What happened
A Pearl Meyer survey of 116 board members, CEOs, C-suite executives, and senior managers found that only 34% of C-suite executives said it is consistently clear which executive or team makes calls about AI strategy — the lowest clarity rate among all cohorts polled. By contrast, 53% of board members and 57% of senior managers below the C-level reported clarity on AI ownership.
Why it matters
Companies are investing heavily in AI — total spending reached $2.5 trillion this year (a 44% increase over last year) and is projected to rise to $3.3 trillion next year — yet the executives closest to implementation are the least confident about who owns the results. The Pearl Meyer study warns that "ambition for AI outcomes is currently outpacing the leadership structure needed to deliver on them." This misalignment matters because 80% of U.S. CEOs believe their job is at risk if AI projects fail, creating pressure to justify massive spending without clear accountability.
What to watch
A gap is widening between boards and management teams on the scope of change required. While 88% of CEOs and 79% of C-suite executives said achieving strategic goals will require significant organizational changes within three years, only 42% of board directors agreed — and 63% of CEOs believe employees can absorb additional change, versus only 33% of the C-suite and 40% of non-C-suite executives who agree. Pearl Meyer's co-author Brad Jayne flagged this as "an alarm bell," warning of potential "finger pointing" and possible turnover if spending cannot be connected to investor-recognizable outcomes within a year.
Summaries like this, in your inbox every morning.
The disconnect between C-suite clarity and board confidence reveals a structural problem in how companies are managing AI transformation. The executives closest to the messiness of implementation — those who must actually build systems, push them through the organization, and ensure they work without errors — are the least convinced that clear ownership exists. Meanwhile, those furthest from daily execution (board members) are most confident the matter is settled. This gap suggests that boards may not fully grasp the operational complexity their companies face.
The timing of this misalignment is acute. With AI spending projected to reach $3.3 trillion next year, CEOs face existential pressure: 80% of U.S. CEOs surveyed in May believe their job is at risk if AI projects fail. Yet confidence that AI will deliver significant gains within 18 months sits at only about 50% across all companies — regardless of their stage of maturity, from pilot phase through full enterprise deployment. Brad Jayne, a principal at Pearl Meyer, notes an "impact-versus-speed tension": distributing ChatGPT or Copilot licenses is quick, but building durable systems that avoid errors and integrate across the organization takes far longer. This gap between speed-of-investment and pace-of-returns could become dangerous when boards demand justification for spending.
Pick your industry and the AI tools you use, and get news related to your work every day.
Free · 30 seconds with Google · unsubscribe anytimeWhat is AIToday? →
Ask AI anything about this article. The AI reads this article, earlier AIToday articles, and Wikipedia, and cites its sources. Q&As are published on this page for other readers too.
