The real question is whether your Board understands what AI is doing and whether it is governing its use effectively.

Artificial intelligence has moved rapidly from an interesting new technology to a practical tool being used across associations every day. It writes content, analyses financial data, cleans membership databases, identifies trends, prepares reports, supports customer service, and even helps Boards manage their information.

A recent Association Forum Special Interest Group with association leaders demonstrated just how quickly this is happening. Most participants said their organisations already have an AI policy. Yet the discussion also revealed that having an AI policy does not necessarily mean an organisation understands how it uses AI.

And that creates a governance challenge.

From ChatGPT to Boardroom Bots

The range of applications was striking.

ChatGPT is being used broadly across organisations, while Canva is supporting marketing and communications. Microsoft Copilot is being explored to help staff and members find relevant information and documents.

Claude is being used for everything from analysing spreadsheets and financial information to cleansing member databases and identifying missing information. It has also been used to analyse past surveys and strategic planning projects, identify themes and issues, develop solutions, prepare KPI reviews and create monthly reports.

One organisation has used AI to develop a timeline for a 100-year-old association, cross-checking information and identifying gaps.

Perhaps most intriguing was an AI bot that attends Board meetings, prepares minutes and summarises discussions. Directors can then ask the bot questions about matters such as risk management.

AI is also being used for voice-based customer service, event planning, speaker selection, budgeting and developing themes.

The message is clear that AI is no longer simply a productivity tool, it is becoming an organisational capability.

But where does governance come in?

The discussion also highlighted some important questions for Boards.

Directors have a duty to exercise care and diligence. That responsibility does not disappear simply because information has been generated by AI. Directors who accept AI outputs without appropriate verification could expose themselves and their organisation to risk.

The principle should be simple: AI-assisted, not AI-decided.

AI can identify patterns, analyse information and suggest options, but human judgement remains essential, particularly when decisions involve strategy, finances, risk or people.

There is also an environmental question. AI requires significant computing resources, energy and, in some circumstances, water. Associations need to consider whether their use of AI is consistent with their environmental and sustainability commitments.

Five things Boards should consider

1. Do we have an AI policy and does everyone understand it?
A policy needs to be practical, communicated and regularly reviewed.

2. Are we verifying AI-generated information?
AI can be wrong, sometimes very convincingly so. Important information should be checked before it informs decisions.

3. Are we using AI where it genuinely adds value?
Look for opportunities to improve productivity, member services, decision-making and organisational capability, not simply opportunities to use AI because it is available.

4. Are we protecting confidential and sensitive information?
Boards should understand what information staff can enter into AI systems and the risks associated with doing so.

5. Does our use of AI reflect our values and responsibilities?
Consider privacy, ethics, environmental impact, governance and the organisation's broader purpose.

The technology will continue to evolve. The governance responsibility won't.

The best Boards will not be those that know the most about AI. They will be those that ask the right questions about how it is being used, what risks it creates and where it can deliver genuine value.

AI may be the most powerful new tool available to associations. But ultimately, the Board is still accountable for how the tools are used.

Tony Gleeson 

Associations Advisor

Associations Forum