Mission-driven boards lag on AI oversight, survey finds

Diligent Institute has found that most mission-driven boards do not use artificial intelligence in oversight or strategic decision-making. The findings are based on a survey of 230 stakeholders across nonprofit and public sector organisations.

More than half of respondents, 52%, said their board does not use AI to support risk oversight or strategic decisions. A further 26% reported only minimal or ad hoc use, while 14% said their board uses AI regularly alongside traditional governance approaches.

Only one respondent said AI was fully embedded in board oversight and decision-making. That contrasts with broader spending priorities: 30% of organisations identified technology and AI modernisation as their leading area for investment.

The figures point to a gap between organisational spending plans and board governance. AI and digital risks were also among the most pressing board agenda topics, cited by 25% of respondents.

Financial strain

The survey found that financial pressure remains the dominant concern for mission-driven organisations. Some 53% of respondents identified an economic or funding downturn as their top organisational risk, and 41% said financial conditions, funding and grants were the most pressing item on the board agenda.

Budget allocation and fiscal management were identified by 45% of respondents as the most difficult issue to oversee. Respondents also cited legislative and regulatory change, cybersecurity, misinformation, reputational damage and rapid shifts in technology as connected threats that can move faster than traditional board processes.

Dottie Schindlinger, Executive Director of Diligent Institute, said boards understand the need to sharpen their strategic role but often lack the structures to do so.

"Mission-driven boards recognize the pressures facing their organizations and want to govern more strategically," Schindlinger said.

"Now, the opportunity lies in translating that understanding into repeatable governance practices, supported by technology that brings the right information and insights together, so directors can focus on strategy, test assumptions and make decisions with greater confidence."

Board routines

The research also suggests many board meetings remain focused on backward-looking reporting rather than future planning. Only 11% of respondents said their meetings were mostly forward-looking, while 32% described them as mostly retrospective.

Nearly half, 49%, said they wanted more time for strategic planning. Another 37% said they needed better tools and processes to manage agendas, board papers, minutes and follow-up actions.

Scenario planning was another weak point. Some 43% said their board does not currently conduct scenario planning, while 29% said it is handled mainly by management with limited board involvement.

That matters because respondents described risk as increasingly interlinked rather than isolated. Economic volatility, regulatory change, cybersecurity concerns and technology disruption were all presented as pressures that can affect mission-driven organisations at the same time.

Governance gap

The survey covered board members, executive directors and board secretaries across nonprofit and public sector bodies. Most respondents were based in North America, with smaller shares in Europe, Africa, Australia, New Zealand and the Middle East.

Diligent Institute set out six actions for boards and executives in response to the findings: shifting more meeting time towards strategic planning and decision-making; creating a more disciplined risk oversight cycle; making scenario planning routine; updating administrative board processes; treating board development and evaluation as core governance work; and approaching AI as both a governance tool and a cross-cutting risk.

The research suggests mission-driven organisations are not ignoring AI, but many boards have yet to integrate it into everyday governance. At the same time, immediate financial pressures may be crowding out changes to board practice.

For organisations that rely on grants, public money or donor support, concern about economic and funding downturns is likely to shape board agendas more directly than experimentation with new tools. Even so, the survey indicates that AI is moving up investment plans faster than it is entering the boardroom.

Just 11% of respondents said their board meetings are mostly forward-looking, while only one respondent reported AI being fully embedded in oversight and strategic decision-making.