Will Conaway

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

For decades, the technology industry's infrastructure strategy has been remarkably straightforward: Build bigger data centers, add more fiber and deploy more compute capacity closer to users. But what if the next major leap in AI infrastructure happens above the planet rather than on it?That question is gaining attention as SpaceX continues expanding its Starlink satellite network and explores ways its orbital infrastructure could support AI-related computing and global data movement. While the concept of space-based AI infrastructure remains in its early stages, it represents a potentially significant shift in how organizations think about compute, connectivity and data distribution. Instead of relying exclusively on terrestrial networks, future AI systems could leverage orbital infrastructure to extend services into remote regions, improve resilience and create entirely new competitive dynamics.The idea is gaining traction at a time when demand for AI infrastructure is accelerating rapidly. According to a Goldman Sachs analysis, AI-related data center power demand is expected to increase dramatically through the end of the decade as organizations race to secure the compute capacity needed to support next-generation AI applications. As those investments accelerate, executives are increasingly asking whether future infrastructure strategies will be limited to Earth—or whether space will become a critical extension of the global AI stack.To better understand the opportunities and risks, members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank shared their perspectives on how space-based AI infrastructure could reshape cloud providers, telecommunications companies and AI platform vendors over the next decade. Their insights reveal both extraordinary possibilities and significant challenges, from global connectivity and distributed computing to governance, economics and the growing concentration of infrastructure power.

expert panel

Artificial intelligence has become the fastest-moving investment category in the corporate world. Boards are asking about it, investors expect it and competitors are announcing new initiatives seemingly every week. For many Fortune 500 CEOs, however, the challenge isn't deciding whether to invest in AI—it's deciding where to place the first major bet.The stakes are high because the wrong investment can consume millions of dollars while delivering little business value. Organizations across industries are launching AI labs, experimenting with custom models and deploying new tools at scale, yet many still struggle to achieve measurable returns.That reality raises an important question: If you were making your first significant AI investment today, where would you focus—and what would you avoid?To find out, we asked members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank, a community of leaders and practitioners specializing in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise transformation. Their answers reveal a striking consensus about where AI creates value, why so many organizations get their priorities wrong and the foundational investments that should come before any large-scale AI deployment.

expert panel

For many organizations, AI training has become synonymous with productivity. Employees learn how to write better prompts, automate routine tasks and generate content faster than ever before. But as AI becomes embedded in everyday business decisions, a more important question is emerging: Are organizations teaching people how to use AI, or how to use it responsibly?AI can generate recommendations, summarize information and accelerate workflows, but it cannot assume accountability for outcomes. That responsibility still belongs to people. Yet many training programs spend far more time on tools than on judgment, ethics, governance and critical thinking.This concern is reflected in Deloitte's “The State of Generative AI in the Enterprise” research, which found that regulatory compliance concerns, risk management challenges and the lack of governance models rank among the leading barriers to scaling AI initiatives. As organizations move beyond experimentation, the challenge is no longer simply getting employees to use AI—it is ensuring they can use it responsibly.To explore what modern AI fluency should look like, we turned to members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank, a curated community of experts in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise transformation. Their perspectives offer a roadmap for moving beyond AI tool proficiency and building the judgment, oversight and responsible-use practices that enable organizations to create lasting value from AI.

expert panel

Artificial intelligence remains one of the most consequential forces reshaping business, yet many organizations still struggle to distinguish meaningful breakthroughs from attention-grabbing headlines. While public discussion often centers on increasingly powerful models, digital assistants and speculation about artificial general intelligence, many enterprise leaders are discovering that the most transformative AI developments occur behind the scenes.Ask 10 AI experts what will matter most a year from now, and you might expect 10 different answers. Instead, members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank—a curated group of experts specializing in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise AI applications—arrived at a strikingly similar conclusion: The biggest opportunities—and risks—aren't tied to the next model release. Across industries, they point to the infrastructure that makes AI useful in practice, from governance and security to evaluation, trust and workflow integration. At the same time, many are skeptical of some of today's loudest predictions, particularly around fully autonomous agents replacing human judgment at scale.As recent research from McKinsey suggests, organizations are increasingly finding that AI success depends less on access to cutting-edge models and more on the ability to operationalize them effectively. The experts featured here—those on the front lines of AI innovation—share the developments they believe leaders are underestimating, the trends they think are overhyped and where executives should be investing now to create lasting competitive advantage.

