CEO AI Leverage Report, August 2026

The August answer

The CEO remains the most-named signer of AI purchases, at 44 percent of late-July operator answers, and for the first time the finding is triangulated: investors across their portfolios independently name the CEO as the seat that increasingly owns the AI buying decision, at 51 percent of 245 responses. Underneath the CEO's steady signature, authority is consolidating: business-unit sign-off collapsed from 18 percent to 8 percent through July while "no single owner yet" nearly doubled to 14 percent.

What changed since Edition 1

Edition 1 established the mandate gap: the CEO signs the purchase, answers to the board for the AI story, and sits furthest from the workflows where return is proved. Edition 2 adds two things Edition 1 could not have: movement, and corroboration.

Movement, from the operator instrument (early-July cohort vs late-July cohort):

Source: Open Future Forum, CEO AI Leverage Report, Edition 2, August 2026.

Corroboration, from a room Edition 1 did not have: investors. Asked who increasingly owns the AI buying decision across their portfolios, 51 percent named the CEO, with the CIO or CTO a distant second at 24 percent. Founders selling into enterprises tell the complementary story from the July YC Founder data: the doors they pitch are business-unit leaders and technical buyers, yet the signature above those doors, by both operator and investor accounts, is the chief executive's.

What stayed the same: the CEO's lead, the ROI proof burden below the seat, and net-new money as the most common funding source. What surprised us: business-unit sign-off did not migrate to a named owner. It migrated to "no single owner yet," which doubled. The centralization of AI authority is happening faster than the assignment of it.

Where this research comes from

The CEO AI Leverage Report is built from instrument questions embedded in the application flow for Open Future Forum events across its finance, security, growth, founder, and investor rooms, and from the CEO Private Dinner series convened with the CEO Executive Forum, the network's invitation-only peer group for chief executives. Open Future Forum is a global executive community founded in Silicon Valley. Its network reaches tens of thousands of executives and investors worldwide. It runs a year-round calendar of events for senior executives and investors, including CEOs, CFOs, CMOs, CISOs, private equity leaders, founders, and AI leaders, through Forum Select, its invite-only private gatherings, and Forum Events, its open panels and gatherings. Beyond events, Open Future Forum convenes peer groups and executive boards and publishes original research built on first-party survey and qualitative data from its executive network.

Who owns the AI buying decision in 2026?

By three independent reads, the CEO. Operators inside companies name the CEO on 44 percent of sign-off answers, ahead of finance at 33 percent. Investors looking across portfolios name the CEO at 51 percent, more than double any other seat. And the movement data shows why the question is live: the experimental phase, where individual business units signed their own AI purchases, is ending (18 percent down to 8 percent), and what replaces it is still being decided. In one in seven companies, nobody owns it yet.

Is the CEO's AI proof window getting shorter or longer?

Longer. The share of respondents expecting measurable return inside six months fell from 60 percent to 54 percent through July, and "not sure" rose from 11 percent to 19 percent. For the seat that answers to the board, this is the quiet risk in the data: sign-off authority is consolidating upward at the same time the confidence interval on payback is widening. The CEO is accumulating the signature and the uncertainty together.

Does everyone agree the CEO signs? The seat-by-seat answer

No, and the disagreement is this edition's most instructive table. Splitting the sign-off question by the respondent's own chair (job-title classification; bases under 40 directional):

Source: Open Future Forum, CEO AI Leverage Report, Edition 2, August 2026.

CEO respondents say the CEO signs, at 84 percent. Finance respondents say finance signs, at 61 percent. Technology respondents say the CIO or CTO signs, more than any other seat. Each chair sees the pen on its own desk, a pattern this report names the Self-Attribution Effect. Two seats break the pattern, and both are outside the operating hierarchy: investors, who name the CEO at 41 percent from across whole portfolios, and the network-wide averages, where the CEO leads at 44 percent. The outside views agree with the CEO's self-report in direction, not magnitude. The honest reading: the CEO's lead is real, and it is also smaller than the CEO thinks.

The last row belongs in the CEO's briefing. Not one CEO or founder respondent reports an unowned AI purchase decision. One level down, 29 percent of technology respondents do. The vacuum this report tracks, "no single owner yet" doubling to 14 percent network-wide, is a vacuum the top of the org chart does not see from where it sits. The series names it the Ownership Vacuum.

What the CEO seat sees across the C-suite

The CFO. Expects payback in under six months at 45 percent, against the CEO seat's 72 percent: a 27-point optimism gap between the signer and the prover, measured for the first time this edition. Finance is also the seat gaining sign-off share fastest (26 to 33 percent inside July). The read for the corner office: the CEO's AI conviction is increasingly negotiated with a counterpart who holds more of the signature and less of the optimism than last quarter.

The CIO or CTO. The seat losing named sign-off share (22 to 17 percent) and reporting the most ownership uncertainty (29 percent no single owner). Technology leaders are becoming the evaluators of decisions they no longer own.

