Innovation

Kostas Grigoriou: Simply put, “rapid change” is the future of work. In a few short years, job descriptions may boil down to a single bullet point: “tech-enabled complex problem-solving to create value.” What does that mean? Developing new tools to capitalize on opportunities. Leading and motivating highly capable teams—fluent in business and STEM—toward a common goal. It may sound daunting, but it won’t be for students who have done it before they’ve even entered the workforce. 

Daniels is laser-focused on preparing students for this. Our strategic vision is clear: to own the intersection of business and technology. We are radically rethinking what a future-ready business education looks like, and Daniels is leading the charge with bold moves. Look no further than the launch of truly innovative programs such as IBE (Integrated Business & Engineering) and MBT (Master of Business and Technology), with many more in the works.

Andy Hughes: At DeVoe, we’ve redesigned business education around agility. From our new Executive MBA with the Oxford immersion to our interactive AI-powered undergraduate business coach, we equip students to lead in today’s disruption-heavy economy. We don’t just teach theory, we embed practical experiences, certifications, and simulations directly into our programs. Our graduates don’t wait until after graduation to lead—they’re already solving real-world business problems as part of their curriculum. In short, we’ve flipped the model: students don’t adapt to school; our school adapts to the future.

Andy Hughes: Today’s business challenges don’t come in neat categories, so neither should education. At DeVoe, we intentionally integrate business, technology, and leadership because that’s how work happens. Our students tackle projects that span operations, analytics, marketing, and AI—all within the same learning experience. Whether it’s executive learning to manage AI-driven teams or an undergrad using our AI Business Coach, cross-disciplinary fluency is non-negotiable. The future belongs to those who can lead across boundaries—not just within silos.

Kostas Grigoriou: Technology is transforming industries and reshaping how businesses operate, create value, and compete. Professionals are now expected to understand complex networks of people, technologies, and processes to identify opportunities for value creation and, increasingly, to build solutions themselves. As a result, we see the rise of a new leader archetype built on an interdisciplinary foundation. Innovation requires leaders who can apply integrative problem-solving that transcends disciplines. Leaders must display mastery of communication, storytelling, and relationship-building to connect with people, acquire domain expertise, and deeply understand workflows, unmet needs, and problem spaces. They must also demonstrate fluency in building and working with software, information, knowledge, and data to experiment and test solutions. Their ability to connect with diverse people, motivate them and rally them toward a common goal is also critical. That is, it requires leaders to deeply understand more than one discipline.

Kostas Grigoriou: Our students will soon find themselves in a work environment that expects them to collaborate effectively with AI tools/agents as much, if not more than, with people. To get there, I want my students to play every role there is to play at the interface of humans and AI. Start by being power users of AI tools to understand their capabilities and limitations and learn how to craft effective prompts. And then evolve into creators who use AI tools to build solutions from scratch. Are we debating an issue in strategy? Immersing ourselves into a new space for our work on a team project? Putting together a new business concept for a competition? Building a prototype to test with customers? Regardless of the context, there are many opportunities to use, consume, and leverage AI to be more productive.

Andy Hughes: AI is central to everything we do. Our new Master’s in AI with a Data Analytics specialization is training future-forward analysts, while our Executive MBA integrates AI in leadership, innovation, and strategy. Even undergrads use AI through interactive tools like our AI Business Coach, simulating decisions and generating real-time feedback. But it’s not just about using AI, it’s about teaching students to lead, question, and deploy AI responsibly. We don’t see AI as a trend. We see it as the literacy of tomorrow’s workforce.

Andy Hughes: We don’t believe students should just graduate with knowledge; they should leave with impact. That’s why we embed hands-on experience into every level of learning through our problem-based learning framework. From global immersion at Oxford, to executive followership and AI certifications, students graduate with tools, not just transcripts. Our programs are modular, customizable, and constantly updated to reflect what the market demands. But what truly sets DeVoe apart is our commitment to linking arms with learners beyond graduation. In a world that demands constant upskilling, we’ve created a framework for lifelong learning—offering stackable credentials, industry partnership, and AI-powered pathways for ongoing development. Whether someone earned their degree last year or a decade ago, we want DeVoe to remain their go-to partner for what’s next.

Kostas Grigoriou: We do a wonderful job at Daniels preparing our graduates for technical and product leadership roles. These are roles for which companies struggle to find qualified candidates—a known unmet need. I would argue that three key capabilities underpin that success: 1) A STEM-infused learning environment integrating business with technology, science, and engineering; 2) Our emphasis on practical and experiential learning, constantly exposing our students to real-world challenges and hands-on projects; 3) Our unique strong culture of collaboration, empowering students to sharpen their communication, teamwork, and leadership skills.

