Editor’s note: The following is a guest post from EY Americas Center for Board Matters Leader Lee Henderson.
As AI reshapes the future of business, boards are increasingly tasked with overseeing investments, risks and other critical factors surrounding its deployment.
Forward-looking directors recognize that their role extends beyond defensive postures, and strive to offer strategic guidance to help management keep pace with a rapidly shifting landscape. Leading boards are also encouraging management teams to leverage technology as a catalyst for long-term value creation.
Businesses are encouraged by early outcomes from AI deployment. Nearly all of the 500 U.S. senior leaders at organizations where the business invested in AI said they realized AI-driven productivity gains, according to EY’s US AI Pulse Survey.
More than half of surveyed leaders called last year’s gains significant — and respondents at organizations investing $10 million or more in AI were much more likely to see significant gains than those who invested less.
Enterprisewide integration of AI tools embedded responsibly into operations can magnify returns. That is yet another reason why boards in their governance capacity should play a leading role from the outset in overseeing the adoption of AI.
Strong governance of technology that cascades across a company can determine the extent to which such technologies advance corporate strategies. In setting the tone at the top, the structure that boards put in place to govern technology is instrumental in this process.
Technology’s strategic role
Effective boards encourage alignment of technology strategy with overall business goals. In doing so, they foster a culture of innovation that proactively leverages these tools as drivers of innovation, efficiency and new business model creation.
Nearly half of Fortune 100 companies cited AI risk oversight last year as part of the board’s remit in regulatory disclosures, triple the rate of 2024, according to EY Americas Center for Board Matters 2025 report. Included in this oversight should be the risk of not moving boldly enough when it comes to AI investments, as it may now be as significant as traditional technology risks.
Companies reaping the benefits of AI to date are reinvesting those gains accordingly, with nearly half using the expanded capabilities to develop new AI capabilities. Boards should fully consider the potential for upside rewards when weighing them against the risks.
A tailored governance approach
The disclosure analysis also found AI and cybersecurity are most often assigned to audit committees. Boards might need to assess whether their current approach helps or hinders them. Will the added oversight responsibility overload the committee? Is the board able to strategically partner with management to provide oversight of technology transformation and investment?
As boards bring in more tech-savvy directors, they have greater flexibility to consider new governance approaches, such as creating a technology committee. These committees typically oversee risks, strategies and opportunities but their scope and responsibilities vary. For example, financial companies, where boards most frequently have a tech committee, often focus on strategy, trends and investment decisions.
While technology committees provide designated time for directors and management to dig into tech issues, the establishment of another committee can create resource, scheduling and coordination considerations for management and the board.
Some companies integrate aspects of tech governance into other standing committees. For instance, a company might charge the finance committee with tech investment considerations, audit and risk committees with tech risk matters, and the compensation committee with relevant human capital considerations.
Relying on the tech experience of their directors, the full board of a tech company or a board with a deep bench of technology expertise might opt to integrate technology topics across items on the meeting agenda. Other boards choose this approach to underscore the strategic importance of technology to the business.
Ultimately, one size does not fit all. Boards are successfully using different approaches tailored to their own needs and circumstances, recognizing that what works best for a board might change over time.
