Every board needs to confront what artificial intelligence (AI) means for their company’s business model and their ability to create shareholder value. That urgency sets the tone for this episode, where host Skadden partner Ann Beth Stebbins moderates a discussion about how boards are overseeing their companies’ use of AI — and how they can use AI themselves in their oversight role.

For insights, Ann Beth sits down with Sumaiya Balbale, a director at Shake Shack, and Skadden colleague Don Vieira, who heads the firm’s tech policy practice and advises companies on AI governance.

Sumaiya says that directors should ask sophisticated, pointed questions about a company’s use of AI. She says that Shake Shack is employing AI in various aspects of its business, for example, to make better predictions about customer flows, inventories and orders, ultimately, to improve the customer experience. She encourages directors to use AI tools themselves as an effective path to building comfort with, and understanding of, AI.

Don also encourages directors to develop AI literacy, becoming fluent in where and how AI is being used in the company. But companies need to facilitate AI use by directors in ways that don’t compromise confidential information, such as introducing such information into a public chatbot.

Audit committees at some companies are taking the lead on understanding AI risks, he says. And nomination and governance committees are increasingly focused on whether the board itself and management have adequate AI literacy, or whether they need to find people to help assess AI, both as an opportunity and as a risk.

“Because the technology is changing so quickly, the board has to have some broad stroke principles rather than hard and fast rules,” Sumaiya says. “You don’t want to have a framework that’s obsolete two months later when the latest model comes out.”

Companies “need to enable an environment where people feel like AI fluency is important and critical,” and make “sure that people feel empowered to understand this technology, to use it to find creative applications, to identify the risk, but also to grow in their own talent and capabilities,” Sumaiya says.

Don suggests tempering optimism about AI’s capabilities with an appreciation of its risks. As one example: Some companies have been accused of “AI-washing,” claiming that AI is building efficiencies when it is not. “It’s critically important that the board vet that and make sure it’s part of its oversight process,” he observes.

Tune in for a practical, candid discussion about how boards can navigate AI as both a strategic opportunity and a governance responsibility.

Name: Ann Beth Stebbins

Title: Partner at Skadden

Connect: LinkedIn

Name: Sumaiya Balbale

Title: Board member, Shake Shack

Connect: LinkedIn

Name:

The federal government has made sizeable investments in several private companies and is steering inbound foreign investment — the most significant U.S. government involvement in the private sector outside of wartime economies. Mick Mulvaney, first-term Trump White House chief of staff and former director of the Office of Management and Budget, joins Skadden M&A partner Ann Beth Stebbins to explain what this means for corporate boards.

Although some companies are actively seeking government capital, Mulvaney point to potential dangers as he views the government as “dramatically less disciplined than the private sector.” He predicts the trend of government as a source of private capital will continue regardless of which party controls the White House, representing a fundamental shift in how both Republicans and Democrats view the government’s role in the economy.

Mulvaney warns companies to think carefully before taking government money. Do businesses truly understand what it means to have Uncle Sam as a co-owner on their board? What happens when administrations change and policies shift, he asks?

Ann Beth points out that none of the deals to date include redemption features, so companies cannot easily buy back government stakes. Even if there were a redemption feature, Mulvaney adds, it could be difficult to exercise that if the government does not want to be bought out. “How would you feel about it — when you have to have a relationship with the government in your business — how would you like to [be] at that point?” he asks.

Having policies to promote national and economic security makes sense, Mulvaney says, but there are “other things the government can do that do not involve the actual ownership of the means of production.”

Mulvaney supports the Trump administration’s negotiating with countries such as Japan and South Korea to direct investment into the U.S. in exchange for access to the U.S. market.

He says that we have only seen the first moves on all these fronts. “They’re going to continue to pursue government ownership of private companies and at the same time are also going to continue to try to encourage more direct foreign investment and then look for places for Americans to invest overseas…. [W]hat you’re seeing now, you’re going to get for the last three years and three months of this administration…. because they are absolutely committed.

Name: Ann Beth Stebbins

Title: Partner at Skadden

Connect: LinkedIn

Name: Mick Mulvaney

Title: Senior Advisor, McLarty Associates

Connect: LinkedIn

☑️ Follow us on X & LinkedIn.

☑️ Subscribe to The Informed Board on Apple Podcasts,

The economic playing field is being reordered. What does that mean for boards?

“Decisions that are being made today are going to be existential to the long-term viability of the companies that they're overseeing,” suggests Kevin Kajiwara, co-president of Political Risk Advisory at Teneo, who advises Fortune 100 CEOs on geopolitical risks and their strategic implications.

Kevin joins Michael Leiter, head of Skadden’s National Security Practice, and host Ann Beth Stebbins, a Skadden M&A partner, in a conversation about how boards can effectively exercise oversight in today's geopolitical environment.

The U.S. had a remarkably consistent role shaping the general economic trajectory of the regulated free market for decades, Kevin says, but that playing field is now being reshaped, and “boards need to ask themselves if the type of economic actors that prevailed during the previous period will continue to be the preeminent actors going forward.” It is not yet clear what shape the new global paradigm will take, he says.

Mike emphasizes that political risk is no longer just dinner conversation at board retreats. Political decisions around the globe directly impact quarterly results, annual performance and future viability through effects on supply chains, tariffs, technology controls and data access. Business decision in one region now trigger counter-reactions from other jurisdictions. “If boards aren't thinking about it in those terms — the political decisions around the globe that will have direct impact on their quarter, on their year, on their viability in the future — they're not very good boards, and the company may not be around very long,” he says.

Boards can no longer focus only on the fundamentals of a company, because too much depends on external, political factors, he says. And political risk is no longer limited to the consequences of the next election.

Both guests recommend that boards incorporate international expertise when evaluating their own composition. Boards should also institute regular updates from management on geopolitical risks, and consider conducting scenario planning exercises to test management assumptions. Companies should review and update disclosures, including risk factors, to demonstrate board engagement and support management in navigating an increasingly complex global environment.

Name: Ann Beth Stebbins

Title: Partner at Skadden

Connect: LinkedIn

Name: Mike Leiter

Title: Partner, National Security; CFIUS; Cybersecurity and Data Privacy; Congressional Investigations; Artificial Intelligence, Skadden

Connect: LinkedIn

Name: Kevin Kajiwara

Title: Co-President, Political Risk Advisory, Teneo

Connect: LinkedIn

☑️ Follow us on X &