Why we shouldn't focus on "early adoption"

I've never ridden an electric scooter. They've been around for years, but I've never seen the point: slower than a bike, without the physical benefits of walking.

And I don't feel any urge to buy one of those Norwegian "home robots" that have been circulating online lately. My life won't become meaningfully better because a machine empties my dishwasher.

I aim to use less technology, not more, and I'm definitely not an early adopter.

Still, I've been working with emerging technology for 15+ years. I gave my first keynote on AI long before ChatGPT existed, and I teach AI strategy to executives — even though I avoid outsourcing my own thinking to generative AI.

This might sound like a contradiction, but it serves a point.

My job is not to test all the latest technology; it is to understand it.

Still, when it comes to emerging technology, we often view adoption as a goal in its own right. In recent weeks, a few global reports have shown that Sweden is one of the countries "falling behind" in AI adoption, and I see people on LinkedIn expressing concern about it daily.

I'm not.

To me, early adoption isn't the point. Understanding is.

But understanding artificial intelligence doesn’t require that you use it daily. Nor does it mean that you become a prompt engineer or build your own models. It means recognising what the technology can and cannot do, understanding system-level risks, and interpreting new incentive structures. Then, assessing how these dynamics will affect an organisation’s strategy, operations and decision-making.

If anything, I worry more about leaders deploying technology they don't fully understand than leaders who are slow to adopt it.

In the last few months alone, we've seen real-world examples of AI browsers manipulated by malicious instructions embedded in websites and AI code agents deleting complete databases for software companies.

None of this is about a lack of adoption. It's about a lack of understanding.

If we removed the pressure to use every new tool and instead focused on helping leaders understand how the technology works and what it will mean — for society, for organisations, and for themselves as leaders and human beings — we would make far better decisions.

We should also ask who benefits from the adoption narrative. Much of the pressure comes from those who profit from faster adoption — vendors, consultants, and tool builders. Very little comes from people responsible for long-term organisational health, culture or ethics.

And as I wrote last week, implementing new technology at scale is never about the technology alone. It is about understanding people and the societies in which they operate. Yet in many organisations, these skill sets haven’t been meaningfully included. AI is technology, so it gets routed to IT — or to a Chief Digital Officer tasked with delivering pilot projects the CEO can mention in earnings calls.

Many organisations are working hard to look ahead.

But looking ahead and being ahead are not the same thing.

Most fail to create real value — not because the technology lacks potential, but because they run fast without knowing where they are going.

The world doesn't need faster adoption. It requires deeper awareness, better judgment, and leaders who know why they're adopting something new.

The leaders I trust most aren't the ones who adopt everything early. They’re the ones who combine curiosity with strategic thinking — who stay informed, evaluate what truly matters, and adopt when the timing is right.

The future will not be shaped by those who adopt first, but by those who understand best.

Anna

Weekly Recommendations

AI and Relationships #1 — The world's first AI Dating Café will open in NYC this December, offering romantic dinner experiences for you and your AI companion. This is a physical extension of the rapidly growing AI relationship industry. However, it comes with significant ethical scrutiny as critics and experts warn that such human-machine relationships pose serious downstream risks.

AI and Relationships #2 — Futurist Cathy Hackl dated four AI boyfriends for one week. Her report reveal the seductive comfort of synthetic intimacy, noting the AI's ability to mirror desire and offer constant affirmation. Still, the lack of true emotional depth underscores the irreplaceable, and often messy, value of authentic human connection.

Politics and Social Media — New research has revealed the profound speed at which social media can divide users, finding that subtle changes to user feeds can now increase political polarisation in just one week to the degree that historically has taken three years. The study shows that algorithms designed to maximize engagement, wields immense power to either rapidly deepen political division or, if configured differently, greater harmony.

Water and Climate Change — A new study warns that water scarcity could severely jeopardize the UK's net zero climate targets. Research found that the significant water demands of planned industrial projects, including carbon capture and hydrogen production, could push key regions into water deficits as early as 2030.

AI and Shopping — A new BCG report claims that approximately 40% of younger consumers already using AI tools when shopping and claim that cultural relevance and deep personalization now outweigh traditional brand loyalty, requiring companies to move from conventional marketing funnels to more agile AI-powered experiences.