Strategy & Leadership Competence Center

The Decision Paradox.

What Elite Sports Reveal to CEOs About Leadership Enhanced by Artificial Intelligence.

25
Interviews
11
Subjects

The more AI is integrated into the process, the more weight the person signing carries.

The technology that is supposed to lighten the decision-maker’s load ends up burdening them. There are no more excuses in either direction: one cannot hide behind instinct, because the data speaks for itself, nor behind the algorithm, because responsibility cannot be delegated.

"There are games where I completely agree with the statistic, others where I agree 15–20%. Over the course of a season, maybe 50%."

Premier League match analyst—the same person who compiles that data

Entries

0

professionals, from the pit wall to the locker room

Observe

0%

statements in which AI predominates, as observed

Decides

0%

statements in which AI plays a dominant role at the time of decision-making

The entries

From the pit wall to the locker room

Twenty-five professionals, eleven disciplines, in their own words.

Marco Fassone
“The algorithm decided—it’s not my fault”: when a purchase is dictated by data, the person making it has a ready-made alibi.

Marco Fassone

Sports executive, former CEO of AC Milan, and executive at Juventus, Napoli, and Inter

Giorgio Chiellini
Data can become an important partner for a leader who is often left to make decisions alone.

Giorgio Chiellini

Former soccer player and Director of Football Strategy at Juventus

Demetrio Albertini
The weight of the decision: 40% based on data, 60% based on experience and intuition.

Demetrio Albertini

Former soccer player and former President of the FIGC Technical Department

Lorenzo Bernardi
"Data is impersonal: it can tell you what's happening, but it doesn't always tell you why."

Lorenzo Bernardi

Coach and former volleyball player

Maurizia Cacciatori
"If we were to train and live solely on data, we would become robots."

Maurizia Cacciatori

Former volleyball player and commentator

Federico Bernardeschi
"I can make the best decision to get past an opponent, but that doesn't necessarily mean I'll score."

Federico Bernardeschi

Professional soccer player

Linton Johnson
When the game starts, “let the numbers speak for themselves”: in moments of intense pressure, the best decision-maker doesn’t think—he reacts.

Linton Johnson

Former NBA basketball player

Romano Battisti
“People often look for a scientific excuse to blame the numbers [...], but the truth was much simpler: we were just tired.”

Romano Battisti

Former Olympic rower, Luna Rossa

Michele Aragona
“There are games where I completely agree with the stats, others where I agree 15–20%; over the course of a season, maybe 50%.”

Michele Aragona

Match Analyst, Ipswich Town, Premier League

Gilberto Nobili
"If math isn't a matter of opinion, the fastest boat should always win. But that doesn't happen, because the outcome also depends on the people."

Gilberto Nobili

Director of Technology and Operations, Luna Rossa

Marco Arnoletti
"I'd rather have a model with a 5% margin of error that's predictive than one that's 1% accurate but unable to respond to reality."

Marco Arnoletti

Chief Powertrain Engineer, Bugatti Rimac

Marco Ricci Malerbi
The estimator is considered more reliable than the sensor because it does not break or drift.

Marco Ricci Malerbi

Junior Track Performance Engineer, Dallara

Marco Spiga
"AI should serve to challenge our beliefs, not to confirm them."

Marco Spiga

Volvo executive and sports executive

Giovanbattista Venditti
"The players on the field always have the final say, because they're the ones living in the moment."

Giovanbattista Venditti

Former rugby player, Italian national team member

Umberto Pelizzari
The decision to climb back up “is entirely up to the athlete: it cannot be delegated to a device.”

Umberto Pelizzari

Freediver and TV host

Angel Osakue
"The natural instinct is to move, but you have to be trained to stay still."

Angel Osakue

Skeleton athlete, Italian national winter sports team

Danielle Madam
"What the data can't capture is what really matters: the sensations on the platform [...]".

Danielle Madam

Shot put athlete, member of the Italian national team

Stefano Mancinelli
If the technology fails, the “programmed” person can no longer act on instinct.

Stefano Mancinelli

Former professional basketball player

Giovanni Valentini
"The risk is standardization: if everyone uses the same models, everyone starts producing the same ideas."

Giovanni Valentini

Chief Revenue and Marketing Officer of the FIGC

Domenico Mattiaccia
"AI works like a funnel: you start with a thousand profiles and end up with twenty; then you need to conduct a qualitative analysis."

Domenico Mattiaccia

Head of Academy Methodology and Player Development

Alberto Melis
"When something is too specific, sometimes it's faster for me to just do it myself than to correct the AI."

