The news of Jensen Huang's resignation from NVIDIA in the wake of the affairs-and-alleged-spying scandal is a “wobbler” that almost nobody expected. I say almost nobody because one brave analyst, Christian Lamarco, saw trouble coming and went short NVIDIA stock. Apparently, he wasn't buying into the idea that the AI revolution made NVIDIA invincible, and he was wondering why the potential spy was traveling with Huang.

The business and technology worlds have been turned upside down; investors are understandably nervous, and everyone seems to have an opinion about what happens next. Meanwhile, one of the world's most important companies suddenly finds itself navigating a leadership crisis that would have been almost unimaginable a few weeks ago.

In Advantexe business leadership simulations, we introduce unexpected events that we call “wobblers” to see how participants respond when their carefully developed strategies collide with reality. Sometimes it's a supply chain disruption, sometimes a competitive threat, and sometimes a leadership crisis that nobody saw coming. As a simulation designer, I find it fascinating to watch how leaders respond when the assumptions underlying their decisions suddenly disappear.

And this is one heck of a wobbler.

But before everyone starts predicting the demise of NVIDIA, I think it's worth remembering two important laws of business physics that have proven themselves repeatedly over the years:

1. Everyone is replaceable.

2. If you have a strong, winning value proposition for your customers and a great brand, you can overcome an extraordinary setback.

Neither law guarantees a happy ending, but both provide an interesting perspective on what happens next.

Every experienced Sales Professional has that horrible story of winning a big deal, “ringing the bell,” starting implementation while the contract was still being signed, and feeling great about life…

Until the bottom fell out when a different vendor “stole the deal.”

I was working with a client in the specialty chemical industry to design a new strategic selling program. During a subject-matter-expert interview, I heard a story about a salesperson who won a brand-new logo from an incumbent vendor. The incumbent, who had been living in the account for more than a decade, apparently became complacent, got expensive, and saw quality decline. So, the customer decided to shake things up and issue an RFP.

My client’s organization responded quickly, demonstrated credibility, and offered a higher-quality product at a lower price, winning the business.

But something nefarious happened on the way to happiness. The former vendor, who had built up numerous high-level relationships within the account, went crazy and started pulling in executive-level contacts to save themselves and override the decision.

And painfully, they were successful.

Think about that. The challenger had a better product, a better price, and the customer's decision. Yet somehow, the incumbent walked away with the business.

That story got me thinking about the strategic selling skills and tools that could have prevented this disaster. Based on experience and some painful lessons from the real world of selling, I'd like to share five insights.

The temptation now exists for anyone in talent development to make training so rigorous, structured, and scripted with AI tools that it leaves no room for spontaneity, discovery learning, or exploration.

As someone who has designed and delivered sophisticated business simulations for decades, I'm wired to encourage learners to explore, try different approaches, fail, learn, and try again. Some of the greatest learning moments I've witnessed have occurred when something completely unexpected happened during a learning experience.

But over the past several months, as everyone has started using AI assistants to do their work, I've noticed a concerning trend. Training programs are becoming bloated with AI slop, too many PowerPoint slides, and a rigid focus on cramming more information into less time.

Apparently, if AI can create 100 PowerPoint slides in 30 seconds, we're now obligated to show all 100 to learners. And just to make sure we're getting our money's worth, we should probably add a 40-question knowledge check at the end.

This approach risks starving learners of opportunities to think, explore, and discover. Ultimately, it also starves companies of the talent they need to make decisions that drive business success.

The people designing these programs probably think they're being efficient. But in practice, this approach can be lazy, ineffective, and potentially very expensive.

The goal of training isn't to get through the content. The goal is to develop people who can think and perform when the content doesn't have the answer.

Any sales professional who's been selling for more than three years knows what I am talking about. It's that moment in the sales process when someone on your own team starts to go negative and suddenly becomes the unofficial head of the "anti-sales department."

I recently interviewed a senior sales professional at a specialty chemical company who told me how brutal it is out there right now. She shared a story about conducting a quarterly account review with an important customer. She prepared especially well, researching the customer's business strategy, their customers' needs, their financial goals, and more. Based on this research and her institutional knowledge of the account, she developed an agenda filled with ideas and potential solutions to help the customer improve their business.

But instead of being gracious and thankful, the customer exploded.

"I have to be very open with you. I am taken aback that you would come in here and try to upsell me on new products and services. I thought in all of your research you would realize we are struggling with cash, margins, and budgets. The last thing I am thinking about is spending more money."

And then it happened. Five minutes after the meeting, the Technical Service Manager, who was there to support the sales professional and demonstrate some of the company's new technologies, turned to her and said the fateful words: "See, I knew this was a bad customer. I don't know why we waste our time."

Last week, we launched our new Business Leadership Essentials simulation, and something interesting happened during the debriefings. Several new leaders openly admitted how much they love AI and how it's changing how they think about leadership. One simulation scenario challenged participants to decide how to use AI as managers, and the discussions were fascinating. The scenario was related to using AI for performance reviews.

At Advantexe, we're also using AI in ways that would have seemed like science fiction just a few years ago. We're building AI-powered business simulations, creating realistic role-playing experiences, and helping leaders develop new capabilities through technologies that continue to amaze me.

But those debriefings got me thinking. If AI can write an employee's performance review, set their goals, create a coaching plan, and even tell you how to resolve a conflict, what's left for the manager to do?

The answer, of course, is just about everything that matters. That's one of the most interesting leadership challenges of the AI revolution.