsson, Chief Economist at Singlar Bank and member of LLYC’s Advisory Board. “We are moving in a context characterized by a historic combination of structural changes and new paradigms that define a new era, in which the global governance rules in place since World War II are progressively losing relevance.” For this reason, political risk analyses, which measure the impact that electoral cycles, government coalition health, or even more serious crises can have on an investment, are increasingly used. “Traditionally, companies primarily evaluated macroeconomic risks (cycles, inflation, interest rates, demand) because these were the main variables affecting their bottom line. However, growing political fragmentation, social polarization, trade tensions, and the disintegration of the world order have expanded the perimeter of monitoring,” says Coronil Jonsson.
To this end, some companies have their own foresight departments or hire consulting firms that offer these kinds of services. In many cases, risks are assessed through open-source analysis (facts and data that are public but require interpretation) or through contact with political insiders. Sometimes, this foresight literally requires a conversation: the human interaction between a decision-maker and an expert, or preferably a group of experts, is sometimes essential for the former to get a real sense of the most probable future scenarios and how they overlap with their own interests.
“It’s not only about managing risks and detecting challenges, but also identifying the opportunities offered by a world in full transformation,” says Coronil Jonsson.
When it comes to aggregating many opinions, as Tetlock recommended, surveys remain a relatively common tool, although in the economic and political foresight field they are usually conducted among experts rather than the general population. But new tools are also emerging to understand and design future scenarios. Recently, prediction markets that aggregate the forecasts of hundreds or thousands of people betting on a specific event have gained importance. “Aggregating the predictions of many people systematically beats the vast majority of individual predictions, even when we use ‘superforecasters,’” says Kiko Llaneras, chief editor of visual narratives and data at El País, and author of the book Think Clearly: Eight Rules to Decipher the World and Succeed in the Data Age. “The logic for this to work is intuitive: each person has slightly different information and also different biases. By aggregating predictions, information is combined and biases are smoothed out. The result, on average, is judgments better than almost anyone’s.” And in many cases, especially in recent years, this translates into a figure (or call, in industry jargon) that encapsulates the estimated probability that a given event will happen. This increases the clarity of the prediction and can help decision-makers who must choose among various investment or strategic options.
However, the unprecedented rise of social networks and the growing influence of digital conversation have led to the creation of tools that allow aggregating an even larger number of opinions. These are not from experts and therefore may lack reliability, but they are so massive that they provide real clues about the dominant ideas about the future in society, or about major consumption trends or political opinion. One such tool is LLYC’s Data Analytics Suite, which uses Big Data and Artificial Intelligence to identify conversation topics on social networks, which actors dominate that conversation, their relationships, the volume of conversation, and how and when it peaks or generates opinion shifts. These realities add a new layer to companies’ foresight exercises.
However, the new foresight, which uses these kinds of tools as well as the knowledge of expert predictors, and sometimes “superforecasters,” is no longer only a private sector tool. In recent years, many public and private institutions have also adopted foresight to advance geopolitical scenarios, consumption trends, or climate and demographic evolutions. Since 1997, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence of the United States government has published a report every four years analyzing long-term global trends; its latest edition, for example, focuses on 2040. In 2020, the Spanish Government created the National Office of Foresight and Strategy, which aims to anticipate future scenarios so that the country’s governance and legislation align with major trends. One of its first projects was Spain 2050, which brought together about a hundred academics from various specialties to conduct a “strategic foresight” exercise, in the document’s own words, to anticipate the “social, economic, and environmental” challenges Spain will face, it said, “in the coming decades” and to get ahead of them. In several Latin American countries, such as Chile, there is growing talk about foresight, or “anticipatory governance,” as a tool governments should adopt.