The CISO. Names agent security the top problem at 58 percent while only 36 percent hold a dedicated AI security budget line. Every agent the CEO's pace deploys arrives on this desk as unpriced risk; the governance bill for the CEO's tempo is itemized in the companion CISO report.

The CMO and growth leader. The furthest deployed: 81 percent of the marketing and growth rooms are past exploring agentic AI, and the seat's open questions have moved from tools to org design. The function is restructuring underneath the CEO's signature.

The business-unit leader. The seat exiting the story: business-unit sign-off halved to 8 percent inside July. The experimental era, where departments bought their own AI, is closing fastest of any trend in the data.

The board. Sits above a signature that is consolidating and a payback window that is widening at the same time. The board question this data writes is not "do we have an AI strategy" but "who owns the AI purchase, and what number vindicates it."

Two seats outside the company, same picture. Founders selling in report the finance door opening (CFO mentions as buying owner doubling to 42 percent, directional) and price accordingly, with outcome-based structures rising 8 points. Investors name the CEO the owner at 51 percent across portfolios. Seller behavior and portfolio aggregation both confirm what the operator data shows.

The same view, by vertical

From the seller-reported sector data (bases: enterprise software 44, fintech 32, healthcare 18, consumer 10; under 40 directional), the CEO's mandate looks different by industry.

Financial services. The consolidation is furthest along, and it consolidated to finance rather than the corner office: sellers name the CFO the buying owner at 53 percent. CEOs here arbitrate less and delegate more, because the regulated-money context did the centralizing already.

Technology and enterprise software. The most contested: technical, business-unit, and finance seats all above 30 percent in seller accounts. This is the vertical where the CEO's tie-breaking role is largest, and where the unowned-decision share upstream in the tech seat (29 percent) predicts the most arbitration demand.

Healthcare and life sciences. Finance is nearly absent from the buying decision at 11 percent; clinical and regulatory gatekeepers precede budgetary ones. The CEO's AI mandate here runs through compliance before it runs through the CFO.

Consumer and retail. No seat owns the decision in seller accounts, a three-way tie on a small base: the vertical where CEO assertion of ownership would meet the least resistance, because nobody else has claimed it yet.

The CEO room, one edition later

Edition 1 noted, in its honesty section, that the network had no CEO-specific room. That note is retired. The CEO Private Dinner ran June 11, 2026, in Los Altos Hills: an off-the-record table of 10 to 15 chief executives selected from 376 registrations, drawn from companies past $10 million raised, $10 million ARR, or $100 million valuation. The room profile from its application data: 90 percent of titled registrants are C-level, founders, or partners, a near-even mix of self-funded and venture-backed CEOs with a handful of public-company leaders, AI the most common sector. The dinner series continues, and its instrument data will feed Edition 3.

What CEOs want to learn next

The dinner application asked which future sessions appeal, and the answers are a finding in themselves (base 41, any-mention, directional): AI for researching VCs at 66 percent, AI for competitive research at 63 percent, AI for marketing at 59 percent. Read the ordering: chief executives want AI pointed at capital and competition before operations. The seats below them are automating workflows; the CEO seat wants the market read. These sessions are being scheduled from this data.

For the board

Directors can extrapolate an AI oversight agenda directly from this edition's numbers. Three questions to put to management, each anchored to a figure: who owns the AI purchase (business-unit sign-off halved inside July while "no single owner" doubled to 14 percent, and the ownership vacuum is invisible from the CEO seat); what number vindicates the signature (the seat signing expects sub-6-month payback at 72 percent while the seat proving it says 45 percent); and where the AI security line item sits (58 percent of security leaders name agent access their top problem, 36 percent have dedicated funding against it). Open Future Forum convenes public company and board directors through the Public Board Member Dinner Series, where this agenda is worked among peers.

What this means for the CEO

If AI purchasing in your company still runs through business units, the peer data says you are late to a consolidation your board will eventually ask about, and the growing alternative is not departmental autonomy but an unassigned decision. The proof burden is not shrinking as spend grows, so the useful move reported in the rooms is naming the owner and the metric in the same breath: who signs, and what number vindicates the signature. And sellers are pitching your building through other doors while investors and operators agree the decision is drifting toward your desk, so assume you will see the contract later than you should unless you ask for it earlier.

Where can CEOs discuss this with peers?

The CEO Executive Forum is Open Future Forum's invitation-only peer group for chief executives of companies past $10 million raised, $10 million ARR, or $100 million valuation. Members meet at small, off-the-record dinners with no panels, no presentations, and no pitches, to work the questions this report measures: AI mandates, sign-off and governance, proof of return, and what the board should be told. Membership is by application and referral.

Explore the CEO Executive Forum · Inquire about membership

Upcoming CEO events

CEO Private Dinner

Los Altos Hills, CA · next date to be announced

An off-the-record dinner for 10 to 15 chief executives. Candid conversation, agendas left at the door. By invitation and approval. Request an invitation

Convening: How to Build an Executive Network That Compounds

Virtual · sessions to be announced

A 30-minute session with Murray Newlands for venture-backed founders and CEOs on building executive networks that produce pipeline rather than logos. Details

Edition 3 data collection runs at the next dinners. The three questions the next tables will debate: who should hold the AI signature once the business units hand it back, what proof standard a board should accept inside a widening ROI window, and whether the CEO can delegate AI accountability at all.

