The Medical Devices sector faces a triple disruption in 2026. Portfolio realignment is accelerating, companies like Johnson & Johnson carving out big chunks of their business (orthopaedic) to focus on other higher growth areas like cardio. Care delivery is shifting from hospitals to ambulatory surgery centres (ASC), with over 500 procedures now added to the ASC-eligible list in the US alone, a trend also observed in many other countries. And AI is moving from pilot projects to core operational capability. McKinsey’s report, The State of AI in 20251, suggests the direction of travel is clear, even if progress remains uneven: Almost all surveyed organisations report using AI, but nearly two-thirds say they have not yet begun scaling it across the enterprise. In other words, the leadership challenge is no longer whether to explore AI, but how to embed it effectively, safely, and at scale.
Each of these shifts demands different leadership. Not better leadership in the abstract. Different leadership for a specific context.
This matters because as found in our Leadership Navigator studies, over 50% of executives believe the changes they face are unique. In MedTech, they are right. A company divesting non-core assets to fund growth in pulsed field ablation needs a different leader than one building AI products from scratch. A company rewriting its commercial model for ASC customers needs a different leader than one optimising hospital procurement relationships.
Yet most organisations still select leaders based on generic competency models. They look for “strategic thinkers” and “change agents” without defining what strategy and change mean in their precise situation, in their specific market, at this exact moment.
The studies confirm what executive search practitioners observe daily: Leadership effectiveness depends on the match between the leader’s capabilities and the organisation's specific situation. A MedTech CEO managing aggressive restructuring and margin pressure operates in a fundamentally different context than one scaling a newly acquired neuromodulation platform. Both roles require excellence. Neither role requires the same leader.
Organisations that define their leadership needs through the lens of their actual strategic situation, rather than a universal leadership framework, report better outcomes under pressure. The question is not “who is a great leader?” The question is “who is the right leader for what we need to accomplish in the next 18 to 36 months?”
More than 10% of organisations plan to restructure their leadership teams within one to three years. Before they hire, they should define what success looks like in measurable terms.
For a MedTech company entering the ASC market, the needed leadership result might be: “Build a commercial model that captures 15% of addressable ASC procedure volume within 24 months”. For a company scaling AI capabilities, it might be: “Establish enterprise-wide data governance and deploy three validated AI applications within 18 months”.
These are not job descriptions. They are performance contracts. They force clarity about what the organisation needs before the search begins.
The leaders who will drive innovation, improve patient outcomes, and maintain competitive advantage in 2026 are not the ones with the most impressive résumés
The studies show that at least 66% of what you evaluate in your next leader should focus on their relevant track record in relation to the specifics of the role and situation. This is not about years of experience. It is about demonstrated results in comparable contexts.
A leader who has successfully built ASC commercial channels in orthopaedics brings directly transferable knowledge to a cardiac device company facing the same shift. A leader who has scaled AI governance in diagnostics brings relevant architecture thinking to a surgical robotics firm. Track record in a relevant context is the strongest predictor of future performance.
Leadership excellence is not only about who someone is. It is about what they have accomplished when it truly mattered.
MedTech executives should resist the temptation to hire for generic leadership qualities. Instead, define your specific strategic context. Set clear, measurable leadership results. Then find the leader whose track record proves they have done it before, in a situation that mirrors yours.
The leaders who will drive innovation, improve patient outcomes, and maintain competitive advantage in 2026 are not the ones with the most impressive résumés. They are the ones whose experience matches your reality.
1 McKinsey. (2025). The state of AI in 2025. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/quantumblack/our-insights/the-state-of-ai