Forbes Research’s recent Inside The Numbers rundown — backed by the 2025 Forbes CxO Growth Survey — makes one thing plain: corporate America has put AI at the center of its growth story and is racing to claim the prize. C-suite leaders now rank technology above purpose and process as their primary growth lever, and the survey shows rapid increases in AI and automation budgets as executives try to sprint ahead of competitors. The cheerleading from the boardroom is loud and unmistakable.
But the sound of boards throwing money at generative models doesn’t mean firms are actually ready to deploy them safely or profitably. Forbes’ survey found that more companies are accelerating digital transformation and increasing AI spend, yet confidence about short-term growth is shakier than the long-term optimism CxOs express — a leash between ambition and reality. That disconnect is the first red flag for any conservative who believes in prudent stewardship of capital and jobs.
That red flag becomes a flashing alarm when you look at independent readiness studies. Cisco’s 2024 AI Readiness Index — a broad survey of thousands of organizations — found that only about 13 percent of companies are fully prepared to capture AI’s potential, even as nearly every firm reports urgent pressure to act. The gap between executive urgency and technical readiness is not theoretical; it is a real operational chasm that will cost money, time, and livelihoods if rushed recklessly.
Forbes’ data spotlights how AI is already reshaping operations: many CxOs say AI agents are transforming automation, and a meaningful share of CIOs have already deployed agent-style automation for customer support and processes. Leaders also say upskilling is a priority, but training doesn’t happen overnight — mismatches between hype, hiring, and capability creation leave companies exposed. If leadership treats AI as a viral must-have instead of a tool tied to clear ROI and measurable outcomes, taxpayers and investors will pick up the tab.
Practical problems pile up fast. Cisco reports that only about one in five companies has the GPU capacity required for serious AI workloads, and many projects have fallen short of expectations despite bigger budgets. That means firms are spending more without the infrastructure or metrics to prove value, and the boardroom mantra of “move fast” risks turning into a costly scramble that replaces skilled roles with fragile automation rather than upgrading them. Conservatives should demand accountability: capital must be deployed where it creates durable value, not where buzzwords promise quick headlines.
Cybersecurity and governance are not afterthoughts — they are the backbone of any real AI strategy. Forbes notes that organizations are boosting cybersecurity alongside AI investments and adopting zero-trust models and continuous improvement programs, but execution still lags in many places. That’s exactly the sort of mixed record where market discipline has to bite: boards must insist on security, auditability, and legal compliance before waving a green flag on wide-scale rollouts.
The conservative case is simple: welcome innovation, but demand competence. Companies should tie every AI dollar to clear business outcomes, certify infrastructure readiness before sweeping deployments, and invest seriously in retraining so workers aren’t collateral damage in a productivity experiment. Washington’s instinct to over-regulate can be as dangerous as laissez-faire neglect, so the right path is one that preserves freedom to innovate while forcing transparency, liability, and measurable standards on firms that want to upend essential work processes.
The clock is ticking: executives tell researchers they have short windows to prove AI’s impact, and missteps now will be exploited by competitors and regulators down the road. If business leaders want conservatives to trust this technological leap, they need to show disciplined stewardship — not marketing decks full of promises. The marketplace and the rule of law, not fads and slogans, should determine which companies lead and which decline.