Kostas Grigoriou: The hearts and minds of their people are the most significant barrier and the one that leaders in established industries will have to wrestle with. Adopting an innovation goes through feelings and skills. I can tell you exactly what our graduates would recommend. I just finished working with one of our IBE student teams, who, as part of their Capstone, explored the adoption of AI in legacy industries. The students—informed by their extensive primary and secondary research—recommended a set of actions that all point to effective change management: set a clear time-bound expectation for AI adoption; share success stories from AI adoption in specific areas within the organization; explain clearly that AI is here to make everyone more productive, not replace them; address the fears; and invest heavily in the development of new skills that people need to effectively adopt it. That’s the playbook!

Andy Hughes: Fear of change, outdated processes, and siloed thinking all block innovation. Unfortunately, those issues permeate the way many organizations function. Our graduates are trained to challenge these types of status quo issues while honoring organizational values. Our graduates would recommend starting with measurable, AI-informed pilot projects that show quick wins—building buy-in across stakeholders. Just as important, our graduates foster a culture of curiosity, encouraging feedback loops and internal idea sharing. Innovation isn’t just about big tech investments—it’s about empowering people with the tools and confidence to solve problems differently.

Andy Hughes: Leaders must create safe spaces to test ideas without fear of failure. They reward experimentation—not just outcomes. At DeVoe, we teach leaders how to build “innovation rhythms” into their teams: recurring sprints, brainstorming sessions, and idea showcases that normalize thinking differently. Transparency from leadership and access to tools like AI-driven insight platforms can help employees see how their input drives results. Culture change isn’t a memo—it’s a daily mindset driving attitudes and daily behaviors, and it starts at the top.

Kostas Grigoriou: There is a lot that organizations can do, but my three favorite strategies are: 1) Encourage consistent inexpensive experimentation and heavily invest in successful experiments—regardless of whether they originated at the top or the bottom of the organization; 2) Showcase a high tolerance for failure where failed experiments are celebrated for the lessons they created for the organization; 3) Offer employees a clear but flexible framework to guide their behavior, choices, and time spent between exploration and execution. Execution is critical for the organization’s present while exploration safeguards its future; all the people need is some help when it comes to deciding how to balance the two, and organizations should provide that clarity.

Kostas Grigoriou: I read Joseph Schumpeter’s Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy during my first year as a student at Georgia Tech, and it defined my worldview from that point forward. Schumpeter coined the term “creative destruction” to describe the process by which new innovations disrupt and replace old industries and technologies, ultimately leading to economic progress. This process, Schumpeter argued, is driven by entrepreneurs—the agents of change—and is a key feature of capitalist economies. As a result, I have come to admire companies that are really good in disrupting themselves before someone else does it to them. It’s not easy to avoid resting on one’s laurels, and there aren’t many who can do it consistently. Satya Nadella’s Microsoft is a great example—they did it with SaaS, then with Cloud Computing and now with AI. Nadella’s empowering leadership style and actions have fostered a culture of agility, experimentation, and innovation that is bound to keep giving. 

Andy Hughes: One standout example is the evolution of financial services. Fintech startups disrupted traditional banks not by offering radically new products—but by using AI, automation, and UX design to deliver seamless, personalized service. Now, legacy banks are partnering with tech firms, launching in-house innovation labs, and investing in AI to compete. AI has disrupted higher education as well. At DeVoe, we are leveraging AI and innovation to change how we do business. It’s a model we explore in our EMBA program, where students assess how AI can create competitive advantages, not just efficiencies.

Andy Hughes: Innovation without ethics is dangerous. Business leaders must ask: Who does this technology help? Who might it harm? Are we transparent about our use of AI, especially in hiring, pricing, creativity, and decision-making? At DeVoe, we train students to lead with integrity—not just efficiency. It is critical that businesses hire people who have been trained to consider bias, equity, privacy, and the long-term societal impact of their decisions. AI can drive growth, but technology use must also be governed by values and enhance human potential and not diminish it. In our classrooms, ethics is never an afterthought—it’s built into our DNA.

Kostas Grigoriou: “Do no harm”—or at least, try to. This rule should apply not just to an individual business but also to the impact the actions of the business might have on all of its stakeholders. Innovative technologies bring discontinuities, which in turn present both opportunities and threats. Opportunity has a tendency to corrupt judgment or lower the capacity for critical thinking out of fear of missing out. It generates hype. In those environments, people are more likely to ignore threats or warning signs of negative impact on people, value, stakeholders, and communities. To top it all off, our governance mechanisms are often virtually non-existent as policy and self-regulation play catch-up. As a result, even well-intentioned leaders have justifiable blind spots. Being aware of the rising risk for blind spots is step No. 1. And of course, in the midst of chaos, we also have certified “bad actors” who sense an opportunity to game the system. In the absence of safeguards, leaders are left with nothing more than an “ethical compass” and perhaps the need to lean a little heavier on “leading,” that is, doing the right thing even when it is hard.