My newsletter on culture committees back in November stirred up more reaction and a healthy discussion than anything I have written in months. People spoke up from every corner of the organization chart. Some agreed that culture committees had reached their limit. Others argued that committees had changed their company for the better. The discussion itself said something important. Culture work is ready for its next phase.
Committees were never the problem. The problem was the role many of them were asked to play. They became communication groups instead of system builders. They carried responsibility without authority. They hosted meetings while decisions moved somewhere else. Even the most committed employees could only go so far when the systems around them did not reinforce the culture they hoped to shape.
Research is now catching up to what many leaders have felt for years. Harvard Business Review highlighted in August 2025 that durable culture change shows up when decision rights, metrics, and leadership routines are redesigned, not when communication volume increases. Harvard Business Review
This idea traces back to Edgar Schein’s foundational work at MIT. Schein showed that culture grows out of what leaders consistently pay attention to and reinforce through hiring, performance, and rewards. Aga Bajer
These ideas point to the next evolution of the culture committee.
The most effective committees today operate less like communication hubs and more like learning systems that drive real world results. They gather insights that reveal where alignment is strong and where it breaks down. They help leaders understand how decisions land across the organization. They build clarity about what people experience, not what leaders assume. Their purpose is not to own culture. Their purpose is to help culture take hold.
This work benefits from evidence leaders cannot ignore. Gallup reports U.S. engagement fell to a ten-year low in 2024, with only 31 percent of employees engaged. That slide is felt most by younger workers and shows up in performance, safety, and quality. Gallup.com+1
Attrition tells a similar story. MIT Sloan’s analysis found toxic culture is the strongest predictor of industry-adjusted turnover and is ten times more influential than compensation. That level of risk demands system fixes, not slogans. MIT Sloan Management Review
This work requires sharper questions. Are leaders making decisions in a way that reflects shared beliefs? Do measurement routines reinforce the behavior the company expects. Is recognition supporting the right examples. Are people seeing follow through when they raise concerns or identify gaps. When committees examine systems instead of slogans, the work becomes real.
When leaders own the outcomes and committees illuminate the truth on the ground, culture begins to move. Employees see proof that their input shapes decisions. Leaders gain visibility into what they might miss. Culture becomes a shared mandate supported by structure and reinforced by routine. The work no longer depends on charisma or enthusiasm. It depends on embedded practices that keep belief and behavior aligned.
For everyone who asked what comes next after the “death” of the culture committee, the answer is a rebirth. Committees can regain relevance by becoming partners in system design. They can help leadership identify friction, clarify expectations, and reinforce alignment. They can turn insight into the next right action instead of just more activity.
The evolution is already happening. Now we name it, strengthen it, and build for what culture work demands next.
Elsewhere In Culture
https://www.linkedin.com/news/story/us-adds-64k-jobs-but-unemployment-rises-too-6824644
The November jobs report gives leaders just enough good news to miss the point. Adding 64,000 jobs after October’s losses looks like progress until you pair it with what actually matters. Unemployment climbed to 4.6 percent, the highest level in four years, and that rise tells you the slowdown is real. Job growth is concentrating in defensive sectors like health care and construction while manufacturing and federal employment pull back. That pattern shows caution spreading through the economy, not confidence. When unemployment rises even as jobs are added, it signals that the labor market is losing balance and momentum at the same time.
John Frehse has been clear about where this goes next, and I agree with him. The unemployment rate is unlikely to stop here and could rise another fifty percent from current levels before it finds a floor. About half the country is already experiencing recession conditions, even if the national headlines are still trying to sound optimistic. American innovation will absolutely reinvent the economy, because it always does, but timing is everything. John estimates it will take eighteen to thirty six months before we start climbing out, and that means leaders need to prepare for a period that gets harder before it gets better. The organizations that face that reality now, instead of explaining it away, will be the ones that come out stronger on the other side.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/12/15/trump-ai-tech-force-amazon-apple.html
The launch of the US Tech Force signals a meaningful shift in how the federal government is thinking about talent, power, and relevance in an AI-driven economy. By creating a structured path for early career technologists to work on high-impact problems, the government is acknowledging that modernization does not happen through policy alone. It happens through people who have the skills, context, and authority to build new systems inside legacy institutions. Paying competitive salaries and partnering with major tech firms is table stakes. The deeper challenge is whether government agencies are prepared to integrate this talent into environments that have historically rewarded caution over speed and process over outcomes.
This is where workplace culture becomes the determining variable. Bringing in top technical talent without changing how decisions get made, how risk is handled, and how success is measured will only accelerate frustration. Technologists stay where they can see their work ship, where leaders understand the tools being deployed, and where accountability is shared rather than diffused across layers of bureaucracy. If the US Tech Force is paired with cultural clarity and real ownership at the agency level, it can become a catalyst for long-term change. If not, it will simply become another rotational program that produces great resumes and very little transformation.
Most leaders will enter 2026 reacting. I do not want to react. I want to see what is coming before it arrives. That is why we are bringing leaders together for the Surrender To Lead Summit on January 13.
You will hear from executives who are already shaping the year ahead and you will see how the themes from our upcoming book Surrender To Lead come to life in real decisions and real results.
If you want clarity going into 2026, register now and be in the room where leaders are already looking forward.
Register Now At https://www.surrendertolead.com/summit/