Blake Crawford

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.

expert panel

Artificial intelligence is rapidly redefining the cybersecurity battlefield, shifting the balance between defenders and attackers at a pace many organizations are struggling to match. As enterprises embed generative AI, autonomous agents and machine learning into critical workflows, the attack surface is expanding just as quickly as defensive capabilities evolve.This tension is at the center of discussion among members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank, a curated group of leaders specializing in enterprise AI, machine learning and responsible AI deployment. To them, AI is not just a technology upgrade—it is a structural shift in how cyber risk is created and managed.According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s AI Risk Management Framework, organizations adopting AI face heightened risks related to system reliability, security vulnerabilities and adversarial manipulation, even as they gain powerful new defensive tools. At the same time, a Google Threat Intelligence Group analysis on AI-enabled threat activity warns that adversaries are increasingly using generative AI to accelerate vulnerability discovery, exploit development and initial access—signaling a shift toward more automated and scalable cyber intrusion models.With this knowledge, senior executives are asking a pressing question: Over the next five years, should we be more optimistic about AI’s role in cybersecurity—or more concerned? And more importantly, what concrete actions should leaders take today to stay ahead of the curve?Their insights suggest the answer is not binary—but it is urgent.

expert panel

AI observability is quickly becoming one of the most consequential shifts in enterprise AI—not because it adds more dashboards, but because it exposes how AI systems actually behave inside real business workflows. For executives, that visibility is both a breakthrough and a burden. It reveals model performance, data quality, user interaction patterns and system drift in real time, yet it often arrives in a form that is fragmented, technical and difficult to translate into decisions that matter at the board level.Organizations are rapidly scaling generative AI and machine learning systems across core operations, but many are struggling to operationalize oversight in a way that connects technical signals to measurable business outcomes. The result is a widening gap between AI capability and executive clarity—where systems are increasingly powerful, but not always understandable in business terms.Members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank—a curated group of leaders in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise transformation—argue that the issue is not a lack of data. It is a lack of translation. AI observability, they note, only becomes strategically meaningful when organizations move beyond monitoring and toward decision-making frameworks that connect model behavior, risk signals and user impact directly to business KPIs.In the sections that follow, Think Tank members break down how organizations can close this gap in practice—from building operating models that turn observability into action, to identifying behavioral drift before it becomes business risk, to redefining governance so insights don’t remain trapped in technical teams. They also surface the most persistent obstacles executives face today—including signal overload, fragmented ownership and the absence of shared language between business and technical stakeholders—and offer concrete ways leaders can turn visibility into decisions that drive measurable value.