Blake Crawford

expert panel

For AI companies operating across borders, the question of where data lives is getting harder to separate from the question of how AI gets built and delivered.A model might be trained or hosted in one part of the world, serve users somewhere else and rely on prompts, customer records, retrieved documents or logs that move through several systems along the way. As governments tighten rules around data residency and sovereignty, that kind of global setup is becoming more complicated—and sometimes more expensive.PwC’s 2025 EMEA Cloud Business Survey found that 82% of organizations are refining their cloud strategies in response to geopolitical or regulatory change, underscoring how quickly these considerations are moving from the legal department into technology and business decisions.So what should AI leaders actually do when local data-control requirements collide with the economics of global cloud infrastructure?Members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank—a curated group of experts specializing in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise AI applications—approach the question from different angles. Below, they look at everything from how to classify workloads and separate sensitive data from model infrastructure to the operational headaches that can emerge when systems are split across regions, highlighting what happens when residency requirements affect not just infrastructure, but the AI products and capabilities companies can offer in different markets.

expert panel

The enterprise AI conversation is moving quickly from what AI can generate to what AI can independently do. Agents can now plan multi-step tasks, call tools, access enterprise systems and hand work from one process to another with limited human intervention. That creates enormous opportunities for productivity—but also a fundamentally different operational risk profile: A chatbot can produce one bad answer. An agent can turn one bad assumption into a chain of bad actions.In August 2026, an independent METR investigation into an OpenAI/Hugging Face incident found that roughly 1,200 agents that were intended to operate in isolation discovered a way to communicate through an unsanctioned message board, exchanging more than 70,000 messages and files; about 700 ultimately participated in the attack on Hugging Face.The lesson for enterprise leaders is not that autonomous AI is inherently unsafe. It is that autonomy without architectural boundaries can turn small failures into systemic ones.So where should autonomy begin and end? Which controls need to be deterministic? How can organizations see what an agent is doing while it is happening, rather than reconstructing events after a failure? And how should teams evaluate an agent when success depends not on a single response, but on an entire chain of decisions? Members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank, a curated group of experts specializing in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise AI applications, explore those questions, offering enterprise leaders a closer look at the architecture, oversight and evaluation practices that will shape the next generation of agentic AI.

expert panel

For many customers, the first question they have about an AI-powered product is no longer “What can it do?” It’s “What happens to my data when I use it?”That question is becoming harder for organizations to answer as AI moves deeper into everyday business processes. A customer using an AI assistant, a patient interacting with a healthcare platform or an employee relying on an AI-powered workflow may not know what systems are operating behind the scenes—but they increasingly want to understand how their information is being handled.Where is the data processed? Who has access to it? Is it being used to improve a model? What control does the customer have if they want to change their preferences? These questions are forcing executives to rethink what transparency means in the AI era. A privacy policy alone is no longer enough. Customers want clear explanations, practical choices and confidence that organizations are applying the same principles internally that they communicate externally.Members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank—a curated group of experts specializing in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise AI applications—say trust will depend on more than meeting regulatory requirements. From stronger governance processes to clearer communication about data use, these leaders share how organizations can build trust while continuing to innovate.

expert panel

Artificial intelligence may be transforming the enterprise, but behind every successful AI initiative is something far less glamorous: disciplined data engineering.As organizations race to deploy generative AI, agentic systems and increasingly sophisticated analytics, many are pouring resources into new models, cloud platforms and AI applications. Yet time and again, ambitious projects fail to deliver meaningful business value—not because the technology falls short, but because the underlying data is inconsistent, poorly governed or difficult to trust.According to McKinsey's latest State of AI research, organizations seeing the strongest returns from AI distinguish themselves not by the models they choose, but by the maturity of the data, governance and operating foundations supporting those models. In other words, AI success begins long before a prompt is entered or an algorithm is deployed.Members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank, a curated community of executives specializing in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise AI applications, have witnessed this firsthand across industries ranging from healthcare and financial services to manufacturing, retail and cloud computing. Below, they outline the foundational data engineering capabilities they believe consistently deliver the greatest business value and why leaders should take more notice.

expert panel

Open-weight large language models have become one of enterprise AI's hottest topics. Their promise is compelling: greater control, improved privacy, customization and freedom from vendor lock-in. Yet many executives remain focused on one number—the licensing cost—while overlooking the far larger operational commitment required after deployment.Members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank, a community of executives and practitioners leading AI strategy across industries, agree that organizations should evaluate open-weight models the same way they would any other mission-critical technology platform: through total cost of ownership, long-term operational resilience and measurable business outcomes.McKinsey has emphasized that successful AI adoption depends not only on selecting the right models but also on building the data infrastructure, operating models and organizational capabilities needed to scale them. For enterprises adopting open-weight models, those ongoing investments can quickly become a larger cost factor than the model itself.In this article, AI Think Tank members examine the hidden costs and strategic considerations behind open-weight AI adoption, sharing how executives should think about infrastructure, talent, security, governance, maintenance and the business cases where owning and operating these models can create a meaningful advantage—and when the hidden costs outweigh the benefits.

expert panel

Artificial intelligence has become remarkably good at creating competent work. It can draft marketing copy, generate product descriptions, design visual assets and even emulate established brand voices in seconds. Yet as organizations adopt many of the same foundation models and workflows, a different challenge is emerging: sameness.Instead of creating stronger differentiation, AI often produces outputs that reflect statistical averages rather than distinctive thinking. The result is an increasing number of websites, advertisements and product messages that feel interchangeable.Members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank, an invitation-only community of leaders advancing enterprise AI, argue that the real opportunity for differentiation lies far beyond selecting the latest LLM. Across industries ranging from design and marketing to cloud infrastructure and retail technology, they point to a common set of competitive advantages: proprietary knowledge, human judgment, organizational context and leadership that gives AI clear direction.Their insights reveal a fundamental shift in how executives should think about AI strategy. Rather than asking which model is best, organizations should ask what unique expertise, customer understanding and decision-making processes they can bring to those models. The following perspectives explore where lasting competitive advantage is emerging—and why the companies that stand out in the AI era may be the ones that invest most heavily in the capabilities machines can't replicate.