This is a draft version! Do not share the link externally!

Report

Build to Lead: 2026 Enterprise Architecture Survey

Our 2026 survey reveals how architecture separates AI leaders from laggards, why governance is falling behind, and what it takes to scale AI securely.

AI leadership is increasingly defined by architecture, not investment alone. Our 2026 survey of senior technology leaders reveals how strong data foundations and proactive architectural decisions distinguish AI leaders from laggards. Yet as agentic AI advances, governance is struggling to keep pace, including in highly regulated industries. The findings highlight what it takes to scale AI securely and deliver lasting value.‍

No items found.

Why Architecture Determines Who Leads in the AI Era

‍

In 2025, our two-part From the Backroom to the Boardroom series (Part 1 and Part 2) showed how enterprise architecture evolved from a technical discipline into a strategic business priority. Our 2026 survey takes the next step, moving from architecture's strategic relevance to measurable differences in AI maturity and readiness. The findings reveal where organizations are pulling ahead, where critical gaps remain, and what separates ambition from execution.

‍

Data readiness predicts AI maturity

% reporting advanced or
transforming AI maturity

1.0%
Bottom
quartile
10.6%
2nd
quartile
24.3%
3rd
quartile
39.4%
Top
quartile

By quartile of data readiness  |  n = 415

Exhibit 1: Share of respondents reporting advanced or transforming AI maturity, by data-readiness quartile.

‍

Motivation defines integration depth

Cost and model
optimization
65%
35%
Both equally
51%
49%
Workflow redesign
for impact
53%
47%
Standalone / adjacent (periphery) Partially / fully embedded (deep)

Primary stated motivation for embedding AI more deeply  |  n = 415

Exhibit 2: Deployment depth reached, by primary stated motivation for embedding AI more deeply.

‍

A third of organizations are exposed on both fronts

Confident in
containment

5.5% Ungoverned &
confident
16.6% Governed &
confident
32.8% Ungoverned &
low-confidence
45.1% Governed &
low-confidence

Low confidence in
containment

Ungoverned for
agentic AI
Governance in place
(partial or dedicated)

n = 415. Magenta cell marks the double-exposure segment.

Exhibit 3: Governance status against confidence in containment. The magenta quadrant is the double-exposure segment.

‍

Governance maturity flips the accelerator-to-constraint ratio

Accelerator Constraint
59%
20%
Mature governance
(partially/fully automated)
32%
34%
Immature governance
(ad hoc / manual)

Share describing AI governance as an accelerator vs. a constraint on deployment  |  n = 415

Exhibit 5: Share describing AI governance as an accelerator versus a constraint on deployment, by governance maturity.

‍

Methodology

This report is based on a survey of senior technology and architecture leaders, fielded by Dialectica in August 2026.

‍

28%

C-level respondents

72% direct reports to C-level

87.5%

Companies >1,000 FTEs

12.0% at 501–1,000 FTEs

61%

Based in Europe

24% Americas, 11% MEA, 4% APAC

6

Priority sectors

Insurance, Financial Institutions, Energy, Industrial Goods, TMT, Public Sector

Supported by


More to Explore

No items found.
No items found.
Insurance
Financial Institutions
Energy
Industrial Goods
Technology, Media & Telecommunications
Public Sector
No items found.