expert panel

For decades, innovation hubs emerged through a relatively organic mix of academic excellence, entrepreneurial culture, venture capital and geographic density. Silicon Valley became the archetype because talent, capital and ambition concentrated naturally over time. That model is changing. Today, nations and hyperscalers are deliberately constructing AI ecosystems through multibillion-dollar infrastructure investments, workforce initiatives, cloud agreements and regulatory partnerships. Microsoft’s recent multibillion-dollar commitment to expand AI and cloud infrastructure in Australia illustrates how governments and technology companies are increasingly collaborating to shape national AI capacity and digital sovereignty. According to the Stanford AI Index Report, nations are increasingly treating AI infrastructure, semiconductor access and compute capacity as matters of economic and geopolitical strategy. Members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank say this evolution signals something much larger than a technology boom. It reflects a geopolitical realignment in which compute, chips, data governance and workforce development are becoming instruments of economic and political influence. Here, they explore how engineered AI hubs are reshaping economic power, redefining digital sovereignty and determining which nations and organizations may ultimately control the future AI ecosystem.

expert panel

The nature of teamwork is undergoing one of the most significant transformations since the rise of the digital workplace. As artificial intelligence moves from a supporting tool to an embedded collaborator, organizations are rethinking not only how work gets done, but what collaboration truly means. A widely cited report from McKinsey highlights that generative AI could automate up to 30 percent of hours worked across the U.S. economy by 2030, fundamentally reshaping roles and workflows. But this shift is not simply about efficiency—it is about redefining the human role within teams. Members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank—a curated group of leaders specializing in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise applications—believe teams will not necessarily disappear, but will instead evolve into hybrid ecosystems where human judgment, creativity and ethical oversight intersect with AI-driven speed, scale and synthesis. The following insights explore how that evolution will unfold—and what leaders must do to stay ahead.

expert panel

The notion of a “steady state” has quietly disappeared from modern enterprise leadership. In its place is a reality defined by continuous disruption, where artificial intelligence is not just accelerating change but compounding it. Organizations are no longer transforming in phases—they are operating in a constant state of reinvention. For executives, this requires a shift from managing change as an event to leading within change as an environment. Members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank—a curated group of experts in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise AI applications—bring a front-line perspective to this challenge. Their work across healthcare, cloud architecture, enterprise platforms and AI governance show that the organizations that succeed are not those with the most advanced tools, but those with the most adaptive operating models and leadership mindsets. According to McKinsey’s 2025 report on the state of AI, companies are rapidly scaling AI adoption, yet many struggle to translate that investment into sustained business value—often because their structures, decision-making processes and cultures are not designed for continuous change. To help their fellow leaders better cope with these evolving demands, Think Tank members outline the capabilities executives can no longer treat as optional. Through real-world insights and expert perspectives, they explore how leaders are redesigning operating models, reshaping team expectations and building organizations that don’t just withstand disruption, but continuously learn and perform within it.

expert panel

The race to deploy artificial intelligence is accelerating—and so is the pressure on leaders to act. From boardrooms to product teams, executives are being asked the same question: How fast can we get AI into production? But as organizations rush to capitalize on generative AI, the risks—hallucinations, data leaks and brand damage—are becoming harder to ignore. A National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) report on AI risk management emphasizes that without proper governance, AI systems can introduce significant reliability, security and accountability risks into enterprise environments. Insights from the Senior Executive AI Think Tank suggest that this is not a simple trade-off between speed and safety. Instead, it’s a leadership challenge that requires rethinking how organizations define competitive advantage. Below, Think Tank members discuss whether being first with AI is truly the advantage leaders think it is—or if the real differentiator is trust built through disciplined execution, strong governance and a clear understanding of where AI delivers value.