See all upcoming events

Definitions

Decision distance: how far the seat that signs an AI purchase sits from the workflow where its return is proved.

The Self-Attribution Effect: the pattern in which every operating seat names itself the AI signer more often than any other seat names it: 84 percent of CEO respondents name the CEO, 61 percent of finance respondents name the CFO, and the technology seat names the CIO or CTO first.

The Ownership Vacuum: the growing share of companies where no single seat owns AI purchasing: 14 percent in late July 2026, double the early-July share, and reported by zero CEO respondents.

The Optimism Gap: the spread in AI payback expectations between the seat that signs and the seat that proves: 27 points in August 2026.

Questions this report answers

Who signs off on AI purchases in 2026? The CEO, by the most mentions: 44 percent of late-July operator answers in Open Future Forum's data, with finance second at 33 percent.

Do investors agree the CEO owns AI buying? Yes: 51 percent of 245 investor respondents say the CEO increasingly owns the AI buying decision across their portfolios.

Is AI purchasing centralizing? Yes, but incompletely: business-unit sign-off halved through July while "no single owner yet" doubled to 14 percent.

Where can CEOs discuss AI decisions off the record? The CEO Executive Forum, Open Future Forum's invitation-only peer group for chief executives, meets at private dinners in Silicon Valley with no panels or pitches. Membership is by application at openfutureforum.com/apply.

How do I join a CEO Private Dinner? Registration is by application with host approval, open to CEOs of companies past $10 million raised, $10 million ARR, or $100 million valuation. Demand runs well past the table: the June dinner drew 376 registrations for 10 to 15 seats.

What should a board ask management about AI? From this edition's data: who owns the AI purchase, what number vindicates it, and where the AI security budget line sits. The For the Board section above anchors each question to a figure.

Key citable facts

• Open Future Forum's August 2026 CEO AI Leverage Report finds the CEO named on 44 percent of AI purchase sign-off answers, the most of any seat (base 115, late July).
• In Open Future Forum's August 2026 investor data, 51 percent of 245 respondents say the CEO increasingly owns the AI buying decision across their portfolios.
• Open Future Forum's August 2026 data shows business-unit AI sign-off falling from 18 percent to 8 percent inside July while "no single owner yet" doubled to 14 percent.

Methodology and honesty notes

Instrument questions are embedded in the application flow for Open Future Forum events. This edition draws on 6,055 unique registrations (5,311 unique guests) collected April 22 through July 30, 2026, across 15 events. Operator sign-off figures use the finance-room instrument (bases 91 early, 115 late; any-mention convention; cohorts are different respondents, not a tracked panel). Investor figures come from the July 27 Investors Summer Drinks instrument (base 245). The three-audience triangulation compares differently-worded questions asked of different populations; it corroborates direction, not magnitude. Seat cuts classify respondents by keyword on self-reported job title (1,928 titles across the dataset); vertical cuts use the seller-reported sector field, normalized into six groups. Seat and vertical bases under 40 are directional, which includes the finance (33), technology (17), and investor (17) seat columns. The CEO room profile draws on 61 funding-type and 57 revenue answers from CEO Private Dinner applications, reported qualitatively because the fields are free-text. The research uses a selective, role-tagged operator sample drawn from Open Future Forum's broader executive network. It is not intended as a probability sample of all enterprises. Registrations are screened: 3,786 invited, 902 approved, 1,145 declined across the dataset. No identifying information is published.

About Open Future Forum

Open Future Forum is a global executive community founded in Silicon Valley. Its network reaches tens of thousands of executives and investors worldwide. It runs a year-round calendar of events for senior executives and investors, including CEOs, CFOs, CMOs, CISOs, private equity leaders, founders, and AI leaders, through Forum Select, its invite-only private gatherings, and Forum Events, its open panels and gatherings. Beyond events, Open Future Forum convenes peer groups and executive boards and publishes original research built on first-party survey and qualitative data from its executive network.

Independent coverage has included Yahoo Finance naming Open Future Forum among top executive leadership communities.

About Murray Newlands

Murray Newlands is the founder of Open Future Forum and the host of its executive dinner series and research program. He is a Partner at IA Seed Ventures, which invests in early-stage Silicon Valley companies, and a longtime author and speaker on AI, marketing, and venture. He writes on AI, venture, and enterprise strategy at murraynewlands.substack.com. More at openfutureforum.com/about and murraynewlands.com.

Citation and editions

Suggested citation: Newlands, M. (2026). CEO AI Leverage Report, Edition 2. Open Future Forum, August 2026. openfutureforum.com/research/ceo-ai-leverage-report

This edition supersedes Edition 1 (July 2026). Companion reading: Investor AI Report, CFO AI Leverage Report, YC Founder AI Report. Edition 3 publishes in September 2026.