
AI adoption within organizations is increasingly polarized, with Gallup data cited showing that while 77% of technology professionals use AI at work, overall workplace adoption rose only marginally from 45% to 46% in late 2025. This stagnation is attributed not to employee reluctance, but to aggressive uptake by leadership without corresponding redesign of roles and workflows at lower organizational levels. In the UK, research presented notes an 8% net job loss tied to AI alongside a 11.5% productivity increase, with younger workers expressing heightened concern over future employment security.
Supporting analysis emphasizes that AI utilized only in decision-making circles can compress organizations, trading resilience for short-term efficiency. Dave Sobel cautions that celebrating productivity gains without acknowledging operational fragility introduces organizational brittleness, as headcount reductions outpace tangible capability improvements across all layers. The discussion underscores the risk in pitching AI as a leadership tool without regard for its broader impact.
Additional topics include the risks of encryption practices—specifically Microsoft’s BitLocker—and the limits of user control over recovery keys when stored in the cloud. Dave Sobel highlights governance failures when MSPs assume encryption equates to privacy without explicit decisions regarding key custody and authority, noting that silent trade-offs can expose organizations to privacy vulnerabilities. Furthermore, coverage of CISA’s absence from RSA conference outlines how diminished federal engagement increases liability and ambiguity for MSPs tasked with interpreting security policy. New video authentication features from Ring are examined as evidence of a broader shift where provenance and chain of custody outweigh convenience, directly affecting the evidentiary value of managed data.
The overarching implication for MSPs and IT providers is clear: risk, authority, and liability are being systematically reallocated within the supply chain and between vendors, government, and service providers. Operational preparedness now depends on explicit documentation, governance choices, and advance recognition of liability transfer. Failing to adapt—by leaving deployment decisions, key management, and evidentiary workflows unexamined—may result in organizational fragility, legal exposure, and loss of client trust.
Four things to know today
00:00 Stalled AI Adoption and UK Job Losses Show Productivity Gains Are Not Broadly Shared
04:06 BitLocker Encryption Allows Microsoft Access to Recovery Keys Stored in the Cloud
06:21 CISA Breaks From Past Practice, Declines RSA Conference Appearance
This is the Business of Tech.
Supported by: https://scalepad.com/dave/
Support the vendors who support the show:
👉 https://businessof.tech/sponsors/
Get exclusive access to investigative reports, vendor analysis, leadership briefings, and more.
👉 https://businessof.tech/plus