Alberto Melis

Sports Marketing and Communication, Esperia Cagliari, and Innoversity Sport

Alessandro Rinaldi
Constant monitoring causes significant psychological stress for the athlete.

Alessandro Rinaldi

Mental coach, basketball

Andrea Rinaldi
Even when we delegate the decision to a machine, responsibility does not disappear: it shifts to the design of the system and the monitoring of its outcomes.

Andrea Rinaldi

Freestyle Race Director, International Ski Federation

Lorenzo Iannarilli
The danger isn't that AI will make mistakes, but that everyone will rely on the same AI and stop questioning the data.

Lorenzo Iannarilli

Project Manager; expert in innovation, AI, and digital transformation

Pietro Parente
AI creates alternative simulations and indicates which is more likely and which is riskier, without specifying which is the right choice.

Pietro Parente

Innovative Technologies and Processes: LUMSA University, CONI’s Advanced School of Olympic Specialization

Figure 1

The Algorithmic Authority Gradient

Who prevails, step by step. The algorithm's authority diminishes as the decision moves closer to action.

AI Prevails Interaction Human Judgment Prevails

Observe

observe

61%
16%
23%

Orient

guide

17%
20%
62%

Decides

decide

9%
19%
72%

Act

to act

40%
60%

174 coded statements: 31 in Observe, 69 in Orient, 64 in Decide, 10 in Act. Orders of magnitude, not measurements. Cells with a reduced base are the least stable.

The Delegation Curve

The percentage of statements in which AI prevails across the four phases.

75%50%25%0% 61%17%9%40% OBSERVEORIENTDECIDEACT

What Concerns Those Who Use Them Every Day

Risks raised spontaneously, without being asked. Out of 25 respondents.

Context that cannot be encoded by a machine

7

Overconfidence, black box

5

Atrophy of intuition, deskilling

5

Standardization, Loss of Creativity

4

Ambiguity regarding accountability, excuses

3

Psychological pressure, burnout

2

It doesn't matter what stage it's at. What matters is how the decision is made.

How repeatable is the error, how reversible is it, and how long does it last? These three questions underpin every recurring decision.

Zone 01

Full Power of Attorney

Repeatable, reversible, low-cost, and high-frequency.

Who Decides

The system. Humans design the rules.

The Check

Statistical monitoring of the decision population, not a case-by-case review.

Zone 02

AI makes the recommendation; a human signs off on it

Partially repeatable; the error is correctable but costly.

Who Decides

A person who must provide a reason when deviating from the rule.

The Check

Recording recommendations, decisions, and deviations: this is the foundation of feedback that the company lacks.

Zone 03

A decision made entirely by humans

Rare or irreversible; unspecified context.

Who Decides

Whoever bears the consequences.

The Check

AI does not make recommendations: it tests the hypothesis and generates the worst-case scenario.

The Discoveries

Four Things We Didn't Expect

01

AI does not reduce the responsibility of decision-makers—it increases it.

When every performance metric is tracked, falling short of the target becomes indefensible, and hiding behind it doesn't work.

02

There is a situation in which it's better to let the machine decide—and it's not the one you'd expect.

In competition judging, AI wins not because it is more accurate, but because it is consistent: in a ranking, a systematic error cancels itself out, but a random error does not.

03

An expert's instinct is not an alternative to data: it is data accumulated over time.

It becomes reliable only when immediate feedback corrects it over the course of years. In sports, this happens in every competition; in business, it almost never does.

04

The most common way to avoid responsibility is not to follow the algorithm—it's the opposite.

Choose instinctively and then select the numbers that justify that choice. Almost no one recognizes this as a mistake, because the result looks like an analysis.

The full report

Nearly fifty pages, twenty-five entries, and a checklist you can use on Monday morning.

Research conducted by the Strategy & Leadership Competence Center at H-FARM Business School.

H-FARM Business School

Project led by Susanna Sgarbossa, Research Manager at H-FARM Business School.

Researchers: Matteo Graziani, Hillary Esi Akoun, and Gaia Catalano, research analysts at H-FARM Business School and students at H-FARM College.

With contributions from Alessandro Petrillo, CEO of H-FARM Business School; Federico Donati, Program Manager for the Centers of Excellence; and Pierluigi Fasano, Professor and Coordinator of the Centers of Excellence.

We would like to express our deepest gratitude to the leaders in sports and innovation who contributed to this research with their expertise and perspectives, including Carlo Nardello, a professor and expert in innovation, governance, and digital transformation. Special thanks to Erika Andreetta, Partner at PwC Italy, for her contribution to the strategic development of the Strategy & Leadership Competence Center and for spearheading this research, and to Team Luna Rossa, which opened the doors of its technical and sports team to us.