Optimistic, with Exceptions

As the generative AI (GenAI) proliferation continues, leaders’ views of this technology can be summarized as optimistic*.

That asterisk is doing a lot of heavy lifting.

In the year since Russell Reynolds Associates last surveyed leaders about their views on GenAI, we hosted over 100 CEOs and CHROs in our AI Leadership Labs roundtable series, where we discussed GenAI’s increasing impact on organizations and the leadership challenges that acceleration presents, uncovering how trailblazing CEOs are developing strategies to tackle the AI opportunity head-on.

Now, five key learnings from our H1 2025 Global Leadership Monitor illuminate more about leaders’ increasingly complex views on GenAI.

On one hand, there’s deep enthusiasm: as GenAI implementation progress continues, leaders are seeing significant AI-driven boosts to productivity and revenue, and are slowly gaining confidence in their organization’s GenAI readiness. Yet this optimism is underlined by new leadership challenges—from atrophying critical thinking skills to quality control concerns to AI-driven workforce reductions—that pose serious questions for organizations.

GenAI adoption soars—more than doubling in last year

Leaders report that GenAI implementation and usage has significantly increased, with nearly half (49%) of leaders reporting piloting (30%) or fully implementing (19%) the tech in their function/team’s day-to-day workflow (Figure 1).

This is a significant increase from last year, when only 8% of leaders reported that they had fully implemented GenAI, and another 21% said they were piloting AI programs. Conversely, the number of leaders who have not taken any steps towards engaging with AI fell significantly—from 33% in H1 2024 to 14% in H1 2025.

Figure 1: H1 2024 vs H1 2025 generative AI implementation progress
% of leaders answering, "To what degree has your function or team implemented generative AI"

_{Source: Russell Reynolds Associates’ H1 2025 Global Leadership Monitor, n = 1,891 CEOs, C-level leaders, and next generation leaders; H1 2024 Global Leadership Monitor, n = 1,382 CEOs, C-suite, board, and next generation leaders.}

Leaders who have successfully implemented GenAI and managed through the subsequent AI transformation tackle the challenge incrementally, starting by supporting the CEO in leading the AI conversation, then integrating AI into all strategic discussions. This is then supplemented by bringing in AI-savvy leadership—from the board of directors down to the factory floor, all with access to AI tools and the requisite training to be successful, and then publicly championing and showcasing their success.

_{Source: Decoding the Future: The RRA Systems View on Leading Through AI Transformation | Russell Reynolds Associates}

Leaders see significant AI-driven productivity, skills & capabilities, and process boosts—and they expect more impacts in the coming years

This implementation progress has translated into significant organizational impact.

When we asked leaders to quantify AI-driven impacts on their businesses today, the results were clear: over half of leaders report increases to their team’s productivity (55%) and capabilities (52%) (Figure 2). These increases aren’t specific to leaders whose teams have fully implemented AI—leaders whose implementations are still in-progress (piloting, developing, investigating) also report significant increases on these factors as well.

Approximately one-third of leaders report that AI has increased quality in their organizations’ internal processes (37%) and products/services (30%). Regarding costs, 20% of leaders report that AI has increased their organization’s profitability and 18% say that AI has increased revenue streams. While it’s worth noting that leaders are more likely to report that AI has yet to have an impact on these items (versus a meaningful increase or decrease), we expect this to change as implementation progress continues.

The only item on which leaders were more likely to report AI-driven decreases? Overall headcount. While 8% of leaders reported that AI contributed to increases in their organization’s headcount, 15% said it had decreased the number of employees. This split should be considered via the lens of workforce transformation and its accompanying skillset shifts—while some organizations are bulking up technical capabilities, others (or even the same ones) are looking for opportunities to streamline.

Figure 2: AI-driven organizational impacts today (H1 2025)
% of leaders reporting AI-driven increases/decreases on the following

_{Source: Russell Reynolds Associates’ H1 2025 Global Leadership Monitor, n=1,555 CEOs, C-suite, board, and next generation leaders.}

As organizations continue their AI-enablement journeys, leaders expect these impacts to be amplified. The implementation progress and the tangible results described above likely both contribute to leaders’ increased enthusiasm around AI’s future impacts on team productivity (up 5pp since last year), new revenue streams (up 6pp), and new jobs (up 7pp).

This enthusiasm prompts important AI transformation questions that executive teams and boards need to answer before they set out to design new revenue streams and talent strategies, including:

• Do you have future-forward advisors on your board with the appropriate skills/knowledge to support the management team?
• How are you re-imagining your future operating model (team structures, workflows, KPIs)?
• How are you ensuring AI governance at every level of your organization?
• Do you intend to reskill your workforce? If so, how?
• Do you need new talent, like a chief AI officer?

Leaders grow more concerned about AI’s long-term implications, as over half express concern about GenAI usage stunting critical thinking skills

Despite the positive impacts noted above, leaders’ views on GenAI aren’t all rosy. Over half of leaders (54%) express concern about individuals failing to develop critical thinking and judgment due to an over-reliance on AI, and a quarter are concerned about AI inadvertently undermining product/service quality (25%) and critical internal process quality (26%).

