Main Menu
Working together to deliver lasting impact in Europe, North America and Australia. Find out more:
Grow an exceptional career in partnership with exceptional people.
Hit enter to search or Esc to close
Popular searches
Reflections on the Enterprise AI Summit
When business-critical software can be built in hours, what happens to organisations designed to make decisions in months? And if AI expands our capacity tenfold or more, how do we decide what is worth doing?
These questions ran through the Enterprise AI Summit, hosted by IT Revolution in partnership with Newton, which brought more than 170 people from defence, healthcare, policing, infrastructure, government and retail to Bletchley Park on 2–3 November.
Bletchley Park brought people together to crack a complexity no single mind could solve alone and our first expert speaker of the day, Jacqueline de Rojas CBE, Chair of the Bletchley Park Trust and President of Digital Leaders, set the tone drawing comparisons with the 9,000 people who came to Bletchley during the Second World War to break encrypted enemy communications at speed and scale. The aim was a different kind of AI event, with speakers chosen for what they have delivered rather than their title, and with every talk covering what was tried, what worked, what failed and what it cost.
The atmosphere was lively from the start. Speakers were open about what had failed and what it had cost and each closed by naming what they wanted help with from the room. They stayed after their talks and joined the conversations that followed. Delegates from very different sectors used a shared challenge to ask each other for advice and insight they would not normally find in their own networks.
Jacqueline de Rojas CBE, Chair of the Bletchley Park Trust and President of Digital Leaders, used the 9,000 people recruited to Bletchley for how they thought to ask whether leaders are rewiring fast enough and asking the right questions. Boards, she argued, should measure outcomes, not pilots and hours saved, because speed without direction is “a bullet train going to the wrong station”.
Jondavid Black and Jeremy Knupp, Northrop Grumman, made the engineering case for reliable AI in mission-critical work – an agent that works most of the time is not enough, so agent workflows need the same testing and evidence, including proof that no required step was skipped, as any other critical system.
Fernando Cornago, adidas, described moving from AI hype to practice, with AI-generated content now on about half of its products and argued that organisations need to be fast and stay fast. He was candid about the downsides, from token costs to security pressures and the strain on people.
Lord Clement-Jones, whose parents met at Bletchley as codebreakers, advised boards to define their values and purpose before adopting AI, keep a human in command and assess impact up front. He also warned that firms must still teach judgement to future partners as entry-level work changes.
Barty Wardell and Nik Lebedenko, Vividata, showed how a team of fewer than ten engineers built airline software in a heavily regulated industry by pairing AI agents with automated checks before every merge, so speed and safety rise together.
Trevor Rodenhurst, Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police, described AI reducing administration time but increasing speed to conviction so officers can spend more of it on the street and criminals are off streets sooner.
Chris Strear, Intermountain Health and Rob Vickers, Newton partner, set out three horizons for AI in healthcare – an always-on “digital COO” for patient flow inside the hospital, predictive and preventive care across health and care and personal AI assistants for patients. Chris closed by asking why healthcare lags other industries.
Dame Emily Lawson, Newton’s Chief Operating Officer and Mallory Durran, Nesta, started from the question leaders should ask, not “what are they not telling me?” but “what question am I not asking?” They showed how a model that flags struggling government programmes worked where an earlier one had failed, because builders and users worked together and Emily argued that the machine is the easy part.
Matthew Skelton, Conflux and co-author of Team Topologies, argued that most of what AI needs from an organisation is already known from cloud and DevOps, avoid handoffs, align incentives, give agents clear limits and start from outcomes, not another technology-first initiative.
Nathan Labenz, Waymark and The Cognitive Revolution, gave a candid account of the frontier, arguing that AI systems trained to win can also cheat. He set out practical safeguards, supervise agents’ work, give them a way to escalate and keep the know-how to run critical systems without AI.
Marya Caples and Michael Winslow, Thrive Market, showed how a food safety manager used AI to replace a spreadsheet-and-email process for vetting ingredients and how engineering made that safe route available to everyone through two-day “dojos” where only non-engineers touched the keyboard.
Gus Paul, Morgan Stanley, showed how his team translates productivity gains into business value.
Dustin Warner, NRC Health, described replacing a core platform in 90 days by putting curious engineers beside the operations team. He then built a “synthetic org chart” that brought sales, service, operations and technology together around shared objectives without changing the formal structure.
Matt Klosterman, Hilton, showed how the company is widening who gets to build, with the share of his developers contributing to both iOS and Android rising from 7 to 100 per cent in months. He warned that simply going faster yields only 10 to 30 per cent.
