The real difference will be people, not who has the best technology.
En los salones del Madrid Leaders Forum, dos ejecutivos pusieron nombre a lo que muchos intuyen pero pocos articulan con claridad: la inteligencia artificial ya no es una promesa futura, sino el terreno donde se libra hoy la competencia empresarial. Sin embargo, la ventaja no reside en el acceso a la tecnología —que es cada vez más universal— sino en la capacidad humana de adaptarse, juzgar y liderar en medio de la incertidumbre. La historia que emerge no es la del hombre desplazado por la máquina, sino la del hombre obligado a redescubrir qué es lo que solo él puede hacer.
- La IA ya está integrada en las operaciones reales de las empresas, y quienes aún la tratan como proyecto futuro están perdiendo terreno ahora mismo.
- El miedo a la destrucción masiva de empleo simplifica una realidad más compleja: los roles se transforman, emergen nuevas funciones, y la convivencia entre experiencia senior y nativa digital se vuelve una necesidad estratégica.
- La democratización de la IA generativa nivela el acceso, pero no resuelve el problema central: alguien con criterio humano debe interpretar lo que la máquina produce, porque el algoritmo genera probabilidades, no decisiones.
- La ciberseguridad y la gobernanza de datos se han convertido en presiones ineludibles, con amenazas que evolucionan tan rápido como las defensas, obligando a inversiones continuas sin garantía de protección total.
- Europa avanza con regulación protectora mientras Estados Unidos y China aceleran con menos restricciones, dejando a las empresas europeas atrapadas entre la exigencia de cumplimiento y la urgencia de competir globalmente.
En el Madrid Leaders Forum, dos directivos dibujaron con precisión el nuevo mapa de la competitividad empresarial en la era de la inteligencia artificial. Alfonso García Muriel, responsable de DXC Technology en España y Portugal, fue directo: todas las empresas pueden comprar las mismas herramientas de IA. Lo que las diferenciará es si sus organizaciones son capaces de moverse con la velocidad suficiente para aprovecharlas, y si sus personas pueden adaptarse a trabajar junto a ellas. El liderazgo moderno, argumentó, no consiste en gestionar tecnología sino en dar dirección, construir confianza y acompañar a los equipos en la transformación sin que pierdan el rumbo.
García Muriel rechazó la narrativa simplista de la destrucción de empleo. Las funciones cambian, surgen nuevas formas de trabajo, y la colaboración entre profesionales experimentados y generaciones nativas digitales se convierte en una ventaja competitiva real. Pero fue claro en una condición: la IA solo genera valor cuando convergen una infraestructura de datos sólida, reglas de gobernanza claras y talento humano capaz de convertir los outputs tecnológicos en decisiones de negocio reales.
Jorge Barredo López, de Naturgy, aportó otra dimensión. La IA generativa está abaratando tanto el acceso a estas capacidades que empresas pequeñas pueden hoy competir con herramientas antes reservadas a los gigantes tecnológicos. Pero esa democratización no altera una verdad fundamental: la IA es probabilística, no determinista. Genera patrones y posibilidades; no toma decisiones. Alguien —una persona— debe evaluar lo que produce la máquina y decidir qué hacer con ello. En Naturgy, esa división es deliberada: los sistemas automatizan tareas operativas, mientras las personas aportan juicio, supervisión y autoridad real.
Ambos ejecutivos señalaron la ciberseguridad y la gobernanza de datos como presiones crecientes e inevitables. A medida que proliferan los sistemas de IA, también lo hacen los vectores de riesgo. García Muriel lo resumió con sobriedad: la protección total no existe, y las defensas deben evolucionar al mismo ritmo que las amenazas. Sobre todo esto planea la sombra de la regulación europea, que busca proteger a los ciudadanos pero corre el riesgo de lastrar la capacidad competitiva de las empresas del continente frente a un Estados Unidos y una China que avanzan con menos restricciones. El equilibrio entre protección y competitividad sigue sin resolverse, y el coste de no encontrarlo es alto.
Artificial intelligence has stopped being something companies talk about doing someday. It is happening now, embedded in how businesses actually operate. That was the central takeaway from a panel discussion at the Madrid Leaders Forum, where two executives laid out what they believe will separate winning companies from the rest.
