SAP: Will AI Replace Humans For C-Suite Strategy Decisions?

From AI’s evolution as a back-office tool to a trusted adviser in boardrooms – a survey by SAP shows that 74% of executives now trust AI input more than advice from friends or colleagues when making strategic decisions.

Perhaps more striking is that 44% of respondents would allow Gen AI to override decisions they had already planned to make. 

This is a dramatic departure from traditional executive decision-making, which has long relied on human intuition and trusted advisers alongside data analysis.

“AI is taking on a new role as the C-suite’s strategic copilot,” writes Jared Coyle, Chief AI Officer for SAP Americas, in TechRadar. 

The survey says that technology now handles data analysis and recommendations for 52% of survey respondents, uncovers hidden risks for 48% and presents alternative strategic paths for 47%.

“AI is helping leaders go deeper – to challenge assumptions, test new scenarios and make more informed decisions about how their business operates,” Jared explains. 

The depth of executive’s reliance on AI

The scope of AI’s integration into decision making becomes apparent through practical applications. 

Jared describes using AI for both professional and personal tasks, from generating “personalised bedtime stories for my children” to planning family holidays. 

While acknowledging limitations – “it struggles to manage complex scheduling” – he emphasises that “AI has transformed how I approach and solve many problems, offering a helpful sounding board.”

Jared says: “SAP CEO Christian Klein recently shared that he uses Gen  AI to preview quarterly earnings results and better understand company performance.”

This means that AI’s influence spreads across C-suite functions, encompassing “automated anomaly detection in financial transactions for CFOs, streamlining contract reviews and generation of new contracts for CPOs, to COOs needing to evaluate capacity planning and manage variability in market demand,” as Jared says.

Document analysis also remains prevalent, with Jared identifying “the most common use case of all – summarising complex documents and topics and generating subsequent action items.”

This practical adoption shows AI’s analytical advantages.

“A trusted colleague might offer valuable perspective, but they haven’t parsed two billion data points before weighing in,” Jared says, highlighting the technology’s capacity to process information at scales impossible for human advisers.

How infrastructure challenges threaten AI’s integration success despite growing adoption

Despite growing adoption across sectors, obstacles persist in achieving reliable AI implementation.

“The reality is that many companies still lack the reliable data infrastructure needed to support high-trust AI use,” Jared warns.

“Lack of alignment between IT and business teams, patchy system integration and concerns about data quality all threaten to undermine the effectiveness of AI as a strategic advisor.”

These technical challenges require careful management as AI influence expands throughout organisations. 

In response, Jared advocates for balanced implementation strategies, noting that “while executives should continue to use AI to help with business matters, there’s a risk that critical thinking will be lost rather than enhanced as a result.”

The concern centres on maintaining human judgement where it matters most.

“True strategic decision-making will always require a human touch – which AI can’t replicate,” he says, suggesting that successful integration depends on augmenting rather than replacing executive thinking.

This balance points toward what Jared describes as fundamental changes in leadership approach.

“Going forward, we see leadership evolving from command-and-control to co-creation,” he explains.

“Those who thrive will be the ones who understand how to blend human experience, emotional intelligence and machine-derived insight into a cohesive and future-first strategy.”