Across the GCC, progress in AI adoption continues at breakneck speed. Prior to the ascendancy of generative AI (GenAI), McKinsey predicted that the combined GDP of the Arab Gulf region could rise by 9% because of artificial intelligence (extra “value” of $150 billion, according to analysts).
But even in May 2023 when the estimate was published, McKinsey saw the potential of GenAI and stated in its report that its projections “could be quickly surpassed” by the emergence of large-language models (LLMs) and other autonomous-creation technologies.
As knuckles whiten and pulses race, the AI rollercoaster seems out of control. But history shows that GCC governments are never content to wait and see. They strategize; they act. In June this year in the UAE, Sheikh Hamdan bin Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Crown Prince of Dubai and Chairman of The Executive Council, approved the appointment of Chief AI Officers (CAIOs) in 22 government departments. The CAIO is a role that has garnered much attention since AI became a wild stallion in need of a whisperer. While the idea may seem natural and timely, the complexities behind real-world appointments is worth exploring.
Let’s start with the basics. The CAIO’s job description shows much overlap with other tech execs, such as the Chief Information Officer (CIO) and Chief Data Officer (CDO). Without absolute, unquestioned ownership of AI, the ability of the CAIO to effect real purpose in the journey to Everyday AI (an all-embracing cultural shift where an organization’s entire workforce operates every second with AI in mind) is limited. For the CAIO to be worth the resources expended in their headhunting, recruitment, onboarding, and ongoing cost of retention, the enterprise must use the resource properly. The CAIO must be allowed to take the reins of strategy, implementation, and governance so they may guide the organization towards fulfilling business objectives and, in the case of private companies, gaining competitive advantage.
Usurpin’ turf
Where a CAIO is present, the CIO should be restricted to focusing on broader IT infrastructure, and the CDO to looking after data assets. The CAIO will develop and execute AI programs. They will align outputs with business goals and drive an Everyday AI culture that embeds ethics, banishes bias, exudes transparency, and delivers data privacy. In short, the CAIO is an amalgam of business strategist and risk manager. As part of this hybrid role, the officer will lay the groundwork for AI success by devising ways of acquiring and retaining top AI talent. But pushback from CIOs and CDOs is inevitable, given the enormous stake they may already have in AI-related areas.
The CIO may have established the organization’s overall technology strategy, IT infrastructure, cybersecurity posture, and digital transformation programs from the ground up. AI is probably an integral part of their portfolio. They may see the CAIO less as a horse whisperer and more as an unnecessary stable hand. The CDO may have a similar view, given that their role may be considered to extend naturally into AI, including its governance. From the data expert’s perspective, a CAIO could threaten non-AI data initiatives such as self-service analytics.
The first and most obvious countermeasure to potential power struggles is to define each role to eliminate overlaps. Acknowledge the tight interdependencies between AI, data, and IT, and mandate close collaboration between the CAIO, CIO, and CDO to ensure AI initiatives are supported by all departments and aligned with business goals. Over time, it is to be hoped that trust and efficiency will emerge from this collaboration. But the CAIO must lead in AI governance. In any enterprise, a risk to one is a risk to all. Other stakeholders must be encouraged to see the difference between AI and data governance and to recognize the need to support the CAIO as they take the lead in the former.
By committee
But just because the role of AI leader is clearly defined, it does not necessarily follow that responsibilities for Everyday AI should be on the CAIO’s shoulders alone. Collaborative approaches that include multiple team members from across the organization could be used to turbocharge AI maturity. Committees may emerge that either replace the CAIO or are chaired by the CAIO but include the CIO, CDO, and many other business stakeholders. Committee members would share ownership of AI initiatives, allowing leaders to align strategy and governance on IT, data, and AI before a single project is launched.
This first-things-first approach has proved a winner in general digital transformation programs. It would likely be a similar boon to the AI journey, with or without a CAIO. We have seen so many digitalization efforts collapse under the weight of departmental silos. Lessons cannot be salvaged from failures while finger-pointing persists. When siloes are eliminated and everyone takes responsibility for every project, we have achieved joint accountability — a key component of Everyday AI and a strong countermeasure to turf wars.
So, is the wild-stallion wrangler just visiting, or here to stay? While the CAIO role may be fulfilled by a cross-functional committee in some organizations, others may see a dedicated executive as a must-have. Either way, the CDO and CIO will be critical to the campaign for an AI future — not as lieutenants to the CAIO, but as fellow generals working together to overcome the complexities of AI integration in a world hungry for its leverage.
Everywhere, every day
As with everything, attitude matters. If there is resistance to the CAIO, job descriptions will matter little, and a committee approach may better serve the AI program. But where collaboration can blossom and the spirit of joint accountability is embraced, the rewards of an independent arbiter and strategist could be significant. The GCC seems set to lead in the AI space. It could be that the Everywhere CAIO could be the ticket to Everyday AI.
The writer is Regional VP & General Manager, Middle East, Turkey & Africa, Dataiku