expert panel

The race to dominate artificial intelligence has long been framed as a contest of scale—whoever spends the most on compute, talent and data should win. But Meta’s reported delay of its “Avocado” model, alongside discussions of licensing Google’s Gemini 3 technology, signals a turning point. According to members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank, the frontier of AI is becoming harder to sustain even for the most well-funded organizations. A recent analysis of Big Tech’s AI spending highlights how companies are pouring tens of billions into infrastructure while facing diminishing returns in performance gains—proving that capital alone is no longer enough to secure leadership. This moment raises urgent questions for executives: If even hyperscalers struggle to keep up, what does competitive advantage in AI actually look like? And where does that leave smaller companies entering the race? Below, Think Tank members attempt to answer these questions while looking toward what’s next. Together, their perspectives outline a new playbook for AI competition—one that begins with a surprising change at the very top.

expert panel

As artificial intelligence matures, one question looms large for executives: Where will durable revenue actually come from? Despite explosive adoption, many AI products still struggle to convert usage into sustainable profit. The shift from experimentation to enterprise value is now underway—and the stakes are high. Insights from the Senior Executive AI Think Tank—a curated group of leaders in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise systems—point to a clear trend: Profitability will not come from novelty, but from deeply embedded, outcome-driven applications. A recent Forbes report on AI ROI in the enterprise found that more than half of companies using AI are already seeing measurable revenue gains, with many reporting 6% to 10% growth, and some exceeding 10%. The findings reinforce a critical shift: Organizations are prioritizing AI solutions tied directly to business outcomes rather than experimental tools. What emerges from the Think Tank’s collective perspective is not a single dominant model, but a clear direction of travel. Enterprise copilots, verticalized AI systems, outcome-based pricing and workflow-native automation are converging into a new blueprint for profitability—one rooted in integration, accountability and measurable results. The following insights break down how these models are taking shape in practice, and what leaders must prioritize now to turn AI from a promising capability into a dependable revenue engine.

expert panel

Europe has spent the last decade establishing itself as the global leader in technology regulation. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) reshaped how organizations handle personal data worldwide, and the European Union’s landmark AI Act aims to set guardrails for high-risk AI systems across industries. Yet policymakers now appear willing to recalibrate. European officials have begun discussing potential simplifications or delays to portions of the AI Act and related digital rules as they confront a widening innovation gap with the U.S. and China. The EU’s strict regulatory framework has slowed the pace of large-scale AI experimentation compared with other global tech hubs, putting them at a distinct disadvantage in the market. Members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank—a curated network of leaders specializing in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise AI strategy—say the debate isn’t simply about regulation versus innovation. Instead, they argue that Europe’s regulatory approach has quietly limited several categories of AI development, from cross-border data platforms to real-time industrial automation. If policymakers move forward with regulatory adjustments, the ripple effects could be significant: Startups may gain the freedom to experiment faster, enterprises may finally scale AI deployments beyond pilot programs and the EU could evolve from global rule-setter into a more formidable technology competitor. Below, Think Tank members explain what Europe may have been holding back—and what could happen next.

expert panel

No longer confined to analytics dashboards and recommendation engines, AI systems are now initiating transactions, approving workflows, flagging anomalies and even orchestrating other software agents. With this sudden increase in autonomy, business leaders are left asking: Where should humans step back—and where must they stay firmly in control? According to a 2025 McKinsey survey on the state of AI, nearly nine out of 10 organizations now report using AI in at least one business function, yet most are still early in scaling these technologies and many lack robust governance and risk controls. As artificial intelligence advances from advisory tools to agentic systems capable of multi-step planning and execution, the leadership challenge shifts: defining not just what AI can do, but what it should do. Members of the Senior Executive AI Think Tank—a curated group of experts in machine learning, generative AI and enterprise-scale transformation—argue that the real issue isn’t capability but accountability. Across their industry expertise, they all converge on one theme: The boundary between human judgment and machine decision-making must be dynamic, evidence-based and anchored in responsibility. Here is how they recommend drawing—and redrawing—that line.