Survey says: Senior leaders are using AI, but they could use more direction

May 8, 2026

4 min

Saleem Mistry


Over the years, study upon study has shown that senior leaders are slower to adapt to new technology – email, the Internet and social media – than younger employees. That’s not necessarily so with AI, according to the University of Delaware’s Saleem Mistry.


Mistry, associate professor of management at UD's Alfred Lerner College of Business & Economics, recently conducted a survey of more than 200 university alumni, 75% of which had more than 16 years of professional experience. He found that senior leaders are actively adopting AI to solve their biggest challenges. However, they are doing so largely without structured support or guidance.


Here are four findings from Mistry's survey that shows how AI is actually being used at the top.


Senior Leaders Are Overwhelmingly Self-Taught


Mistry said his most glaring finding is the gap between high AI adoption among senior leaders and the near-total absence of formal corporate support. Although a majority use these tools, they are almost entirely self-taught, which highlights visible opportunity that organizations aren’t really steering the AI conversation for leaders:


• High usage. 62% of all senior leaders surveyed use AI tools "regularly" or "occasionally" in their work.


• Training gap. Of those users, an overwhelming 80% report their organization provides "Never" or only "Sometimes" (mostly never) adequate training.


Mistry said this shows that leaders from VP level down are using tools like ChatGPT and Copilot informally to keep up with heavy workloads, without any real organizational guidance. The stakes are high. In the survey, a vice president of legal was using AI for compliance tasks and a manager of three was using it for performance reviews, both with no formal training. “These are senior leaders handling sensitive work while essentially figuring it out on their own,” Mistry said.


There is a clear ladder of AI use


Leaders are not using AI randomly. There is a clear progression in how they use it, moving through three levels.


• Tier 1 (The Drafters)

This is the most common starting point. Leaders use AI to improve writing and communication. They draft emails, shape documents, and refine tone. As one Director of Product put it, it helps him "polish phrasing" and adjust tone and voice.


• Tier 2 (The Synthesizers)

At this stage, leaders use AI to manage information overload. They summarize meetings, condense documents, and pull together research so they can keep up with large volumes of input. As one leader managing a team of 200 said, "Being a leader requires attention in a variety of areas. AI helps me manage the vast amounts of information I need to consume."


• Tier 3 (The Architects)

Here, leaders move beyond writing and summarizing. They use AI to automate parts of their work. This includes building agents, creating custom GPTs, or designing tools that track work and performance. One leader managing 300 people said, "It will eliminate half or more of my overhead."


Managers and individual contributors use AI for different reasons


People managers and individual contributors (IC) are using AI for very different reasons based on their roles.


• For people managers, their main challenge is scale. They are overloaded with communication and administration, so they use AI to reduce noise and keep up. They lean heavily on summarization and tone adjustment tools.


• For project leads and ICs, their focus is output. They use AI to produce work faster, including drafting content, building decks, writing code, or generating ideas. This difference reflects their jobs. One group is trying to keep up, the other is trying to produce more. It also shows that AI is not a single-use tool. Its value depends on the problem it is being used to solve.


This difference reflects their jobs. One group is trying to keep up, the other is trying to produce more. It also shows that AI is not a single-use tool. Its value depends on the problem it is being used to solve.


Resistance to AI is mostly intentional


Among the 38 percent of leaders who do not use AI, resistance is usually not based on lack of awareness. It falls into three groups:


The Ethical Objectors. Some avoid AI due to concerns about its broader impact.

• The Quality Skeptics. Some do not trust the output and feel it is not reliable enough for important work.

The Blocked. Some are not allowed to use AI due to company policy.


Mistry concludes that there is a clear overall pattern: Leaders are using AI in practical ways, but mostly without structured support or guidance.


“If it feels like you are figuring this out as you go without much help from your organization, that is consistent with what most leaders are experiencing,” Mistry said.


To connect directly with Mistry and arrange an interview, visit his profile page and click on the "connect" button. Interested reporters can also email MediaRelations@udel.edu.


Connect with:
Saleem Mistry

Saleem Mistry

Associate Professor, Management

Prof. Mistry's research seeks to unpack factors that shape fragmentation and integration within and between leaders, individuals and teams.

