Over the past editions, we have explored the Intelligence Triad, the Virtuoso Dynamic Model, Data Hedges, the White Canvas Moment, and Master Data as the Cipher Key. Each of those frameworks answers what needs to change and how to think about it.
But there is a question that sits above all of them — one we have been dancing around. And it is time to address it head-on.
Who actually owns this transformation?
The What and the How Are Not Enough
More and more, I am convinced that before embarking on any transformative journey, it is fundamental to ensure that the right People, disciplines, skills, and competencies are united under the same frame of action — be it under the same organisation, structure, leadership, or governing body.
While we spend a lot of our time focused on the what and the how, I find it of utmost importance to focus on the Who immediately after the What and the How are directionally clear. Who will orchestrate the transformation? Who can lead it? Who owns the Process being transformed? Who owns the Data? Who can decide on the design? Who can arbitrate the options?
We tend to assume that if we know the what and the how, the who will simply fall into place. Experience has taught me that this is seldom the case. If we expect gravity to somehow bring the right People together, we will fundamentally fail. These are lessons from the field — not theory.
The Inflection Point Demands Different People Profiles
As business leaders we are all clear that we are at an inflection point in Global Business Services. We cannot continue to build the next generation of GBS (a.k.a. GBS 3.0) based on the blueprints of the past. Well, we can — but they will be obsolete by the time they are established, and competitiveness will be compromised.
As GBS Leaders, witnessing the power and speed of technology around us, we understand this. Which is why it has never been more important to get your People right. Never has it been more critical to deeply understand the skills and competencies needed to bring us to the Next Gen Business Services.
Companies that become intentional about their teams — and about the specific skills needed to drive the next chapter of the GBS build — will unlock strong potential.
Two Roles That Will Define the Next Generation GBS
So what are the skills needed? They follow two fundamental role types that will become paramount: Ownership and Stewardship.
These roles will expand across end-to-end Processes — and end-to-end may mean even beyond your own company walls (technology will break those boundaries sooner than we think) — and across multiple domains of Data. Both Process and Data are the enablers of next generation GBS. So we need our teams to become either Owners or Stewards of Processes and Data, and in some cases, both.
This brings us to what I call the Ownership Dilemma.
The Ownership Dilemma
I have listened carefully to many organisations and peers share their experience on the concept of ownership. Two specific types of ownership are fundamentally key to unlocking the next generation of Business Services: Process ownership and Data ownership.
The dilemma is not whether ownership matters — everyone agrees it does. The dilemma is that ownership is consistently claimed but rarely exercised. Processes have owners on paper. Data has owners in governance documents. But in practice, when a critical decision needs to be made — on Process design, on Data standards, on technology choices — the room goes quiet. Nobody wants to own the outcome.
This gap between nominal ownership and genuine accountability is one of the most invisible and destructive forces in GBS transformation today. And in the age of AI, where Data flows across systems and Processes cross functional and even company boundaries, this gap becomes catastrophic.
You cannot feed a Data hedge-free environment into your AI when nobody actually owns the hedge trimmer.
Ownership vs Stewardship: Understanding the Distinction
These two concepts are frequently confused — and that confusion is expensive.
Ownership is about accountability and decision rights. A Process Owner is accountable for the end-to-end design, performance, and strategic evolution of a Process. They can arbitrate between competing design options. They can say yes or no to change. They carry the result. A Data Owner holds equivalent authority over a defined Data domain — they set the standards, govern the definitions, and are ultimately responsible for Data quality and fitness for purpose.
Stewardship is about operational responsibility. A Process Steward ensures day-to-day execution aligns with the defined design, monitors performance, flags deviations, and drives continuous improvement within established boundaries. A Data Steward is responsible for the practical quality of Data within their domain — cleaning, enrichment, monitoring, escalating issues to the Data Owner when standards are not met.
The distinction matters for one simple reason: Stewards execute within a framework. Owners define the framework. Without Owners, Stewards have no north star. Without Stewards, Owners have no operational reach.
Both roles are essential. Neither can substitute for the other. And in most organisations today, the Steward role is partially filled while the Owner role is almost entirely absent in any meaningful sense.
Why GBS Is the Perfect Place for Ownership and Stewardship to Thrive
This is where GBS has an extraordinary structural advantage — one that is still largely untapped.
GBS sits at the intersection of every major end-to-end Process. It is the only function in a company that operates across business units, geographies, and functional domains simultaneously. It sees the full journey of a transaction — from origination to resolution — in a way no single business unit ever could.
That cross-functional visibility makes GBS the natural home for Process Ownership. Not because GBS should control everything, but because GBS uniquely understands everything end-to-end. When a Process crosses three systems, two functions, and four geographies, someone needs to hold the complete picture. In most organisations, only GBS can do that.
The same logic applies to Data Ownership. Master Data — vendors, customers, employees, products — lives and breathes across GBS operations every single day. GBS teams are often the first to feel the pain of bad Data, and the first to recognise the patterns of where and why it breaks. That practitioner knowledge is precisely what a Data Owner needs.
Beyond visibility, GBS has something else that makes it ideal: neutrality. GBS sits outside the political boundaries of individual business units. It has no vested interest in one design over another. That neutrality makes it a credible arbitrator — the role that effective Ownership requires most.
The next generation GBS will not simply be a delivery engine. It will be the governance backbone of an organisation's Process and Data landscape. The shift from execution to ownership is not just a role change. It is a fundamental elevation of what GBS means and contributes.
Making the Shift: What Intentional Looks Like
Intentionality is the operating word here. This does not happen by accident.
Start with your most critical end-to-end Processes. Map them honestly — not as they appear on an org chart, but as they actually flow across systems, teams, and company boundaries. Then ask the question: Who genuinely owns this Process today? Who has the decision rights, the accountability, and the authority to change it?
Do the same for your key Data domains.
In most cases, you will find a vacuum. And a vacuum is not a neutral state — it will be filled, eventually, by the loudest voice in the room, or the heaviest budget, or the most urgent deadline. None of those make for good governance.
The organisations that build deliberate Ownership and Stewardship structures — that appoint real Owners, equip real Stewards, and give both the authority and the accountability to act — will be the ones whose AI actually works. Because their Data cipher key will be maintained. Because their Processes will be designed, not inherited. Because when transformation decisions need to be made, there will be someone in the room who can make them.
Connecting the Dots
In Edition #4, I wrote that Master Data is the Cipher Key. That is still true.
But a cipher key without a keyholder is just a key sitting on the floor.
The Ownership Dilemma is what keeps that key on the floor. And solving it — by building genuine Ownership and Stewardship into the very DNA of your next generation GBS — is what picks it up and puts it in the right hands.
The what points the direction. The how builds the path. But it is the who that walks it.