The Chemicals Reset: The Leadership Decisions That Will Shape 2027

A selective market in 2026

The industry entered 2026 still feeling the effects of prolonged uncertainty, overcapacity, and pressure on competitiveness. Cefic’s January report identified announced European chemical capacity closures during 2022–2025 equivalent to approximately 9% of production capacity, affecting around 20,000 direct jobs. These figures describe conditions entering this year, not closures in 2026 alone. [1]

The latest data suggest that a broad recovery remains elusive. Cefic’s October report shows EU chemical production falling 2% between January and July 2026 compared with the same period in 2025. Performance varies considerably: parts of specialty and consumer chemicals have proved more resilient than upstream segments. [2]

The US transaction market shows the same selectivity. PwC’s midyear chemicals deals outlook describes capital concentrating in particular specialty platforms and transactions, with buyers placing considerable weight on credible value-creation plans and the practical challenges of separating businesses. [3]

Europe and North America should not be treated as one uniform market. Nevertheless, these developments raise a shared leadership question: who can deliver the next phase of the strategy under the conditions the business actually faces?

The perspective behind this report

My work spans medium to large multinational manufacturers, with revenues from a few hundred million to several billion, across private equity-backed and publicly listed businesses. It is primarily in Europe and North America, with additional assignments across Asia-Pacific and the Middle East.

The focus is speciality chemicals broadly, a sector serving diverse end markets including industrial manufacturing, construction and building materials, automotive and transportation, electronics and semiconductors, energy, agriculture, water treatment, packaging, textiles, food and beverages, personal and home care, and pharmaceuticals and healthcare. Across this landscape, my work includes high-performance applications and manufacturers shifting from commodity products to higher-value speciality portfolios.

Assignments range from the C-suite through VP and senior director levels, alongside plant leadership. They support operational performance, organic growth and leadership requirements arising from acquisitions and carve-outs. The observations here reflect this work, rather than a representative industry survey.

Where hiring is strongest

In my own work, hiring demand is strongest in operations and supply chain, where businesses are investing in profitability, resilience and efficiency. Consolidation and newly formed organisations also create leadership gaps. Commercial, marketing and R&D appointments remain important, but businesses are more selective about which organic growth initiatives they support and the roles they commit to.

A wider pool of executives does not automatically provide the combination of experience an organisation needs. Leading an established operation differs from stabilising an underperforming network. Integrating an acquisition differs from establishing a business following a carve-out. As consolidation removes management layers, I am also seeing demand for leaders who can combine strategic thinking with hands-on execution, responsibilities that might previously have sat across several roles.

Why succession needs earlier attention

Succession readiness is another recurring gap. Retirement is one trigger, but because high-impact leaders will inevitably attract attention from other interested parties, companies cannot ignore the risk of unexpected departures. Too often, companies begin external recruitment only when the need becomes urgent. Better-prepared businesses identify critical and strategic roles early. They invest in internal talent development, including mentorship and engaging leadership coaches to prepare talent to step up. They also work with external talent partners to build exposure to external talent through talent pipelining before a vacancy threatens continuity.

What persuades leaders to move

A compelling title or remuneration package may start a conversation, but executives also need confidence in the strategy, leadership team and conditions behind the role.

No single reason persuades a strong candidate to move. I start by understanding what is missing in their current role and where they want their career to go. The attraction may be greater autonomy, broader impact, a move from turnaround to growth, or credible progression. The opportunity needs to connect with the individual’s motivations and back up any promises of development or succession with evidence.

A clear mandate builds confidence

A clear mandate helps candidates assess whether they can succeed. They want to understand the business strategy and how it translates into the role’s specific mission. Transparency about why the appointment is being made matters, including relevant lessons from a previous appointment.

Reporting lines, governance and decision-making authority help establish whether the person will have the scope to deliver. Candidates also want a feel for the CEO’s vision, working style, and the culture they would join.

Reputation and the hidden champions

Company reputation influences interest, but recognition is uneven. A respected name and heritage can attract executives who want to contribute to that legacy.

Yet even well-connected industry leaders may be unfamiliar with businesses that lead a particular niche. Part of my role is to bring these hidden champions’ stories to market, helping candidates understand their strengths, history and opportunity. Familiarity can open a conversation; a clear understanding of the business helps candidates assess the fit.

