Marketing finding
Four in five respondents are beyond exploration, while reported impact divides almost evenly among workforce capacity, content speed and customer knowledge. The data does not support reducing marketing's AI business case to one universal measure.
What October adds
The status base is 230; no newer version of that question was fielded after the existing agentic cohort. The impact base is 218 across Marketing Measurement and Attribution in the AI Era and Partner Marketing and the New AI Ecosystem. The three leading measures are close: workforce capacity at 46 percent, content speed at 45 percent and customer knowledge at 43 percent.
Where this research comes from
The status question comes from Agentic AI Meets Go-to-Market. The impact question comes from two marketing events and is deduplicated by email, with the latest answer retained. Other CMO event exports do not contain comparable versions of the tracked questions and are excluded from these percentages.
Current stage
Thirty-six percent are building agentic AI products, 26 percent are piloting agents, 20 percent run agents across the business and 19 percent are exploring (base 230). Building is the largest category, while one in five respondents report production use across the business.
Where value appears
Forty-six percent say AI does the work of more people, 45 percent say it creates content faster and 43 percent say it improves customer knowledge. Eleven percent see nothing measurable (base 218, any mention).
The top three impact measures are separated by only three percentage points. Because the question is multi-select, workforce capacity, content speed and customer knowledge can overlap. Each requires its own baseline and outcome measure.
What marketing leaders ask for
Two open-text question sets add context. Across Marketing Measurement and Attribution in the AI Era and Partner Marketing and the New AI Ecosystem, 103 nonblank answers to the marketing-challenges question (74 and 29 respectively) prominently mention attribution and measurement. At Agentic AI Meets Go-to-Market, 123 nonblank answers to “one thing you want to walk out with” frequently mention agents, go-to-market work and peer connections. These responses are qualitative and were not coded into percentage comparisons.
October marketing evidence
Agentic stage
Marketing agentic stage
| Answer | Count | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Building agentic AI products | 82 | 36% |
| Piloting agents | 59 | 26% |
| Running agents in production | 46 | 20% |
| Still exploring | 43 | 19% |
Base 230.
In total, 187 of 230 respondents are beyond exploration: 82 are building products, 59 are piloting and 46 are running agents across the business. The stage distribution measures activity and deployment, not business value.
| Respondent seat | Base | Building | Piloting | Production | Exploring |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CEO or founder | 74 | 49% | 19% | 23% | 9% |
| Technology | 15 | 40% | 13% | 27% | 20% |
| Other or unclassified | 129 | 27% | 32% | 19% | 22% |
Rows shown cover 218 of 230 respondents; omitted title categories total 12. Classification uses title keywords; the technology row is directional.
CEO and founder respondents are the largest classified group in the marketing instrument. Forty-nine percent report building agentic products, compared with 27 percent of other or unclassified respondents; reported production use is 23 and 19 percent respectively. The technology cut has a base of 15 and is directional. The title classification is shown because the marketing-event sample is not a CMO-only population.
Value drivers
Reported marketing impact
| Answer | Count | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Doing the work of more people | 101 | 46% |
| Creating content faster | 99 | 45% |
| Knowing the customer better | 94 | 43% |
| Nothing measurable yet | 25 | 11% |
Base 218; any mention, so shares can sum above 100 percent.
The three leading impacts are within three percentage points. Workforce capacity, content speed and customer knowledge require different baselines, owners and evaluation windows, so one aggregate productivity measure will not describe all three.
Value by respondent seat
| Respondent seat | Base | Work of more people | Faster content | Better customer knowledge | Nothing measurable |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CEO or founder | 89 | 46% | 48% | 42% | 6% |
| Technology | 13 | 46% | 69% | 46% | 8% |
| Other or unclassified | 96 | 46% | 39% | 48% | 16% |
Rows shown cover 198 of 218 respondents; omitted title categories total 20. Classification uses title keywords; the technology row is directional; any mention.
Among CEO and founder respondents, content speed is the most selected measure at 48 percent. Among other or unclassified respondents, customer knowledge leads at 48 percent. The technology cut has a base of 13 and is directional.
Twenty-five respondents, or 11 percent of the base, report nothing measurable. Their answers show why deployment activity should not be treated as proof of business value.
External context
The CMO Survey's 2026 results also find AI adoption outpacing organizational readiness. The Open Future Forum data adds a value breakdown: workforce leverage, content speed and customer knowledge sit within three percentage points of one another, so no single impact measure describes marketing's AI case.
What this means for the CMO
Use three scorecards, not one: labor and throughput, content velocity and quality, and customer knowledge or commercial lift. Make each agent accountable to one primary scorecard and one business owner. If every agent is justified with generic productivity, the organization cannot tell which system is creating growth.
Questions this report answers
How far along is marketing with agents?
Eighty-one percent are past exploration (base 230).
Where does AI create measurable value in marketing?
Workforce leverage, content speed and customer knowledge are nearly tied at 46, 45 and 43 percent (base 218, any mention).
Is value measurable everywhere?
No. Eleven percent report nothing measurable yet (base 218, any mention).
Key citable facts
- Open Future Forum's October 2026 marketing data finds 81 percent past exploration with agentic AI (base 230).
- Forty-six percent say AI does the work of more people, 45 percent cite content speed and 43 percent customer knowledge (base 218, any mention).
- Eleven percent report nothing measurable yet (base 218).
Methodology and honesty notes
The status and impact questions come from different but overlapping marketing-event populations and are not treated as a panel. Respondents are deduplicated per question by email. Multi-select answers use any mention. Invited-only records are excluded.
Related reading
Citation and editions
Suggested citation: Newlands, M. (2026). CMO AI Leverage Report, Edition 4. Open Future Forum, October 2026. This edition supersedes Edition 3, September 2026.
Work These Questions with Marketing Peers
The CMO Executive Forum meets through small, off-the-record gatherings. Membership is by application and referral.