Delivering Real Business Values Beyond Digital Transformation
Josilda Saad
Digital Technology Director, CIO, CDO & CTO
Suzano S.A.
Delivering Real Business Values Beyond Digital Transformation
Josilda Saad
Digital Technology Director, CIO, CDO & CTO
Suzano S.A.
Across industries, many large-scale technology programs are delivering capability but falling short on consistent business outcomes. Investments in digital platforms, data, and AI have increased significantly, yet organizations continue to struggle to translate that capability into decisions that hold up under pressure. The gap is no longer technical. It is increasingly about judgment, prioritization, and the ability to sequence change in a way that the business can absorb.
This is where Josilda Saad brings a distinct clarity. At Suzano S.A., a century-old organization and the world’s largest pulp producer, she leads across CIO, CDO, and CTO mandates, ensuring technology decisions consistently translate into measurable outcomes. Functions are not separated but aligned through disciplined sequencing, in which immediate value, structural resilience, and long-term capability are addressed with deliberate intent rather than in parallel acceleration.
Experience gained during her tenure at Vale S.A. continues to shape this approach, particularly in navigating complex global programs where competing priorities must be resolved through clear, defensible decisions.
In an exclusive conversation with TradeFlock, she reflects on the principles that guide those decisions and the leadership required to sustain them.
Looking back at your journey, which decisions felt uneasy at the time but ultimately shaped your leadership?
In large-scale technology environments, the hardest decisions are rarely the ones that lack information. They are the ones where momentum is strong, alignment appears natural, and everything seems to be moving in the right direction. Those are precisely the moments where judgment is tested.
Several defining decisions in my journey came from stepping against that momentum. Saying no when acceleration was expected, questioning initiatives that looked compelling in presentations but did not hold under operational scrutiny, and deliberately slowing down transformation when speed began to replace substance. None of those choices felt comfortable at the time, and in many cases, they created visible tension.
Over time, those experiences reshaped how I interpret leadership. Being right too early often feels indistinguishable from being wrong, and discomfort has become a more reliable signal than consensus. Technology leadership, in that sense, is not about sustaining movement but about redirecting it when it is heading toward the wrong outcome. Decisions that challenge alignment are often the ones that redefine it.
“Leadership, in practice, is often about questioning what looks right before it becomes too expensive to reverse.”
Which emerging technologies are creating real impact on business, beyond the hype bandwagon?
A noticeable shift across industries today is that organizations are moving past experimentation and asking a harder question: which technologies actually change how decisions get made on the ground. Many investments in AI and data platforms have delivered visibility, but far fewer have translated into consistent operational outcomes.
What stands out is not a single technology, but the convergence of AI, data platforms, and industrial intelligence when they are embedded directly into decision-making. Applied AI within workflows, digital twins that reflect real constraints rather than theoretical models, and data platforms that translate signals into actions begin to alter how organizations operate day to day.
The difference becomes evident when outcomes improve in tangible ways such as safety, asset performance, or supply chain resilience. Initiatives driven by “AI for AI’s sake” rarely sustain relevance. Value emerges when technology becomes indistinguishable from the business itself and attention shifts toward the reliability of results rather than the sophistication of tools.
How will the roles of CIOs, CTOs, and CDOs evolve over the next five years?
Leadership in technology is entering a phase where ownership is less important than direction. As digital capabilities become embedded across every function, the expectation is no longer to manage systems but to guide decisions that cut across technology, business priorities, and risk.
The defining shift is toward judgment. Trade-offs are becoming more complex, and not all of them can be resolved through data or process. Leaders will be required to integrate competing priorities into a coherent path forward, deciding when to accelerate, pause, or stop entirely.
Technical expertise remains necessary, but it will not be sufficient on its own. Influence will come from the ability to translate complexity into decisions that others can act on with confidence. Over time, credibility will be shaped less by position and more by the consistency and quality of those decisions.
How do you develop maturity in leadership beyond technical skills in future leaders?
Many organizations invest heavily in capability building, yet maturity in leadership often develops only when individuals are exposed to situations where outcomes are uncertain, and decisions carry real consequences. Controlled environments can build knowledge, but they rarely build judgment.
