98% of mid-market companies have discussed whether to involve AI in boardroom decisions, according to a survey conducted by Board Intelligence.
The Summer 2026 edition of the Board Value Index canvassed just over 400 board directors, CEOs and CFOs in the UK, the US, Scandinavia and the Middle East, with the corresponding companies having annual revenues ranging from £50 million (c. $66.8 million) to over £500 million (c. $668 million).
49% of respondents have moved to the implementation stage of integrating AI into the boardroom decision-making process, meaning they’re actively discussing which parts of this process to delegate to AI.
Meanwhile, another 34% have discussed AI at the board level without formally proposing to make any specific changes, while a further 15% have discussed AI but have left it to company management to decide on possible action.
Boards which haven’t considered using AI in decision making are now in an overwhelming minority, according to Board Intelligence’s data, which also shows that flirtations with AI are coming at a time when only 37% of directors or execs describe their boards as “an essential tool for value creation.”
Directors dissatisfied with board performance
Board Intelligence is a London-based provider of boardroom software and advisory services, so it has an interest in highlighting the shortcomings of preexisting approaches to board management.
Nonetheless, its survey would indicate that some execs and directors are not entirely pleased with the performance of their company boards, and that AI tools may be one route towards arriving at more informed decisions.
While 79% of directors say that their company boards enable innovation, only 18% agree that boards “strongly” enable innovation.
Similarly, 86% of survey respondents reported that “overly rigid or inconsistent processes” have resulted in poor, delayed or rushed decisions within the past six months, while 41% say that their boards spend too much time discussing past performance.
It’s in such a context that boards have begun discussing the use of AI, which could help them address many of the problems they encounter, according to Board Intelligence Senior Director Megan Pantelides.
She tells TechRepublic, “The problems AI can realistically address include information overload (processing information more quickly; spotting trends, patterns, risks that might otherwise be overlooked), information asymmetry vs. management, inadequate preparation time (given most board members work part-time across multiple boards), and cognitive bias.”
According to Pantelides, such problems are common and have “a direct impact” on the quality and robustness of the decisions boards reach, with AI providing scalable methods for resolving them.
Performing the ‘analytical heavy lifting’ for decisions
Another rationale for integrating AI tools is accountability, given that boards are under increasing levels of scrutiny in a widening range of areas, and from a widening range of sources.
“Directors have been struggling to keep pace with their expanding remit and the increasingly complex business and governance landscape, and they know they won’t navigate this challenge using the same processes they’ve relied on for decades,” she explains. “AI, used well, gives boards the intelligence layer they need to ask better questions, challenge management more rigorously, and arrive at decisions with greater confidence.”
In terms of what exactly AI is doing within the decision-making process, Pantelides affirms that it primarily performs the “analytical heavy lifting” that can help inform board decisions.
In other words, AI is “synthesising large volumes of information, surfacing patterns across data, flagging risks and assumptions that might otherwise be buried in a 200-page board pack.”
What’s interesting is that, at least right now, there aren’t many specific examples of named companies actively using AI or admitting to using AI in board decisions, although Pantelides does cite Abu Dhabi-based sovereign wealth fund Mubadala as one organisation with an AI member on its investment committee.
Another high-profile company that has gone on record as using AI in its boardroom is Lloyds Banking Group, which in April began using Board Intelligence’s own automated tools to help executives prepare for meetings, primarily via analysis and summarisation of documentation.
In the future, Lloyds could potentially give AI a greater role in its boardroom meetings, using it to identify and reduce bias in decision making, and to provide informational support across numerous areas (e.g. cybersecurity, M&A activity, sustainability, market analysis).
Legal accountability will ensure directors reserve the final say
However, Pantelides suggests that it may be some time before AI agents make decisions, as opposed to simply informing them.
She says, “The fact that such a high proportion of boards are discussing which decisions should remain human-led indicates that boards recognise there are limits to AI’s role in governance, and the question they’re grappling with is where the boundary should lie between AI-assisted analysis and human judgement.”
And ultimately, legal accountability is always likely to reside with (human) board members, meaning that any directors who want to keep the threat of litigation to a minimum would be wise to double check and authorize recommended actions themselves.
“Decisions like signing off policy changes sit at one end of the spectrum; decisions around M&A, culture, leadership, strategy, and crisis response sit at the other,” Pantelides concludes. “In the main, boards are not prepared to delegate the latter — and nor should they.”
