Thought leadership in Finland: what we found when we actually asked

A while ago, we lost a significant tender. Or came second, depending on how you want to look at it. We had done preparatory work with the client, received strong recommendations, and built our proposal around a future-proof operating model for the age of AI. And we still didn't win.

When we reviewed the process afterwards, the reason became clear: we had convinced one key person, but not the group around them. According to research, an average of 5.4 different stakeholders are involved in a B2B purchase decision. Each evaluates it through their own lens, their own goals, their own risks. We had focused on the wrong number of people.

It stings. Silver isn't shameful, but it stings. And the experience confirmed something I've believed for years: thought leadership is not a brand activity. It's a sales tool. The companies that understand this are building a structural advantage that's very difficult to recover against once it compounds.

This year, we decided to stop relying on intuition and go find out what's actually happening. Together with Iro Research, we surveyed 150 C-suite leaders from Finland's Top 500 companies. It's the first comprehensive study of the state of thought leadership in Finland, and the findings were honest in ways I didn't fully anticipate.

Thought leadership is considered important. Almost nobody is measuring it.

56% of respondents consider building thought leadership an absolute necessity or highly important for their business. Among pure B2B companies, that number rises to 61%.

That level of agreement is striking. It means the argument for thought leadership has largely been won in the boardroom. And yet 73% of companies are not measuring it systematically. A third don't measure it at all.

This is the central contradiction of Finnish thought leadership in 2026: the strategic importance is recognised, but the operational commitment isn't there.

The comms silo problem is real and it runs deep

One of the findings that struck me most was the gap between how different functions experience thought leadership within the same organisation.

89% of communications directors believe their company measures or monitors thought leadership systematically or occasionally. Among sales directors, that figure drops to 49%. The same company, very different realities.

More telling still: only 20% of marketing and brand directors say thought leadership is discussed systematically at board level, compared to 73% of CEOs. Thought leadership is being owned by the function least positioned to connect it to revenue, and the functions most responsible for revenue don't feel it's theirs.

Courage is the missing ingredient

The finding that surprised me most was about courage. Or rather, the illusion of it.

33% of all respondents believe it's easy to activate experts and leaders for content creation. Among sales directors, that number rises to 40%. But when you look at what's actually happening inside these organisations, the picture is very different.

The research shows that what holds most experts back isn't lack of time or lack of skill. It's the absence of psychological safety. The fear of saying something wrong. The hierarchy that rewards caution and punishes vulnerability.

Management significantly underestimates this barrier. And because they underestimate it, they don't address it. You can't just tell people to be braver. You have to build the conditions in which they can be.

Leadership commitment is not endorsement. It's participation.

The strongest finding in the entire research was also the most intuitive: in companies where thought leadership is discussed systematically at board level, 42% of respondents find it easy to implement across the organisation. In companies where it isn't, that figure drops to 19%.

The lesson isn't that leadership should approve the thought leadership strategy. It's that they should be in it. Visible, active and posting, not as an obligation but as a genuine expression of their perspective on the industry. When leaders model the behaviour, the whole organisation follows more readily.

What this means in practice

The research points toward five things every organisation serious about thought leadership needs to address:

• Define the narrative first. Identify the specific themes your brand can own and genuinely challenge industry consensus on.
• Build a measurement framework connected to business outcomes, not just visibility.
• Connect thought leadership to sales. Give experts content and tools they can use in client conversations.
• Build the system that makes expert activation possible. Ghostwriting support, structured coaching, a community of fellow participants.
• Make sure top leadership is a part of the program, not just behind it.

Key takeaway: Finland's first thought leadership research shows that strategic intent is high but operational commitment is low. The gap between knowing thought leadership matters and building the systems to deliver it is where most companies are stuck. Closing that gap is a leadership decision, not a communications one.