CCI staff share recent surveys, reports and analysis on risk, compliance, governance, infosec and leadership issues. Share details of your survey with us: editor@corporatecomplianceinsights.com.
AI makes GRC work harder, nearly half report
More than 40% of GRC professionals believe AI tools are adding to the difficulty of their duties, according to a survey by Drata, a cybersecurity and compliance automation platform.
The survey of 300 IT and security professionals at large organizations found that 43% said their current AI tools have actively made their jobs harder.
“That number alone should reset every conversation happening in GRC procurement, board meetings, and vendor briefings right now,” researchers said in the report. “The technology that was supposed to absorb the manual load, accelerate the judgment work, and free teams from compliance drudgery is, for a substantial share of practitioners, doing the opposite.”
Reports of dissatisfaction with AI vary based on revenue, the survey found, with those at higher revenue-generating firms less likely to say AI is making their jobs harder. Among respondents at companies making $250 million or more per year, just 36% say AI makes their work more difficult compared to 55% of those whose firms make less than $250 million per year.
Other findings paint a less-than-rosy picture of AI in GRC. Nearly all respondents (90%) admit some of their AI investments have fallen short of expectations, while nearly three-quarters (71%) reported that an AI tool used for GRC functions has directly caused a failed audit or lapsed regulatory standard.
Other keys findings include:
- 33% of organizations say AI adoption has outpaced their ability to monitor or govern it.
- 87% of professionals lack full visibility into the AI tools employees are using.
- 83% report being at least partially unprepared to handle the coming wave of AI integration.
- 63% of GRC teams have absorbed workload increases of at least 10% without a single new hire.
Most M&A leaders don’t believe a human should solely make the signing decision
Fewer than half of senior dealmakers believe signing a merger or acquisition deal should always remain solely a human responsibility, according to a new survey by Datasite, an M&A information platform.
The survey of 1,000 executives, directors and senior leaders across 27 countries showed that 45% believe the decision to proceed to signing should be entirely a human one, while 33% said it should be an AI recommendation that humans approve and 22% believe it should be an AI-informed human call. Still, 58% say they require human validation or review of AI outputs.
Most dealmakers say AI is becoming a necessary part of M&A, the survey found, with nearly two-thirds (62%) of respondents saying that relying solely on human decision-making is no longer defensible in complex M&A. Just under half (43%) believe AI already makes better deal decisions than humans in some situations, and nearly three-quarters (71%) believe firms that fail to adopt AI today won’t be as viable within five years.
Other key findings include:
- 96% of dealmakers are using or exploring AI for sourcing and screening opportunities.
- 24% say AI helped them complete a deal they otherwise would have missed.
- 50% have AI regularly embedded in due diligence, the stage delivering the highest reported ROI.
Leaders twice as likely to use shadow AI than lower-level workers
Executives and other company decision-makers are using unauthorized AI at double the percentage of rank-and-file employees, according to a survey by TrustedTech, Microsoft cloud solution provider.
Nearly two-thirds (65%) of senior decision-makers at organizations reported using shadow AI, or unauthorized AI tools, vs. 31% of non-decision-making employees, the survey about 2,000 US and UK companies found. Shadow AI use is even higher at the executive level — 73% of C-suite execs reported using shadow AI; that’s nearly double rate of entry-level employees, 36% of whom say they use unapproved AI tools.
Perhaps paradoxically, decision-makers are also more likely to say they are concerned about the use of shadow AI in their organizations — 56% of decision-makers vs. 31% of others. The decision-making group also has a rosier outlook on AI generally, as they are both more confident they’re using it effectively (78% vs. 43%) and more celebratory of its use in the workplace (51% vs. 25%).
