This Advisor, Part II in a series that explores the current state of on-orbit data centers, spotlights the countries, companies, and initiatives leading their development. From national space agencies to emerging start-ups, it maps the key players building space-based computing infrastructure — transforming satellites into intelligent, autonomous systems that can process data in real time.

This Advisor explores the growing importance of lead independent directors (LID) in strengthening board oversight, especially in firms with concentrated leadership or weak governance. The LID plays a key role in balancing power, fostering accountability, and enhancing investor trust — but only when backed by real authority and engagement.

This Advisor argues that to unlock the full potential of private quantum hubs (PQHs), organizations must implement centralized governance systems tailored to the unique demands of quantum ecosystems. These systems must coordinate diverse technologies, manage hybrid architectures, and ensure secure, scalable access for a broad spectrum of users. Without such purpose-built governance, PQHs risk inefficiency and fragmentation — undermining their role as key enablers of enterprise quantum innovation.

As this Advisor explores, AI is transforming corporate governance by narrowing the information gap between boards and management. With greater access to data and analysis, directors can exercise more informed oversight— but face higher expectations, new legal questions, and cybersecurity risks.

In Part I of this two-part Amplify series on AI evaluation, we explore the impetus toward AI accountability that arises from tackling real problems in real-world settings. Understanding how AI can contribute, at what cost, and with what nth order effects in a given context requires rigorous socio-technical systems thinking.

As Marcus Evans, Rosie Nance, Lisa Fitzgerald, and Lily Hands explore, AI explainability is a legal requirement as well as a scientific challenge. Despite the EU and UK’s differing approaches in other aspects of AI regulation, both the EU and UK GDPR continue to uphold individuals’ right to an explanation of automated or semiautomated decisions that impact them significantly. The EU AI Act also provides a right to an explanation for individuals or organizations.

Kitty Yeung urges us to elevate our thinking and consider what we are trying to achieve — via AI or otherwise. She argues that the fashion industry has long failed to appreciate the imaginative journeys consumers are taking, journeys that weave together self, situations, social circles, and eclectic wearables. Destructive practices like fast fashion represent flawed attempts to address human complexity with incomplete information, cumbersome supply chains, and a narrow anthropology that undervalues consumers’ creative agency.

Joseph Farrington emphasizes the importance of evaluating AI systems against their end goals. In healthcare, where developing and deploying AI models is especially challenging, he argues for first modeling the business context and processes the AI will interact with — before moving ahead with development or deployment. This approach can be used to assess, in advance, whether a plausible AI model will provide the intended benefit. It can also be used to run alternative scenarios to identify what else might need to change for the AI to really work or what else might work better if the AI were in place.

Joseph Byrum introduces a framework to help organizations plan rationally and prudently for AI adoption. One element is defining performance thresholds beyond which emerging technologies become economically viable. Another is assessing how AI and humans should interact across different business functions: some tasks can be commoditized and handled by AI, while others remain critical differentiators under human responsibility, with hybrid possibilities in between.

Daniel Flatt contends that an evaluation framework that promotes accuracy and objectivity is a commercial necessity. He points to B2B publishing as a sector of particular note: an industry built on credibility and accountability that AI could undermine, even as it offers opportunities to accelerate time to output. In response, new tools for detecting inaccuracy and bias in AI-generated copy are emerging, alongside collaborations across the publishing workflow and the wider industry.

This Advisor series explores the emergence of on-orbit data centers — space-based platforms that enable real-time, AI-powered data processing and analysis directly in orbit. Here in Part I, we examine the enabling technologies, key benefits, and transformative potential of these systems for autonomous space operations, Earth observation, defense, manufacturing, and beyond.

Most organizations underutilize their boards, treating directors primarily as oversight agents rather than strategic partners. This Advisor recommends a shift toward deeper, ongoing engagement between directors and management to unlock the full value of board expertise. By institutionalizing both hard and soft skills — through regular interaction, strategic involvement, and better succession planning — organizations can ensure board knowledge becomes a lasting asset, not a transient one.

This Advisor explores the accelerating convergence of academic research and industry investment in quantum algorithms, marking a shift from theoretical promise to practical application. From simulating molecules in drug discovery to optimizing logistics and advancing financial modeling, quantum algorithms are beginning to deliver domain-specific value. As industries invest in identifying where quantum advantage matters most, the focus is turning to integrating these tools into real-world workflows and architectures.