Reducing Uncertainty
Foresight is not the art of fortune-telling. As Coronil Jonsson says, its goal is to foresee multiple scenarios, “not as predictions but as tools to understand possible trajectories and prepare agile responses.” The only honest way to do foresight, Llaneras adds, “is to say things like: ‘I see a 20% chance that GDP will contract in 2026’ or ‘Candidate X will win the election with an 87% probability.’ Anything else,” he says, “can lead us to predict with overconfidence or to give up making predictions.” Ultimately, it is about reducing uncertainty, not guessing the future; about narrowing possible scenarios, not knowing exactly which one will occur. About adding technological, statistical, and methodological tools to peek, in a moment of uncertainty, at what is coming. And thus be able to contribute to leaving our mark on it.
To understand the future, reduce uncertainty, and help shape the major future trends, it is necessary to aggregate many voices.
There are many ways to do this. But Tetlock’s way not only seems intuitive, it has been scientifically proven to be the best: gather talented people, give them a clear methodology to compensate for their biases and think in terms of probability, clearly ask for what we need, and put them to talk. It is the recipe to increase the chances of success. And it is, in a certain sense, what the conversation for the future that LLYC proposes intends.
Emmanuel Macron’s visit to Beijing in December 2025 perfectly illustrates Europe’s increasingly weak position vis-à-vis China. Despite diplomatic gestures and the attention of President Xi Jinping, who even personally accompanied Macron to Chengdu—an honor rarely granted to foreign leaders—the French president returned home virtually empty-handed. He secured no significant trade agreements, made no progress in Ukraine, and obtained no real concessions from Beijing.
This episode encapsulates an uncomfortable truth that Europe must accept: the economic relationship with China no longer delivers the benefits that many European leaders still believe are possible. Far from being an opportunity for mutual growth, this relationship has become a growing source of strategic vulnerabilities for the continent.
The mirage of exports
The most common argument used to justify closer ties with China is the supposed potential of its enormous market. However, the data paints a very different picture. Not only did China end 2025 with a record trade surplus of one trillion dollars, but this imbalance is also seriously affecting Europe.
The European Union’s trade deficit with China reached €400 billion a couple of years ago, a figure that reflects a structural asymmetry in the trade relationship and is expected to reach that record level again in 2025, following the slowdown in 2024 due to pressure from European authorities. European exports to China continue to plummet with highly negative growth rates, while the Asian giant has increased its sales to the continent. China needs more than ever to maintain its trade surplus, especially after the additional tariffs imposed by Trump, which have reduced tariffs on direct exports to the US. In this context, it is naive to think that Beijing will open its doors to European products.
A dangerous dependence on imports
While Europe struggles to sell to China, its dependence on Chinese imports continues to grow. Currently, almost 23% of total EU imports come from China, a figure that has steadily increased over the past two decades.
This dependence is particularly worrying in strategic sectors. Europe imports 100% of the heavy rare earth elements needed for nuclear reactors and fiber optics from China, as well as 97% of the magnesium used in aerospace alloys, and 85% of the light rare earth elements essential for catalysts, magnets, and the renewable energy industry. The energy crisis triggered by the war in Ukraine should have served as a lesson about the risks of over-reliance on authoritarian regimes.
With the US market closed due to Trump’s tariffs, Europe is now facing a flood of Chinese products seeking new markets. Chinese exports to the EU grew by 8.3% in April 2025, inundating European ports with goods originally destined for the United States. This situation puts even more pressure on European industry, which must compete with products manufactured at significantly lower costs.
Investments with no return
Another traditional argument for maintaining close relations with China is the attraction of foreign direct investment. Some European leaders still hope that China will open its market to European investment. However, this hope clashes with the reality on the ground.
European companies operating in China are finding it increasingly difficult to do business in the country. European companies in China face increasing regulatory hurdles, a lack of reciprocity in market access, and an increasingly hostile environment for foreign investors. The benefits of these investments have been drastically reduced, and many European companies are reconsidering their presence in the Chinese market.
