• 80% of surveyed executives in EMEA say an AI-related incident reached their board or C-suite in the past year, with only 40% changing AI governance policy or frameworks in response.
• 75% of respondents expect AI agents to have some level of autonomy with respect to decisions by 2027, yet only 37% say their governance is designed to scale with agentic AI deployment.
• When surveyed organizations want to deploy AI faster than governance and compliance frameworks are prepared for, nearly 60 percent (56%) continue within agreed risk limits while governance adapts; a third (33%) delay deployment until governance is ready.
• Only 37% of respondents have a formal, board-reviewed quantification of the financial risks created by gaps in their AI governance.

LONDON, Oct. 15, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- New research by IBM (NYSE: IBM) finds that AI-related incidents are reaching boardrooms across Europe and the Middle East among the organizations surveyed, but governance capabilities and risk accountability are not keeping pace with adoption of the technology.

Eight in ten executives surveyed say an AI-related incident – including an agent failure, data exposure, AI-driven decision error, or AI security breach – reached their board or C-suite in the past year. Yet fewer than half (40%) of those organizations cite a change to AI governance policy or framework in response.

When the pace of deploying AI outstrips governance and compliance frameworks readiness, rather than pause while governance adapts, the majority (56%) of executives surveyed report pressing ahead within agreed risk limits. Just a third delay deployment entirely until their governance is ready.

The survey, of more than 3,200 senior executives at organizations across eight countries in Europe and the Middle East, suggests governance policies will be tested further as AI agents take on more autonomous work. Thirty-five percent of respondents say they are running agentic AI in production today, yet three-quarters expect AI agents to have some level of autonomy towards decisions by 2027. Only 37% say their current governance system is designed to scale with agentic AI deployment.

Ana Paula Assis, IBM Senior Vice President and Chair, EMEA and APAC, said: "The AI debate has moved from adoption to governance and accountability. As organizations progress from AI assistants to autonomous agents, governance can no longer be treated as a compliance exercise. It has become a business requirement and value enabler.

The enterprises that can scale AI with accountability and trust will be postitioned to realize business value. That means governance must be built into how agents operate, with clear boundaries on what they can do, clear ownership when things go wrong, and controls that work in real-time."

Accountability & liability gap

Nearly all executives (98%) surveyed have formally assigned responsibility for AI risk at board level, including 26% with a dedicated board-level AI committee. Yet the research found no clear consensus on accountability for adverse outcomes from AI agents. An organization's CIO or CTO was the most frequently cited role with assigned responsibility for adverse outcomes from AI agents, selected by just 17% of all respondents.

Respondents' views on legal liability when an AI system causes significant harm were also divided: 20% say it should be shared proportionally between deployer and vendor, 19% say there should be a regulatory framework that does not yet adequately exist, and 14% say it should sit with the AI vendor or technology provider.

To manage increasingly autonomous AI agents making decisions without human approval at each step by 2027, executives expect to need formal legal or contractual frameworks defining AI vendor liability for agent failures (33%), defined human escalation thresholds (32%), real-time monitoring and audit trails of agent decisions and actions (30%) and the ability to immediately halt agent activity across the enterprise (29%).

Other key findings include:

• Measurement of financial risk exposure less established than board ownership: More than half (54%) of surveyed executives govern generative AI tools and agentic AI systems as distinct risk categories with separate governance frameworks and a further 38% apply the same core framework, but with additional controls to agentic AI. Measuring financial exposure from gaps in AI governance is less advanced: only 37% have a formal, board-reviewed quantification of the financial risk created by gaps in their AI governance.
• Supply chain risk: 54% of all respondents acknowledge gaps or limitations in how their governance framework covers the AI systems and models used by key vendors, technology partners and supply chain participants. Only 21% continuously monitor third-party AI risk and 13% apply independent assurance or certification requirements.
• Regulation shapes the pace regionally: In the EU, 41% of surveyed executives are accelerating governance investment ahead of the EU AI Act's high-risk obligations in December 2027, and a further 35% are on track with structured compliance plans. In the UK, sector regulator expectations are the most cited driver of AI governance investment (27%), while in Saudi Arabia and the UAE, national AI strategy requirements lead (61%).

Study methodology

The research was conducted by Censuswide on behalf of IBM among 3,221 executive management respondents, including C-level, at organizations with 1,000 or more employees in the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. The data was collected between 14 and 24 September 2026.

