Meet Dr. Connie Allsopp

Why AI Stalls at the Executive Table: October's Lesson in Shared Authority

THE WORLD'S REGISTRAR | 2026 OCTOBER IN REVIEW  

Why AI Stalls at the Executive Table: October's Lesson in Shared Authority

The newest evidence suggests AI transformations succeed or stall on leadership behaviour and stakeholder trust, not on tools. Here is what leaders and entrepreneurs can do about it as they plan the year ahead.

In my work with senior leaders at The World's Registrar, the most honest sentence I hear about AI is rarely about the technology. It is usually some version of, "I am not sure whose decision this is." In October, three articles published by Harvard Business Review within three days made the same point from different angles, and they are worth reflecting on as the month closes.

The lesson: shared authority is the AI adoption strategy

In The C-Suite Behaviours That Stall AI Transformations, Amii Barnard-Bahn (2026) argued that AI initiatives often stall because of how senior leaders act. Two habits cause the most trouble: hoarding decision-making control and tuning out colleagues whose expertise lies outside their own function. Because AI spans departments, executives must share authority, resources and accountability rather than rely on the territorial ownership that likely earned them their roles.

Two companion articles sharpen the picture. First, in The Deployment Failure Holding Back Your AI Investments, Hastings, Syverson and Zimmerman (2026) reported that employees spend about 37% of their time on coordination work, and that tools deployed inside a single department miss the work that flows between them. Second, in Leaders Need to Grapple with Employee Ambivalence on AI, Fosslien, West Duffy and Scott (2026) noted that anxious employees tend to be less engaged and may quietly work around the technology.

My analysis: these are one problem seen from three vantage points. An AI program is a governance and culture program before it is a technology program, and it succeeds or stalls in the room where senior leaders decide who owns it. When authority is siloed, the work between functions goes unowned. When employees are uneasy, adoption goes underground. Both are failures of inclusion in the plainest sense: not every voice that needs to be at the table is there. In my published definitions (Allsopp, 2025), inclusion means bringing all voices to the same table, and accessibility means making the accommodations that let people get there. A CHRO who first hears about the AI roadmap in the meeting, as in the HBR example, has been invited but not included. On my IDEA Implementation Continuum (Allsopp, 2022), most AI programs today sit at the ad-hoc stage: good intentions, no defined strategy and no system for bringing every function to the table.

What leaders need to do: name the business problem before naming the owner; build cross-functional relationships before a crisis forces them; treat early AI plans as experiments; reward results that teams own together; and agree in advance how disagreements will be resolved. Then ask your people, openly, how they feel about AI adoption.

Also on my radar...

AI AND WORKFORCE

Employee sentiment is a leading indicator, not a soft metric. The ambivalence piece above also urges leaders to be candid about where AI-generated gains will go (Fosslien, West Duffy & Scott, 2026). My takeaway: transparency, and sharing your thinking aloud, is a trust strategy. This is the heart of my AI Governance practice.

ESG AND SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS

California's corporate climate disclosure rules have been finalized, with first emissions reports due November 10, 2026, just days from now, for companies above $1 billion in revenue doing business in the state (Segal, 2026a). My takeaway: if you are in a supply chain that touches these companies, expect data requests soon.

The Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures reports 836 organizations in 57 countries committed to aligned reporting, a 14% rise in under a year, and ISO has approved work to develop its LEAP approach into a standard (Segal, 2026b). My takeaway: nature risk is moving from voluntary to expected, and global boards will notice. Building the systems to answer is the work of my ESG and Sustainable Systems practice.

INCLUSION, DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND ACCESSIBILITY

On October 20, a federal court declined to block Executive Order 14398, which was signed on March 26, 2026 and prohibits federal contractors and subcontractors from racially discriminatory diversity, equity and inclusion activities. The court found that the order targets only unlawful, intentional discrimination and applies only to work under a contract containing the required clause. The case continues (Pechaitis & Mitchell, 2026). My takeaway: review your program design against your contracts, and keep the focus on removing barriers to participation. This is a US legal development, and I am not offering legal advice.

What this means for you

1. Map every AI initiative to a named cross-functional group, not a single department owner, and write down who decides what.
2. Measure coordination cost before you buy tools, and judge success by decision quality and cycle time rather than adoption rates.
3. Hold one open conversation with your team about how they feel about AI, and be specific about how gains will be shared.
4. Put succession on the same page: the leaders you are developing now will inherit these systems, so build shared authority into their growth plans.

About Dr. Connie Allsopp

Dr. Connie Allsopp is the CEO and Founder of The World's Registrar, with a doctorate in leadership education and public administration and three decades of experience. She helps leaders and entrepreneurs turn big shifts (AI, succession, ESG and inclusion) into systems their organizations can run.

Work with me by booking a call 

Where does AI ownership sit in your organization: one executive, a committee, or no one yet? If you are working through that question, book a conversation about AI governance, succession planning, IDEA or ESG at drconnieallsopp.com, or email [email protected].

Join the conversation on LinkedIn, where I post The World's Registrar Reviews every month.

References

Allsopp, C. (2025). Inclusion, Diversity, Equity & Accessibility: Tools for leaders and educators. Business Case Journal, 32(1). DOI: 10.69521/bcj.v32i1.9

Barnard-Bahn, A. (2026, October 23). The C-Suite Behaviors That Stall AI Transformations. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2026/10/the-c-suite-behaviors-that-stall-ai-transformations

Fosslien, L., West Duffy, M., & Scott, K. (2026, October 22). Leaders Need to Grapple with Employee Ambivalence on AI. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2026/10/leaders-need-to-grapple-with-employee-ambivalence-on-ai

Hastings, J., Syverson, C., & Zimmerman, S. (2026, October 21). The Deployment Failure Holding Back Your AI Investments. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2026/10/the-deployment-failure-holding-back-your-ai-investments

Pechaitis, S., & Mitchell, L. (2026, October 20). Court Declines to Block Federal Contractor DEI Order, Emphasizes Limits on Its Reach. National Law Review. https://natlawreview.com/article/court-declines-block-federal-contractor-dei-order-emphasizes-limits-its-reach

Segal, M. (2026a, October 15). California Locks in November Deadline for First Corporate Climate Reports. ESG Today. https://www.esgtoday.com/california-finalizes-corporate-climate-reporting-rules-locking-in-november-2026-deadline/

Segal, M. (2026b, October 16). Over 800 Companies Commit to TNFD-Aligned Nature Reporting Ahead of New ISSB, ISO Standards. ESG Today. https://www.esgtoday.com/over-800-companies-commit-to-tnfd-aligned-nature-reporting-ahead-of-new-issb-iso-standards/

#Leadership #AIGovernance #Inclusion