Stuart Pearce, Hg, argued that writing code was never the real constraint, the constraint is now deciding what to build, verifying it and managing change. Teams with identical tools get very different results, depending on how they rethink the software lifecycle.
Keith Hebard, AWE, described scaling AI to improve pace, productivity and price together and the “warm, loving AI hug” he thinks adoption needs.
Adie Holt, Cosine and Peter Passaro, Babcock International, described building a sovereign UK AI model and why secure, locally deployed models matter where commercial cloud models can’t be used. Both argued the UK should not settle for being a permanent customer in the AI race.
Stuart Jennings, the AI Security Institute, which grew out of the taskforce that organised the 2023 Bletchley summit, explained how it tests frontier models before release. He said cyber capability is doubling roughly every five months and urged organisations to join the National Cyber Security Centre’s Early Warning scheme and get Cyber Essentials.
Dr Laura Gilbert CBE argued that even experts are poor at predicting what comes next, so leaders should focus on deliberate choices. She said builders can still choose to build fair tools and closed by asking the audience what society they want to live in and whether they are building towards it.
Speakers repeatedly challenged the idea that the prize from AI is simply doing today’s work faster or with fewer people. Gene Kim encouraged delegates to look beyond productivity gains of around 20 per cent and ask a bigger question, what could organisations use 10X gains to achieve that wasn’t possible before?
As AI accelerates individual activities, the constraint can simply move somewhere else. Gus Paul made the point that speed in one part of a business can create a bottleneck in another and Matthew Skelton talked about reshaping teams, workflows and incentives.
The bigger opportunity is not to apply AI to individual processes in isolation, but to step back and look across the organisation as a whole, how its operating model works, where silos exist, how decisions are made, how governance works and how activity flows through the system. That creates the chance to redesign the system around what AI now makes possible. It is when AI becomes part of strategic transformation, rather than being treated as the technology answer, that organisations can start to unlock the biggest impact.
As AI makes more information available, surfaces signals earlier and gives people across an organisation a greater ability to act, it changes what is required of leaders. Dame Emily Lawson’s discussion with Mallory Durran explored this shift, leaders don’t need to have all the answers themselves, but they do need to create the conditions for better and faster decisions across the organisation. That means being clear about outcomes, putting decision-making closer to the people with the right knowledge, and being willing to learn and adapt as the technology develops.
As Ben Grinnell, Newton’s Chief AI and Capabilities Officer, put it on day one: “We need to democratise decision-making to the place where the people know best. Move decisions to data not data to decisions”.
Again and again, speakers described organisations or teams with access to similar technology achieving very different results. Confidence, behaviours, incentives and people’s willingness to question established ways of working all matter and AI is loosening the boundaries between roles, with developers working across specialisms and non-technical colleagues contributing directly to products.
At the same time, examples from high-stakes environments showed that experimentation and speed don’t need to come at the expense of safety, security or assurance. Faster learning loops are critical for both and leaders increasingly have to create the conditions for both.
There was also a distinctly UK dimension. Regulation, security and safety sat alongside a strong focus on outcomes for people. Justin Geldof, Newton’s Technology Director, who has attended US summits, reflected on how UK regulation, governance and risk shape many of the same questions differently. The interesting point was not that the UK conversation was more cautious, but that ambition and responsible adoption were being considered together.
In the breakout groups, delegates asked how to tell whether AI is supporting their judgement or replacing it, where the next senior engineers will come from and how to separate business value from a rise in output. Gene Kim closed by saying the summit had shown what is possible and that the question now is how much ambition and imagination leaders can bring to the outcomes that really matter.
The conversations across the two days reinforced something we see in our own work. For 25 years, Newton has been about getting under the skin of complex systems, understanding how they really work and finding a way through to impact that lasts. AI doesn’t change that purpose. It gives us new ways to do it and the potential to take on complexity that was out of reach before.
We heard repeatedly that the biggest opportunities won’t come from treating AI as the answer in itself, or from applying it to individual processes in isolation. They come from combining what AI makes possible with a deep understanding of the organisation around it and redesigning how that organisation works to achieve much bigger outcomes. That is where we are focused, bringing leading AI expertise to the organisational complexity our clients actually face and turning it into meaningful impact.
The conversations will continue well beyond Bletchley and we will share more of what we learned in the coming weeks. No one has all the answers yet and rooms like this are how we all get better at finding them.
Thank you to everyone who spoke, joined and shared so openly, particularly those willing to talk about what didn’t work alongside what did and to Gene Kim and the IT Revolution team for bringing the community to the UK with us.
Digital hub
Blog
Would you like to visit our XXXX website?