Organizational BehaviorTeam ChartersLeadershipMuliteamingTeam Resilience
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Delaware

Structural Engineering Expert Available to Discuss High-Rise Building Stability, Structural Failures and Building Safety featured image

1 min

Structural Engineering Expert Available to Discuss High-Rise Building Stability, Structural Failures and Building Safety

University of Delaware structural engineering expert Michael Chajes is available to discuss the engineering challenges involved in assessing and stabilizing high-rise buildings following structural damage, structural failures and concerns about potential collapse. Chajes, a professor of civil and environmental engineering and a registered professional engineer, specializes in structural engineering, structural health monitoring and forensic engineering. He has provided expert commentary to national media outlets on major structural failures, including the Surfside condominium collapse and the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse. His expertise is particularly relevant to the ongoing situation in New York involving a high-rise that is at-risk of partial collapse. He can discuss. • The conditions that can trigger structural instability during construction, renovation or changes in building use. • How engineers assess damaged structures and determine whether a building can be stabilized or safely repaired. • The engineering challenges involved in converting older office towers into residential buildings, including changes in structural loads, construction sequencing and temporary support systems. • How structural health monitoring and inspection technologies help engineers evaluate the safety of aging infrastructure and high-rise buildings. To arrange an interview with Chajes, visit his profile and click on the contact button. Interested reporters can also send an email to MediaRelations@udel.edu.

Post-earthquake crisis in Venezuela: University of Delaware experts available to discuss public health, infrastructure and relief featured image

1 min

Post-earthquake crisis in Venezuela: University of Delaware experts available to discuss public health, infrastructure and relief

Faculty from the University of Delaware’s renowned Disaster Research Center are available to comment on the back-to-back earthquakes in Venezuela. These experts can discuss critical infrastructure failures, public health threats, emergency logistics and community-led response efforts in the region. Available experts include: From what I’ve seen, it looks like the earthquake occurred on the boundary of the Caribbean and South American plate. A strike-slip fault similar to the San Andreas. There have been a lot of nonductile reinforced concrete frame building collapses. There may be an effect of soil given that a lot of the damage has been near the coast. Jennifer Horney (Professor of Epidemiology) Focus: Public health impacts, post-disaster waterborne/vector-borne disease outbreaks and the breakdown of healthcare delivery due to damaged roads and disrupted communication networks. Tricia Wachtendorf (Co-director, Disaster Research Center) Focus: Disaster response logistics, community improvisation, neighbors as first responders and how to donate effectively to maximize impact. Sarah DeYoung (Associate Professor, Sociology and Criminal Justice) Focus: Maternal and infant health/feeding in emergencies, pet and companion animal evacuations and community-level crisis decision-making. To contact these experts directly and arrange an interview, visit their ExpertFile page and click on the contact button. Interested reporters can also email MediaRelations@udel.edu.

From clay on the ground to construction on the moon featured image

2 min

From clay on the ground to construction on the moon

Building material samples from the University of Delaware spent six months mounted outside of the International Space Station, where the harsh conditions of low Earth orbit tested their limits. Some returned with higher measured strength than identical samples stored on Earth. The findings are a promising sign for the long-term goal of building infrastructure on the moon. There are no lunar supply yards, and transporting building materials from Earth would be prohibitively expensive. The solution may lie underfoot, in the form of lunar dust known as regolith. “Regolith is essentially a clay-like silicate material,” said Norman Wagner, Unidel Robert L. Pigford Chair in Chemical Engineering. “It is one of the most abundant materials on both Earth and the moon, which makes it interesting for construction.” Wagner's laboratory develops geopolymers, a cement alternative that binds clays into a strong solid through chemical reactions rather than high-temperature manufacturing. Their goal is to use regolith with minimal additives to produce construction materials without energy-intensive processing. The approach could contribute to more sustainable Earth-based construction, too. To evaluate how geopolymers hold up in space, the UD team sent thin plates made from commercially available simulated lunar and Martian regolith to the International Space Station as part of NASA's MISSE-20 mission. The findings, published in Advances in Space Research, showed the geopolymers did not deteriorate, and in some cases were stronger after their time in orbit. Lunar construction materials must not only survive space conditions, they also must be reliably manufactured on-site. In a separate study in Acta Astronautica, Wagner's team used artificial intelligence to tackle a practical challenge: not all lunar clays are the same. The researchers developed a machine learning model that can predict how strong a geopolymer will be based on the characteristics of the starting regolith and how it is processed. Complementary work from the Wagner lab offers insight into how geopolymers behave while being mixed, pumped and shaped before they harden. The researchers identified a key transition point, known as the critical gel point, at which the material shifts from a workable slurry into a solidifying structure. Mixing or shearing before that point did not affect how long the material took to harden or its final strength. This suggests that engineers may have flexibility in how they handle and process lunar construction materials, without compromising quality. That work appears in a special issue of the Journal of Rheology focused on materials behavior beyond Earth. To speak with Wagner about his space expertise, reach out to mediarelations@udel.edu.

View all posts