About IBM

IBM is a leading provider of global hybrid cloud and AI, and consulting expertise. We help clients in more than 175 countries capitalize on insights from their data, streamline business processes, reduce costs and gain the competitive edge in their industries. Thousands of government and corporate entities in critical infrastructure areas such as financial services, telecommunications and healthcare rely on IBM's hybrid cloud platform and Red Hat OpenShift to affect their digital transformations quickly, efficiently and securely. IBM's breakthrough innovations in AI, quantum computing, industry-specific cloud solutions and consulting deliver open and flexible options to our clients. All of this is backed by IBM's long-standing commitment to trust, transparency, responsibility, inclusivity, and service.  Visit www.ibm.com for more information.

Media contact: 



Gregor Hastings

IBM EMEA Communications

gregor.hastings@ibm.com

Eine Podiumsdiskussion der Wiener FPÖ zum Titel „Der Preis des Klimakommunismus – Wer zahlt die Zeche?“ sorgt in der Stadtpolitik für erheblichen Wirbel. Die Freiheitliche Akademie Wien, das Freiheitliche Bildungsinstitut und der FPÖ-Rathausklub laden am 6. Oktober in die Volkshalle des Wiener Rathauses und holen dafür James Taylor, Präsident des US-amerikanischen Heartland Institute, nach Wien. Taylor gilt seit Jahren als prominenter Akteur der internationalen Szene, die den menschengemachten Klimawandel in Zweifel zieht, und steht seit Langem in der Kritik, weil seine Organisation nachweislich Geld aus der fossilen Industrie erhalten hat.

Auf dem Podium sollen neben Taylor der Wiener FPÖ-Chef Dominik Nepp, Gerald Zmuegg von der Freiheitlichen Wirtschaft Wien sowie der Unternehmer und Politblogger Gerald Markel diskutieren. Eröffnet wird der Abend vom Wiener FPÖ-Klubobmann Maximilian Krauss. Inhaltlich bedient die FPÖ damit ein Narrativ, das sie seit geraumer Zeit in der Klimadebatte verwendet: Klimaschutzmaßnahmen werden als „Klimakommunismus“ adressiert und damit als ideologisch motivierte, wirtschaftlich schädliche Eingriffe gerahmt. Im Zentrum der Veranstaltung steht laut Ankündigung nicht die Abrechnung mit den Kosten der aktuellen Klimaauswirkungen, sondern mit jenen einer ambitionierten Klimapolitik.

Die Einladung Taylors fällt in ein Jahr, das in Europa und Österreich von außergewöhnlichen Wetterextremen geprägt ist. 2026 brachte neue Temperaturrekorde, eine hohe Zahl an Hitzetagen und Tropennächten und eine sich seit dem Frühjahr verschärfende Trockenheit. In der Landwirtschaft werden die Hitzeschäden europaweit auf 14 bis 17 Milliarden Euro geschätzt, für Österreich beziffert die Hagelversicherung den Dürreschaden auf rund 1 Milliarde Euro. Die Agentur für Gesundheit und Ernährungssicherheit (AGES) meldet zudem eine Rekordzahl an Hitzetoten: Im Juni und Juli starben demnach 646 Menschen in Österreich an den Folgen der Hitze. Vor diesem Hintergrund kritisieren Gegner der Veranstaltung, die FPÖ ignoriere die realen Kosten und Risiken der Erderwärmung, während sie über vermeintliche Kosten von Klimapolitik diskutieren lässt.

Wiens Bürgermeister Michael Ludwig (SPÖ) distanzierte sich in einer Stellungnahme deutlich von der inhaltlichen Ausrichtung des Abends. Die Stadt bekenne sich zu den wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnissen über den menschengemachten Klimawandel und zu einer verantwortungsvollen Klimapolitik, betonte er. Positionen, die Klimaschutz pauschal als „Klimakommunismus“ diffamieren, lehne er ausdrücklich ab. Zugleich verwies Ludwig auf die Rolle des Rathauses als „Haus der Demokratie“: Den im Gemeinderat vertretenen Fraktionen stünden grundsätzlich Räumlichkeiten für Veranstaltungen zur Verfügung. Kritik kam auch von den Wiener Grünen, deren Vorsitzender Peter Kraus die Einladung Taylors als „Verhöhnung“ der Bevölkerung bezeichnete, die mit den Folgen von Hitze und Dürre konfrontiert sei, und den Bürgermeister aufforderte, zu prüfen, ob für eine derartige Veranstaltung tatsächlich Räume im Rathaus zur Verfügung gestellt werden sollten.