% of leaders who strongly agree/agree

Given that 15% of leaders report that AI has already reduced their headcount, it’s perhaps unsurprising that 37% also believe that AI will cause layoffs within their organization in the coming years. What is surprising is how quickly that number increased—a year ago, only 15% of leaders said the same.

We see a similar jump amongst people officers; the number of HR leaders expressing worry about AI-driven layoffs doubled over the last year—jumping from 20% to 40%.

Leaders may have mixed feelings about whether workforce shifts indicate positive or negative organizational impacts. Regardless, it’s important to be sensitive to the culture disruption that headcount changes inevitably cause.

 

When done right, AI adoption increases the rigor around data-driven decision making. It’s not about taking shortcuts. AI-enabled operations can meaningfully improve an organization’s efficiency and productivity; however, leaders need to develop upskilling strategies and governing use principles in tandem to fully realize these benefits.”

Tuck Rickards
Russell Reynolds Associates

 

Interestingly, when we segment these results by implementation progress—comparing leaders who have fully implemented GenAI, are in-progress implementing the tech, or have not implemented it at all—these concerns remain fairly consistent (Figure 3).

For example, 48% of leaders who haven’t taken any steps towards implementing GenAI express concern about individuals failing to develop critical thinking skills due to over-reliance on AI, which might explain some of their reticence towards engaging with the technology. However, 53% of leaders who have fully implemented the tech say the same—suggesting that the productivity and revenue gains they’ve reported are not without their individual drawbacks.

Figure 3: Leaders’ concerns about AI’s long-term organizational impacts by GenAI implementation stage (H1 2025)

_{Source: Russell Reynolds Associates’ H1 2025 Global Leadership Monitor, n = 333 leaders who have fully implemented GenAI, 1185 leaders whose GenAI implementations are in-progress, 246 leaders who have not implemented GenAI.}

As with the AI transformation questions noted above, these concerns—as well as others around AI energy consumption, new costs to the business, and managing responsible use—require serious consideration from executive teams and boards.

Leaders’ belief in GenAI’s importance increases, but confidence in their personal AI skills—while improving—remains low

Leaders continue to believe that that a strong AI understanding will be mandatory for future C-suite executives, with 82% agreeing. However, only 41% feel confident in their personal ability to implement AI within their organizations.

While this represents increases on both measures from a year ago, it also reveals that a critical leadership skills gap still persists in organizations. This is quite understandable: with the speed at which new AI-enabled offerings are being released and revamped—as well as the long-term concerns noted above—we know many leaders are making decisions about this technology without fully understanding it.

It’s worth remembering that, even as implementations progress and organizations report material AI-driven impacts, leaders should give themselves space and grace to continue learning about the many tools within this rapidly changing landscape.

Leaders’ confidence in their organization’s AI capabilities is slowly rising

As leaders’ confidence in their personal AI capabilities slowly improves, so too does their view of their organization’s AI skillsets. We observed improving confidence across leaders’ view of their leadership team’s ability to align resources around GenAI (jumping from 35% in H1 2024 to 44% in H1 2025), their board’s AI advisory expertise (20% to 25%), and their employee’s technical skills (27% to 32%) (Figure 4).

We also saw improvements on leaders’ views around their organization’s data quality (31% to 39%), AI safety guidance (27% to 39%), and processes against AI misuse (24% to 32%).

While these numbers are still fairly low—especially considering the meaningful increases in implementation progress—it suggests a trend in the right direction regarding AI upskilling, use cases, and ethical principles development.

Figure 4: Confidence in organizational GenAI capabilities (2024 vs 2025)
% of leaders strongly agreeing/agreeing that their organization has...

_{Source: Russell Reynolds Associates’ H1 2025 Global Leadership Monitor, n = 2,164 CEOs, C-level leaders, and next generation leaders; H1 2024 Global Leadership Monitor, n=1,580 CEOs, C-suite, board, and next generation leaders.}

What’s next? Empowering your organization’s AI transformation

The most effective transformations are not siloed—they empower leaders across the organization to drive coordinated, business-wide change.

This requires leaders who take an enterprise approach to AI ownership, usage, and literacy; leaders with incisive views on their current talent pool’s capabilities and are committed to developing future-focused, inclusive succession pipelines; and leaders with high executive potential, who can both navigate change and keep their organizations steady through the day-to-day.

For those looking to take the next step, visit the RRA Systems View for a practical blueprint on leading AI transformation with discipline and intent.

The enterprise of the future: RRA Systems View on leading through AI transformation

APPENDIX

Learn how implementation progress varies across industry, function, and region

Implementation progress varies by industry, with technology and professional services leading the pack

Unsurprisingly, 30% of leaders in the technology industry report using AI in their day-to-day, with another 31% reporting that they are piloting AI programs (Figure 5).

