Insights
Oliver Wyman just published a survey comparing what PE-backed and public-company CEOs are focused on, and one number is particularly relevant. 49% of PE-backed CEOs say falling behind on AI is a top three threat to their business. For public-company CEOs it’s 22%.
The report links this to the hold period: in private equity, with about five years to create value, lagging behind with AI will show up in the exit multiple.
Even though only 51 of the 415 CEOs surveyed are PE-backed, their direction is clear:
The redesign of roles and workflows is the part that decides whether AI pays off. When we see an AI initiative stall between pilot and EBITDA, the technology is rarely the cause. We would ask a portfolio company three questions. Which workflow is different once the AI initiative is live? Which decisions now sit with someone else? Which line in the P&L moves, and by when? If there are no changes, and people just have a new tool, the value creation plan won’t work.
The shift away from junior roles is a focal point. It’s one of the easiest AI savings to put in a model, which is probably why so many businesses are planning it. But entry-level roles are where future managers learn the business. Public-company CEOs rank succession and leadership development much higher (65% vs 37%) than PE-backed CEOs. This may have to do with hold-period economics as well as a longer view.
The report adds that CEO turnover is rising. If the junior layer is thinned in the first three years, there are few internal successors by year five, which is exactly when a buyer asks who will run the company next. Portfolio CEOs need to think about how they plan to grow their next leaders if there are fewer juniors to grow.
Because exits have stalled, holds are running longer than planned. Bain’s midyear report puts the implied capital cycle at about seven years. Also, a deal that once needed about 5% EBITDA growth now needs around 12% for a 2.5x return over five years. On top of this, the cost and capability of AI are moving fast. Therefore, the plan written at entry is likely out of date before exit, and it is worth planning for a mid-hold refresh from the start.
PE-backed CEOs say their boards have become more involved in finance (41% vs 26%), operations (25% vs 12%), and AI oversight (29% vs 22%). Public boards are leaning the other way towards strategy, governance, and succession. So, PE boards are where AI initiatives can be held to account, but only if directors agree what they are checking. Each AI initiative must be linked to a changed workflow, redefined decisions, and the P&L.
Where do you see the biggest gap between the AI plan at entry and what is delivering?
Sources: Oliver Wyman Forum, “The PE CEO Agenda: Moving at the speed of AI” (July 2026); Bain & Company, Private Equity Midyear Report (June 2026).
Choose a preferred time slot and tell us what you would like to explore. We will confirm the meeting and send you the invite.