Alfonso García Muriel, who runs DXC Technology's operations across Spain and Portugal, made a blunt argument: technology access alone will not be the deciding factor. Every company can buy the same AI tools. What matters is whether an organization can move fast enough to use them, and whether its people can adapt to working alongside them. "The real difference will be people," he said. He positioned the modern business leader's job as something more fundamental than managing technology—it is about giving teams direction, building trust, and helping them navigate constant change without losing their footing.
García Muriel pushed back against a common fear: that AI will simply eliminate jobs. He argued the story is more complicated. Functions will transform. New kinds of work will emerge. Senior professionals with deep knowledge will need to work alongside younger employees who grew up with technology. "Transformation does not necessarily mean reduction," he said. But he was clear that AI only creates value when three things align: solid data infrastructure, clear governance rules, and people talented enough to turn what the technology produces into actual business decisions. Companies, he suggested, should not chase AI for its own sake. They should invest in specific applications that solve real problems.
Jorge Barredo López, who leads renewable energy operations at Naturgy, reinforced the point from a different angle. Generative AI is lowering the cost of entry to these tools so dramatically that small companies can now access capabilities that used to belong only to tech giants. That democratization is real. But it does not change the fundamental truth: machines will handle more routine work, but humans will still make the calls that matter. "AI is probabilistic, not deterministic," Barredo said. It generates possibilities and patterns. It does not determine outcomes. Someone has to look at what the machine produced, think about whether it makes sense, and decide what to do. That someone is a person.
Barredo described Naturgy's approach as a deliberate division of labor. Automation and intelligent systems take on operational and support tasks. People provide judgment, oversight, and the actual authority to decide. This requires leadership that knows where AI genuinely adds value and where it does not. It also requires building teams that think critically instead of simply accepting what the algorithm suggests.
Both executives flagged cybersecurity and data governance as emerging pressures that companies cannot ignore. As AI systems proliferate, so do the risks. Hackers are adapting. Sensitive information is flowing through more channels. García Muriel offered a sobering note: "You will never be completely protected." The threats keep evolving, which means defenses have to keep evolving too. Companies are being forced to spend more money and build more sophisticated protocols just to stay in place.
A shadow hung over the conversation: Europe's regulatory approach. The United States and China are moving forward with fewer restrictions, building AI capabilities and applications faster. Europe, by contrast, is layering on rules designed to protect citizens and ensure fairness. The panelists did not argue against regulation itself. But they warned that if Europe's rules become too heavy, European companies will struggle to compete in building and deploying AI solutions. The balance between protection and competitiveness remains unsettled, and the stakes are high.
Notable Quotes
The real difference will be people.— Alfonso García Muriel, CEO of DXC Technology for Spain and Portugal
Transformation does not necessarily mean reduction.— Alfonso García Muriel, DXC Technology
AI is probabilistic, not deterministic.— Jorge Barredo López, director of renewable energy at Naturgy
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
If every company can buy the same AI tools, what exactly is the competitive advantage you're talking about?
It is not the tool itself. It is the speed and skill with which you integrate it into how your people actually work. Two companies can buy the same software and get completely different results depending on whether their teams understand how to use it and whether leadership has prepared them for the change.
But you said people are the differentiator. Does that mean companies should stop investing in AI itself?
No. You need both. But the money spent on AI infrastructure only pays off if you have the talent and organizational culture to make it work. Without that, you have expensive software sitting unused or producing outputs nobody knows how to act on.
What about the jobs question? Is AI really not going to eliminate positions?
Functions will change. Some work will disappear. But the framing of "elimination" misses what actually happens. A company might need fewer people doing routine data entry, but it will need more people who can interpret what AI outputs mean and make decisions based on that. The skill mix shifts.
So the real risk is not unemployment but skills mismatch?
Exactly. If a company does not invest in retraining and does not create space for different generations to work together, then yes, people get left behind. But that is a choice, not an inevitability.
You mentioned AI is probabilistic, not deterministic. What does that actually mean for a business leader?
It means the machine gives you options and patterns, not answers. A leader has to know when to trust those patterns and when to override them based on judgment the machine cannot have. That requires people who understand both the technology and the business deeply enough to make that call.