The outlook for Chinese investment in Europe is no less discouraging. Existing partnerships between Europe and China are compromising EU regulations on technology transfer and pollution. While China has historically secured massive technology transfers from foreign investment within its borders, Chinese investments in Europe rarely result in significant technology transfer to the continent.
On the other hand, many European countries eagerly await Chinese companies to bring battery and electric car plants and transfer cutting-edge technology while simultaneously creating jobs. The reality is quite different. China has no intention of transferring technology because it knows that this is precisely what allowed it to reach its current position. In fact, the plants already operating in Europe, including in Spain, use older battery models than those used in China. Finally, given that production is less expensive and more efficient in China, using plants in Europe is a less profitable option for China, which needs to protect itself from European protectionism. If European tariffs on electric cars are lifted, the incentive China currently seems to have to produce in Europe will be substantially reduced, especially given China’s current overcapacity problem and the need to generate employment within the country.
The geopolitical context
Pressure on Europe to strengthen ties with China has intensified with Donald Trump’s return to the White House and his aggressive tariff policies. Faced with transatlantic uncertainty, some European leaders see China as an alternative to diversify their economic relations.
However, this reasoning ignores fundamental lessons. Europe is caught on multiple fronts: Russia persists with hybrid attacks, the Trump administration criticizes Europe as economically moribund and security-dependent, and China has weaponized the strategic dependencies Europe has accumulated. Beijing is using its economic leverage to extract strategic political concessions, while European calls to reduce trade imbalances fall on deaf ears as China continues to refrain from taking decisive action. In fact, China is comfortable with the current imbalances because they guarantee it disproportionate influence by making the rest of the world dependent on Chinese exports. The best example is rare earth elements and critical minerals, but there are many others.
An alternative strategy
Europe cannot afford to throw itself into China’s arms in response to Trump’s policies. The costs of abandoning the de-risking policies that the European Commission has been promoting in recent years would be enormous, and the benefits extremely limited.
Europe should focus on strengthening its strategic autonomy, reducing its critical dependencies in sectors such as rare earth minerals, green technologies, and semiconductors, as well as many others yet to come in the field of robotics, for example.
In addition, Europe should implement stronger trade policies, maintaining and reinforcing trade defense instruments while investing more in cutting-edge innovation and diversifying its markets. Europe must also protect itself from acquisitions of its advanced technology.
Conclusion
The temptation to seek refuge in China in the face of uncertainties caused by US trade policies is understandable but misguided. The data clearly demonstrate that Europe no longer benefits much from its economic relationship with China: it is exporting less and less to the Chinese market, accumulating dangerous dependencies on imports, European investment in China is not generating the expected returns, and Chinese investment in Europe rarely transfers valuable technology.
Macron’s visit to Beijing marks a further step in the growing asymmetry between Europe and China, where Beijing is using its economic influence to extract strategic political concessions. Continuing down this path will only deepen Europe’s vulnerabilities.
Europe must learn from its past mistakes with Russia and not repeat them with China.
Diversification, strategic autonomy, and a firm trade policy based on reciprocity are the only paths that will guarantee the continent’s long-term prosperity and security.
Throwing itself into China’s arms, however tempting it may seem in light of Trump’s policies, would be a historic mistake that Europe would pay for for decades.
Federico Isuani, Partner and AI Strategy General Director Americas at LLYC, has been recognized by Merca2.0 as one of the 50 Marketing Leaders in Mexico, a selection that brings together the professionals who are driving the evolution of marketing, innovation, and business transformation in the country.
Beyond the individual recognition, this distinction comes at an especially relevant moment for the industry. Marketing is undergoing one of the deepest changes of recent decades, driven by the acceleration of artificial intelligence and by new ways of discovery, consumption, and decision-making that are modifying the relationship between brands and people.
In this context, Federico has led from LLYC the development of new approaches to understand how organizations build relevance in environments increasingly mediated by algorithms. A work that has contributed to opening a conversation about the need to complement traditional marketing strategies with new capabilities oriented toward visibility, influence, and reputation in ecosystems driven by artificial intelligence.
