Contributors

Related

Executive Summary 

The 2026 Womble Bond Dickinson Client Survey reveals a business landscape in which innovation, especially artificial intelligence, is advancing faster than regulatory clarity. Business imperatives are pushing organizations from experimentation to implementation before fully understanding the operational risks, governance requirements, and longer‑term legal and business implications.

Survey respondents identified AI governance, data privacy, cybersecurity, and cross‑jurisdictional regulation as top concerns. While recent federal policy signals an innovation‑first approach to AI, companies continue to operate within a fragmented regulatory environment shaped by active state‑level AI laws and emerging international requirements, including the European Union’s AI Act.

Despite this complexity, most organizations are staying the course on AI adoption, even as many cite uncertainty driven by inconsistent regulations, the absence of a cohesive federal framework, and the challenge of managing AI risks that extend beyond compliance to daily operations, vendor relationships, workforce impact, and accountability for AI‑driven decisions.

Together, the findings highlight the defining challenge of the Algorithm Economy: success depends not only on deploying advanced technologies, but on deploying the right solutions and rapidly building the governance, operational discipline, and risk management structures required to support them at scale—often before the operational risks and longer‑term implications are fully understood.

What Leaders Are Focused On

Emerging technology is by far the leading area in which clients are seeking guidance. Two themes clearly dominate:

  • Balancing technology implementation with compliance (57%)
  • Weighing risk versus reward (54%)

These pressures are most pronounced among Technology, Energy and Natural Resources, and Aerospace and Defense sector respondents.

Artificial Intelligence Leads the Conversation

Within emerging technology, AI stands apart. Respondents expressed strong interest in:

  • AI adoption, strategy, use cases, ecosystems, and economics
  • AI governance, including risk, compliance, privacy, and ethics
  • AI‑driven cybersecurity threats

Notably, respondents also cited WBD’s existing AI and AI governance thought leadership as among the most valuable content they receive—reinforcing demand for practical, business‑focused guidance.

Concerns extend beyond regulation to real‑world implications, including:

  • Legal exposure from rapid deployment
  • Environmental and energy demands of data centers
  • The impact of delegating critical decisions to automated systems

Risk Areas Beyond AI

While AI dominates, respondents also highlighted several adjacent risk areas:

  • Cybersecurity (53%)
  • Regulatory and compliance risk (47%)
  • Corporate/M&A activity (40%)
  • Intellectual property protection (31%)

Additional areas of interest—though cited less frequently—include ESG and sustainability, global business and cross‑border transactions, energy transition, and dispute resolution.

Threat Level Detected: Compliance and Governance Take Center Stage

When asked about tech‑related regulatory and compliance risks, respondents ranked the following as “very concerning”:

  • Using fair and unbiased AI systems (52%)
  • Preparing for data breaches and cybersecurity incidents (48%)
  • Integrating privacy safeguards into digital products (47%)

Closely following:

  • Building and maintaining internal AI governance frameworks (43%)
  • Keeping pace with cross‑jurisdictional regulatory change (41%)
  • Ethical deployment of emerging technology (36%)
  • Sustainability implications of data transformation (33%)

Very few respondents expressed uncertainty—underscoring that AI governance is viewed as an immediate operational requirement, not a future consideration.

Disputes, Enforcement, and Litigation Exposure

Technology‑related risk is translating directly into enforcement and litigation concerns. Respondents cited elevated concern across:

  • Defending against data breach and privacy claims (77%)
  • Responding to AI and cybersecurity inquiries (73%)
  • Navigating digital compliance audits and enforcement (72%)
  • AI‑related liability and class actions (60%)
  • Biometric litigation risk (44%)
  • Online arbitration and virtual litigation strategies (41%)

While AI‑related scrutiny is rising, data breach and privacy claims remain the highest‑intensity risk, with the greatest share of respondents rating them “very concerning.”

Transactional Risk Is Rising—but Not Universal

For organizations involved in digital transactions, the most common concerns include:

  • Cybersecurity and data protection obligations
  • Data rights, including ownership, portability, and post‑termination access
  • Intellectual property rights, including AI‑generated outputs
  • Liability allocation and indemnification

At the same time, nearly one‑third of respondents indicated they are not directly involved in digital transactions, reinforcing the need for role‑specific guidance.

Adjusting to a New Regulatory Reality

Federal policy has shifted. Executive Order 14365, signed in December 2025, signals an innovation‑first federal approach to AI oversight and a change in enforcement posture. Importantly, however, the Order does not preempt existing state AI laws.

As a result, companies must continue to navigate a fragmented regulatory environment, including:

  • Active state‑level AI laws in California, Texas, Illinois, and New York
  • Additional requirements coming online in 2026, including Colorado’s AI Act
  • International obligations under the EU AI Act’s phased implementation

Despite this complexity:

  • 42% of respondents say their AI plans have not changed
  • 33% remain unsure how federal policy will affect them

Among organizations staying the course:

  • 40% cite a lack of regulatory clarity
  • 31% point to the absence of a cohesive federal AI framework
  • Only 20% cite concern about state or local enforcement specifically

Budget constraints and limited internal AI expertise were also cited as barriers to expansion.

Confidence—and Uncertainty—Around Compliance

Organizations are divided in their confidence to manage evolving AI enforcement:

  • 49% say they are confident
  • 48% are unsure or neutral
  • 3% are not confident

Support for a federal AI framework is notable, but not decisive:

  • 40% positive
  • 44% neutral
  • 16% negative

Support is strongest in Aerospace and Defense and Energy and Natural Resources, and weakest among Education and Nonprofit sector respondents.

Data Privacy Remains Foundational

Looking ahead, respondents identified data protection priorities:

  • Implementing robust security measures (nearly 75%)
  • Third‑party data privacy vulnerabilities (45%)
  • Managing data consent and user rights (41%)
  • Organization‑wide privacy training (32%)
  • Gaps in data mapping (31%)
  • Reputational risk from data breaches (21%)

Final Thoughts (For Now)

The survey makes clear that organizations are operating in a world where implementation is outpacing understanding. Leaders remain committed to emerging technologies—especially AI—but with growing awareness that success in the Algorithm Economy requires more than speed. It requires disciplined decision‑making, governance, and risk management built fast enough to keep pace with technologies that promise significant value but are not yet fully understood.

In 2026, WBD attorneys will explore these issues in greater depth in our upcoming thought leadership series, The Algorithm Economy: How to Win in a Digital World.  Visit our Algorithm Economy hub for practical, business-focused insights throughout the series. 

About WBD’s Digital Solutions Team - The pace of digital transformation continues to accelerate, influencing every area of today’s business environment. Our Digital Solutions Team helps organizations navigate this landscape, offering integrated support across compliance, transactional, litigation, and intellectual property matters.