Early exposure to complexity is therefore essential. Involving future leaders in meaningful decisions allows them to experience ambiguity directly and understand the implications of their choices. Reflection becomes a key part of that process, particularly when individuals are required to explain the rationale behind their decisions rather than simply presenting outcomes.
Accountability must remain intact throughout. Room for errors is important, but abdicating responsibility limits learning. Over time, this approach builds a deeper understanding that leadership is not about certainty, but about taking ownership of decisions and their consequences, especially when the path forward is not fully defined.
“The most dangerous technology decisions are the ones that look right before they are tested by reality.”
How do you manage the tension between building future capabilities, delivering immediate value, and modernizing legacy systems?
The pressure in technology leadership does not come from holding multiple roles such as CIO, CDO, and CTO. It comes from the expectation that all priorities should advance simultaneously, without acknowledging the tension between them. Organizations often assume they can modernize legacy systems, deliver immediate business value, and build future capabilities at the same pace, which in practice leads to fragmentation rather than progress.
My approach has been to treat these responsibilities as interconnected dimensions of a single role rather than separate mandates. Clarity begins by making trade-offs explicit and sequencing decisions deliberately. Not everything can move at once, and attempting to do so usually weakens all three areas.
We continue to invest in the core because it determines how far innovation can actually scale. We prioritize outcomes because credibility depends on visible results. At the same time, we invest in people, recognizing that technology without the capability to evolve it becomes a constraint rather than an advantage. Managing this balance is less about distributing effort and more about ensuring that none of these priorities advance in isolation.
How has your approach to technology and data evolved in response to geopolitical shifts and changing global dynamics?
What has changed most is not the technology itself, but the assumptions around it. There was a time when digital was treated as inherently borderless, almost detached from geopolitical realities. That assumption no longer holds.
Today, every technological decision carries context. Where data resides, how systems are structured, which dependencies exist—these are no longer purely technical considerations. They are shaped by regulation, by geography, and increasingly by risk. This has led to a more grounded approach. Efficiency is still important, but it is no longer the primary driver. Resilience has taken its place. The ability to continue operating under constraint, to adapt to shifting conditions, and to maintain trust across jurisdictions has become central.
In practice, this changes how you design everything. Platforms cannot be uniformly global anymore. They need to be adaptable, capable of operating within local boundaries while still contributing to a broader intelligence framework. Data strategies must reflect not just access, but accountability. At Suzano, this has brought technology much closer to the core business strategy. It is no longer a layer that supports operations. It is part of how the organization anticipates disruption and responds to it.
The idea of digital as neutral is fading. What is emerging instead is a more responsible, more deliberate form of digital leadership—one that recognizes that scale without context is no longer sustainable.
Which capabilities will become non-negotiable for leaders in technology?
The operating environment for leaders in technology is becoming less predictable, which places greater emphasis on how systems behave outside controlled conditions. Strong foundations in systems thinking and data literacy remain essential, but they must be accompanied by a clear understanding of where technology breaks down, particularly in the case of AI.
A more critical capability is the ability to exercise judgment when clarity is incomplete. Access to information is no longer the constraint; the challenge lies in interpreting it without oversimplifying the situation. Leaders must be able to hold complexity long enough to make informed decisions, rather than defaulting to premature conclusions.
Resilience and communication support this process, not as abstract qualities, but as practical tools. Resilience allows leaders to remain steady in uncertain conditions, while communication ensures that clarity is created without distorting reality. Together, these capabilities enable consistent decision-making in environments where certainty is rarely available.
What belief influences your leadership the most in moments of uncertainty?
One of the consistent lessons from experience is that clarity often emerges after action rather than before it. Waiting for complete certainty can delay decisions without improving its quality, particularly in environments where conditions continue to evolve.
The focus, therefore, shifts towards making decisions that are grounded in context, values, and a realistic assessment of available information. The objective is not to identify the safest option, but the most defensible one, especially when viewed beyond the immediacy of the situation.
A useful reference point is whether a decision will still hold its integrity once short-term pressures subside. This perspective helps maintain consistency and reduces the influence of transient factors. Leadership, in this context, is not about eliminating uncertainty, but about progressing through it with discipline, responsibility, and a clear sense of direction.