Priorities for the next phase

I would plan for continued selectivity rather than assume that a market recovery will resolve leadership challenges.

Improving performance while preserving future capability. Businesses need leaders who can distinguish between costs that can be removed and capabilities that must be protected. Short-term improvement loses value if it undermines reliability, safety, customer relationships or innovation.

Executing organisational change. Where acquisitions, divestments or restructuring proceed, leadership requirements should be considered alongside the transaction or operating plan. Accountability, decision-making, and retaining key people need attention before disruption exposes gaps.

Turning technical and digital investment into operating results. I expect leaders will increasingly need to connect new tools to practical outcomes: better reliability, quality, productivity, and decisions. Technology knowledge matters, but so does the ability to secure adoption across sites and teams.

These are planning priorities, not a prediction that every business will recruit more. Some organisations will need external appointments; others may achieve more by developing existing leaders or clarifying responsibilities.

Five practical steps for employers

Align stakeholders around outcomes before searching. Define the three or four results the leader must deliver over the first 12–18 months, then agree the experience, authority and resources required. In one leadership search, we delivered against the hiring manager’s brief, then discovered a more senior decision-maker wanted a different profile. The resulting change of direction cost time. Alignment needs to include everyone who can materially influence the appointment.
Separate essential experience from preferences. An idealised profile can quickly narrow an already limited pool of passive candidates. Agree the non-negotiables and where the business can be flexible, including experience from adjacent sectors. If a candidate brings broader capability than originally envisaged, consider whether the role’s scope, responsibility and reward should reflect that.
Assess how individual contribution to achieved results. Explore the starting position, constraints, individual contribution and durability of a candidate’s achievements. An impressive outcome in a well-resourced business may not demonstrate readiness for a constrained transformation.
Build both internal and external talent options early. Assess readiness for critical roles, develop potential successors (including engaging Leadership Coaches to prepare them for step-up roles), and maintain relevant external relationships as part of the leadership pipeline before a departure happens. This approach gives the business time to address capability gaps and manage foreseeable succession risks.
Make the process open and well-paced. Early exploratory access to senior stakeholders gives candidates space to understand the culture and ask candid questions about business challenges. Follow this with a clear, coordinated assessment process and timely decisions. Momentum matters: personal circumstances, professional priorities and interest can change while a process stalls.

Three questions for senior executives

What evidence demonstrates your impact

Explain what changed because of your leadership, under what conditions, and whether the improvement lasted. Connect your experience to the problem the prospective employer needs to solve.

Are the conditions for success in place

Before accepting a transformation or integration role, establish who sponsors the change, what decisions you can make and what resources are committed. Ask where the leadership team is aligned and where disagreement remains.

Are you staying connected to the market?

Maintaining relationships provides perspective on how roles and expectations are changing. It also creates space to assess opportunities thoughtfully.

The next leadership decision

The chemicals reset is making the relationship between strategy and leadership more explicit. A business can have a credible investment plan and still lack the people, authority or organisational support needed to execute it.

For employers, the challenge is to identify the capabilities that matter and create the conditions for those leaders to succeed. For executives, it is to understand where their experience can make a meaningful contribution.

As businesses prepare for 2027, two questions are worth asking:

Where are you placing your next strategic bet? Do you know who can deliver it?

Sources

[1] Cefic / Roland Berger. European Chemical Closures & Investments Radar 2022–2025. Published 28 January 2026. Covers announced closures during 2022–2025, including approximately 9% capacity and 20,000 direct jobs.

[2] Cefic. Chemical Trends Report, October 2026. See the summary and production analysis, particularly pages 3 and 6–8. Based on Eurostat data, including production figures for January–July 2026.

[3] PwC. Chemicals: US Deals 2026 Midyear Outlook. Published 17 June 2026. Discusses selective dealmaking, speciality platforms, separation readiness and value-creation planning.

Industry data reflects the cited publications available as at 6 October 2026. Talent-market observations, recommendations and the outlook for early 2027 represent the author’s professional assessment.

If you are a senior leader in the Chemical and Process Manufacturing Sector, connect with Sahar Akhtar to schedule a chat about navigating your next career move or to discuss Talent Acquisition challenges.