“I receive this recognition with enormous gratitude, but also as a validation of a conversation that we have been promoting from LLYC for some time. We are living through a paradigm shift that forces us to rethink how brands build relevance. Artificial intelligence is transforming the way people discover, evaluate, and choose, and our challenge is to help organizations understand this new scenario before it becomes an exclusive advantage for a few,” notes Federico Isuani.
This recognition reinforces our commitment to innovation and to the development of solutions that help organizations navigate the changes that are already transforming marketing, communication, and business.
The role of the chief executive has ceased to be exclusively a management space to become a continuous exercise of judgment, resilience, and proactivity. In an environment conditioned by short-term volatility, public scrutiny, and the emergence of AI, leading a large organization today demands qualities that go beyond experience or traditional hierarchy.
Under this conceptual framework, the latest book by Iñaki Ortega, Managing Director of Madrid: ¿De verdad quieres ser CEO? Liderazgo audaz. (Do you really want to be a CEO? Bold leadership), was presented at CEOE. The meeting, which filled its capacity with more than 250 executives and institutional representatives, counted on the support of our executives Jorge López Zafra and Luisa García, and served to analyze the current demands of the C-suite.
The author shared the table and debate with Josu Jon Imaz (CEO of Repsol), Elena Sanz (CEO of Mapfre Iberia), Antonio Garamendi (president of the CEOE), and Manuel Pimentel (publisher and president of Grupo Almuzara). Three major vectors that are redefining corporate governance emerged from the conversation:
1. The loneliness of the final decision
Faced with the trend of infinite deliberation, contemporary leadership requires assuming responsibility at the critical moment. Josu Jon Imaz resorted to the metaphor of “the loneliness of the penalty kick” to illustrate decision-making in companies’ moments of truth: although the consultation processes are collective, there is a moment when the chief executive must decide individually.
Imaz exemplified this commitment by recalling Repsol’s decision to keep its essential services open during the pandemic, prioritizing social impact and the future of the company over the immediate result of that fiscal year. The ability to combine short-term viability with the sustainability of the future horizon defines the maturity of an organization today.
2. The obligation to exercise power against immobility
The true risk for a corporation in times of transformation is not error, but paralysis. Elena Sanz stressed that immobility is a leader’s greatest irresponsibility, pointing out that once the trust of shareholders and society is accepted, the obligation to act is assumed.
Elena Sanz shared the challenge that transforming an organizational structure consolidated over 25 years meant for Mapfre Iberia to gain agility and closeness to the customer. In sectors where the main asset is intangible, such as trust, operational boldness is an indispensable condition to ensure market relevance.
3. The danger of isolation and the ethical challenge of AI
Another of the major challenges analyzed was the so-called “office effect,” that distance that can open up between steering committees and the reality of the environment. The panel’s unanimous response to this risk was active listening and the need to surround oneself with teams with divergent opinions that challenge the leader’s criteria.
This listening ecosystem also includes the adoption of new technologies. The debate addressed AI as a vector of efficiency and knowledge, but with the shared warning of not letting oneself be determined by it. Antonio Garamendi described AI as “the new total revolution,” a challenge that transcends the technological frontier to become an ethical and social debate that will force the reconfiguration of the relationship between companies, professionals, and the social contract itself.
Managing in the scenario of permanent exposure
Companies need strategic partners to govern in uncertainty and assume risks under high public exposure. It is at these critical turning points where brave decisions, backed by communication, creativity, and data-driven influence manage to shield the most valuable asset of any business project: the trust of its stakeholders.
In this context of transformation, bold leadership also requires mastering institutional relations and the regulatory environment. If you are interested in these matters, I encourage you to learn about the LLYC Public Affairs Program directed by Iñaki Ortega, which starts this June. It would be a true pleasure to have you in this 5th edition.