This Advisor explores how CEO overconfidence influences firm complexity, drawing on analysis of over 14,000 earnings call transcripts. While confident leaders may aim to streamline operations, the findings show a 3.1% reduction in complexity among firms led by overconfident CEOs — raising concerns about oversimplification. Boards and investors should carefully evaluate whether reduced complexity reflects strategic clarity or signals deeper organizational blind spots.

This Advisor explores how cybersecurity vendors are harnessing AI to detect and counter increasingly sophisticated deepfakes. It examines emerging capabilities such as multimodal detection engines, real-time threat mitigation, forensic analysis, and behavioral biometrics — technologies designed to safeguard organizations against fraud, impersonation, and synthetic media manipulation.

AI’s rapid adoption offers transformative potential but also introduces significant risks — some with potentially irreversible consequences. This Advisor highlights the importance of strategic leadership in managing these risks through integrated business, AI, and organizational strategies. It underscores the need for human oversight in critical systems, structured AI risk management frameworks, and a commitment to responsible development.

Trevor Hunter examines how leader character strengthens board decision-making. As ESG considerations and the UN’s Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI) reshape board responsibilities, directors are now accountable to a broader set of stakeholders beyond shareholders. Hunter draws on the Leader Character Framework developed by Mary Crossan, Gerard Seijts, and Jeffrey Gandz of Canada’s Ivey Business School, highlighting its role in navigating complex — and sometimes conflicting — obligations.

Shuhui Wang and Hirindu Kawshala analyze more than 14,000 earnings call transcripts to examine how CEO overconfidence impacts firm complexity. They find that overconfident CEOs tend to reduce complexity, often at the cost of long-term alignment, as illustrated by John Flannery’s short tenure at General Electric. Their study underscores the importance of aligning CEO traits with a firm’s strategic and operational needs, particularly during leadership transitions. Boards must discern whether simplification efforts reflect sound strategy or risky overconfidence.

Siah Hwee Ang calls for a shift in how executives engage with boards — not just as monitors or advisers but as long-term strategic assets. He advocates for structures that tap into directors’ expertise through agenda setting, follow-ups, and subcommittees. Boards’ hard skills can be institutionalized via staggered succession, while soft skills can be preserved by documenting decision-making processes. Regular engagement is key, with boards contributing to short-, medium-, and long-term strategic discussions.

Filip Lestan and Ruy de Quadros Carvalho analyze 249 Brazilian firms to assess how board structure influences innovation governance. They found that forming innovation-related committees is far more impactful than vision statements or rhetoric, enabling boards to ask better questions and oversee complex initiatives. Larger boards are more likely to form such committees, while CEO duality and director busyness significantly reduce the likelihood. The article concludes with four actionable steps to strengthen innovation governance through board design.

David F. Larcker, Amit Seru, Brian Tayan, and Laurie Yoler explore how AI could reshape boardrooms by enhancing the volume, quality, and timeliness of information available to directors. AI can reduce information asymmetry, support predictive analysis, and enable real-time scenario planning. These tools help boards become more proactive and better prepared for meetings. However, the authors caution that greater access to information may blur the line between governance and operations, requiring executives to manage directors’ deeper involvement carefully.

David F. Larcker, Amit Seru, Brian Tayan, and Laurie Yoler explore how AI could reshape boardrooms by enhancing the volume, quality, and timeliness of information available to directors. AI can reduce information asymmetry, support predictive analysis, and enable real-time scenario planning. These tools help boards become more proactive and better prepared for meetings. However, the authors caution that greater access to information may blur the line between governance and operations, requiring executives to manage directors’ deeper involvement carefully.

This issue of Amplify invites a reexamination of what makes boards truly effective. It features a collection of articles that explore how boards can evolve beyond conventional roles to become active stewards of long-term value — drawing on leader character, data and analytics, behavioral insight, structural design, and strategic engagement.

Alessia Falsarone examines the evolving role of lead independent directors (LIDs), offering a five-part framework to assess when and how to appoint them. Although LIDs can strengthen board independence and communication, their function varies by context. In firms where the CEO also chairs the board, LIDs often serve as a bridge to management and stakeholders. In other cases, they foster open dialogue on issues like ESG and AI ethics. Falsarone illustrates this with examples, including Coca-Cola’s LID leading efforts in transparency and sustainability amid activist pressure.

Many organizations are stuck in pilot mode, using AI for incremental gains rather than transformative impact. This Advisor, based on ADL’s recent CEO Insights study, calls for a shift toward enterprise-wide adoption, strategic alignment, and long-term vision to fully capture AI’s disruptive potential and stay ahead of emerging competitors.