Professional services and financial services are also making strides—26% of professional services leaders and 24% of financial services leaders report that their teams have implemented GenAI programs, and another 34% and 33% respectively report that they are actively piloting programs.

The healthcare and consumer industries have also made progress on implementation, with 15% of leaders from both sectors reporting that they’ve fully implemented the technology, and over a quarter of leaders from both sectors reporting that they’re piloting GenAI programs.

Only 12% of non-profit leaders and 11% of industrial & natural resources leaders report that their organizations have fully implemented GenAI tools in their day-to-day. However, we expect this to increase as well, as another 29% and 28% of leaders in these respective spaces report that they are piloting GenAI programs.

Of course, each industry has different use cases, customer needs, and steps required to ensure safe implementation, so these differences—while useful to compare across industry—should always be considered within the broader sector context.

Figure 5: GenAI implementation progress by industry (H1 2025)
% of leaders answering, "To what degree has your function or team implemented generative AI?"

_{Source: Russell Reynolds Associates’ H1 2025 Global Leadership Monitor, n = 1,891 CEOs, C-level leaders, and next generation leaders.}

Technology, HR, and customer activation & growth teams are most likely to have implemented GenAI

Technology officers have made the most progress with GenAI implementation, with 40% reporting that their teams are using it in their day-to-day, and another 31% reporting that they’re piloting the technology (Figure 6). Human resources and customer activation & growth (CAG) leaders are also making progress, with 28% and 24% respectively reporting that their teams are using GenAI in their day-to-day.

Leaders in legal/regulatory/compliance (14%), operations (13%), and finance (9%) are less likely to have fully implemented GenAI. However, it’s worth noting that every function—even those that are more likely to be in the piloting, developing, or investigating phases—have made significant implementation progress in the last  year.

Figure 6: GenAI implementation progress by function (H1 2025)
% of leaders answering, "To what degree has your function or team implemented generative AI?"

_{Source: Russell Reynolds Associates’ H1 2025 Global Leadership Monitor, n = 641 CEOs, C-level leaders.}

Consistent levels of GenAI implementation across regions—but a higher proportion of leaders in APAC have yet to take action

From an overall maturity perspective, the regions are fairly balanced in their implementation progress, with approximately half of leaders across Europe, the Americas, and Asia reporting that they’ve fully implemented or are piloting GenAI programs (Figure 7). However, 24% of leaders in Asia report that they’ve not taken any steps to engage with the technology—while only 13% of leaders in Europe and the Americas say the same.

Figure 7: GenAI implementation progress by region (H1 2025)

Learn more about leaders’ confidence in their organization’s capabilities by industry and function

Confidence across industries generally follows implementation progress—leaders in tech and professional services are most likely to report confidence in their organization’s leadership teams (54% and 57% strongly agreeing/agreeing, respectively), boards (31% and 35%), and employees (45% and 39%) (Figure 8).

Figure 8: Confidence in organizational GenAI talent capabilities (industry view)
% of leaders strongly agreeing/agreeing that their organization has...

_{Source: Russell Reynolds Associates’ H1 2025 Global Leadership Monitor, n=330 consumer leaders, 403 professional services leaders, 298 healthcare leaders, 500 INR leaders, 149 nonprofit leaders, 193 professional services leaders, 291 tech leaders.}

Across functions, we again see that confidence in leadership is fairly aligned with implementation progress, with tech officers (who are, unsurprisingly, most likely to be using AI in their day-to-day) reporting the highest levels of confidence in their leadership teams (Figure 9). However, that’s where the correlation ends; leaders have a consistent view regarding the overall employee-base skillset, with no one function deviating more than a few percentage points from the 32% agreement average.

Some of this may be due to exposure: given their proximity in the organization, C-suite leaders have more opportunities to observe and develop confidence in their peers’ AI approach. However, functional leaders do not have consistent exposure to the board or to employees beyond their team—meaning they have fewer chances to develop an informed opinion of these groups’ skillsets.

Figure 9: Confidence in organizational GenAI talent capabilities (functional view)
% of leaders strongly agreeing/agreeing that their organization has...

_{Source: Russell Reynolds Associates’ H1 2025 Global Leadership Monitor, n=618 C-suite leaders.}

Authors

Fawad Bajwa leads Russell Reynolds Associates’ AI, Analytics & Data Practice globally. He is based in Toronto and New York.
Leah Christianson is a member of Russell Reynolds Associates’ Center for Leadership Insight. She is based in San Francisco.
George Head leads Russell Reynolds Associates’ Technology Officers Knowledge team. He is based in London.
Tristan Jervis leads Russell Reynolds Associates’ Technology practice. He is based in London.
Tuck Rickards is a senior member and former leader of Russell Reynolds Associates’ Technology practice. He is based in San Francisco.

The authors wish to thank the 3,000+ leaders from RRA’s global network who completed the H1 2025 Global Leadership Monitor. Their responses to the survey have contributed greatly to our understanding of leadership in 2025 and beyond.