SPEAKERS: Subash Anbu, director, Field Fastener; Annarie Lyles, third-generation owner and board vice chair, Lyles Diversified Inc.; Ben Persofsky, head of the BBH Center for Family Business, Brown Brothers Harriman; Dennis Prischak, president, CEO and second-generation owner, Plastek Industries Inc.
PERSOFSKY: What is keeping private company owners awake at night today that boards were barely discussing five years ago?
PRISCHAK: Aside from growth and profitability, the two things that worry me and my brothers the most are cybersecurity and AI. Cybersecurity because it can become a threat at any moment. AI because we still don’t know exactly where it’s going. We don’t want to get left behind, but we also want to use it thoughtfully.
Our employees are nervous about it, and while we’re a manufacturing company, we spend a lot of time communicating about these issues. We try to be transparent and let people know we’re working through it together. Five years ago, these were not topics we spent much time discussing. Today, they’re front and center.
LYLES: I think the challenge is the sheer speed and complexity of change. Everything is interconnected now. The issues don’t arrive one at a time. They arrive all at once. What we worry about on our board is whether our executives have the capacity to respond effectively. Do they have the resources they need? Are they properly focused? Are we overextending key leaders?
For us, resilience starts with making sure the leadership team has the support necessary to manage constant change.
ANBU: It’s hard not to be excited and concerned at the same time. AI is going to impact us one way or another. It affects cybersecurity, geopolitics, markets, business models and how people work. Just when we thought we had moved beyond one disruption, another appeared.
That’s why boards need a framework for thinking about risk. The specific issues will change over time. A few years ago, everyone was talking about ESG. Today we’re talking about AI, governance and technology. The categories evolve, but the need for disciplined oversight remains.
What concerns me most is the human impact. How do these changes affect employees? How do they affect different generations? How do they change the way wealth is created and work is performed? I don’t think we’ve fully grasped those implications yet.
PERSOFSKY: How are boards approaching AI today?
LYLES: One of the most interesting conversations we’ve had recently involves hiring. A CEO I know received dozens of job applications that all looked remarkably similar. His response was, “Let’s assume everyone is using AI. Show me your prompts.” He wanted to understand how candidates were thinking rather than simply evaluating the final product.
That same concept is emerging inside organizations. If employees are going to use AI, we need safe ways for them to experiment. We need examples, case studies and guardrails. We find ourselves talking about prompts and AI usage in ways that would have seemed unusual just a few years ago.
PRISCHAK: Our board has been discussing AI for at least two years. At first, it felt like this enormous unknown. We weren’t sure where it was headed or what it would mean for the business.
What changed for me was seeing practical applications. I record an annual video message for employees. We used AI to translate it into Portuguese and Spanish using my own voice and inflections. Employees thought I had suddenly become fluent in multiple languages.
The same thing happened with writing. I take a lot of pride in my communications. I wrote an employee letter, then ran it through Microsoft Copilot. It improved the letter while still sounding like me. That was the moment I started to appreciate the technology’s potential.
Now we have teams throughout the company experimenting with different use cases and exploring where AI can create value.
ANBU: The first responsibility of boards is education. Two years ago, everyone suddenly became an AI expert. The reality is that very few people truly understood the technology. Boards need to keep learning and recognize that this is not something they can avoid. It doesn’t matter whether you’re a large public company or a smaller private company. Your customers, suppliers, lenders and competitors are all dealing with AI.
The question is not whether you will engage with it. The question is whether you’ll engage with it intelligently. Boards should be asking how the technology supports strategy, how it creates value, how it changes business models and how it can be deployed securely. Most importantly, they should recognize that learning never stops. This technology is evolving faster than any technology I have seen in my career.
PERSOFSKY: What separates more advanced board conversations about AI from the basic discussions many organizations are still having?
ANBU: The more advanced conversation begins with strategy. Every company has a three-year or five-year plan. Every company has objectives. The question is how AI helps achieve those objectives.
Some companies use AI to gain real-time inventory visibility through computer vision, imaging, Internet of Things sensors and machine-learning models. These tools automatically detect inventory levels and track asset movement, improving operational efficiency and financial performance.
That’s where the conversation becomes meaningful. It’s not about deploying AI because everyone else is doing it. It’s about solving a business problem.
The board’s role is to encourage experimentation while maintaining discipline. Start with a manageable use case. Build a minimum viable product. Learn from it, and adjust.
Agility matters.
PRISCHAK: The discussion isn’t simply, “What is AI?” The discussion is, “What are we doing with it?” That’s where our board has pushed us.
Our directors challenge management to think more proactively. They want us experimenting. They want us learning. They want us preparing for what’s next.
As a CEO, that creates healthy pressure. Sometimes the board asks questions and I realize we haven’t explored an area deeply enough yet. That’s valuable.
LYLES: I think boards also need to recognize that AI is ultimately a people issue as much as a technology issue. The technology will continue evolving. The bigger question is whether organizations can adapt alongside it.
How do employees use it responsibly? How do leaders build confidence rather than fear? How do we create environments where people can learn and experiment safely? Those are governance questions too.
PERSOFSKY: What should boards keep in mind as they navigate this period of rapid change?
PRISCHAK: Communication: Whether we’re talking about AI, cybersecurity or any other emerging risk, employees need transparency. People want to understand what’s happening and what it means for them. If you don’t communicate, uncertainty fills the vacuum.
LYLES: Capacity matters. The pace of change is relentless. Boards need to make sure management teams have the resources, focus and support required to respond effectively.
Resilience isn’t just about surviving disruption. It’s about maintaining the ability to adapt.
ANBU: Stay curious and stay humble. We have not even scratched the surface of what’s coming. Boards should be learning continuously, experimenting thoughtfully and involving employees in the journey. Technology will continue changing. The companies that thrive will be the ones that remain agile, keep people engaged and never stop learning.