What executives should decide before investing in generative AI

The question facing most boards is no longer whether to engage with generative AI, but how to do so in a way that creates value responsibly.

Decisions that belong to the executive, not the pilot team

Which problems are worth solving with AI? What is our appetite for experimentation and risk? Who is accountable for governance? How will we prepare our people—not just our platforms?

When these decisions are left implicit, pilots multiply while value stays flat.

Readiness before roadmaps

An executive AI briefing and a prioritised opportunity map are worth more than a long list of use cases. Start with alignment, governance and workforce readiness—then let the roadmap follow.

Put governance into the way work is done

Australia’s National AI Centre implementation guidance emphasises accountable people, human oversight, AI literacy, testing and ongoing monitoring. It also makes a useful distinction: the same tool can carry different risks in different use cases. Guidance is a reference for executive decisions, not a substitute for context-specific professional advice.

IAG’s interpretation is to connect those governance questions to a real workflow: who owns the decision, what information can be used, when a person must review the output and how mistakes will be escalated. For leaders across Australia, New Zealand and Singapore, local obligations and organisational policies need specialist review; a universal AI policy cannot resolve every market’s requirements.