AI governance: A CX leader's guide to responsible AI implementation

The excitement around AI's potential to personalize interactions, streamline operations, and predict customer needs can easily overshadow a critical reality: governance isn't optional – it's essential.

Whether you're piloting your first artificial intelligence (AI) application or scaling across multiple touchpoints, understanding the governance framework that protects your customers and your business is paramount.

Don't miss any news, updates or insider tips from CX Network by getting them delivered to your inbox. Sign up to our newsletter and join our community of experts. 

Learn More

The regulatory landscape has arrived

The days of moving fast and breaking things are behind us. AI governance is no longer a future consideration; it's a present necessity, but it’s trying to be shaped by regulations worldwide. 

However, getting AI rules approved is easier said than done due to factors including AI’s rapid evolution, a lack of technical expertise among lawmakers, global and regional regulatory differences, and the inability to strike a balance between fostering innovation and risk mitigation. As a result, there have been delays in gaining approval across sectors and regions. 

The European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act, which began enforcement in phases starting in February 2024, represents the most comprehensive regulatory approach to date. For CX leaders, this means understanding risk classifications that directly impact customer-facing applications. High-risk AI systems – including those that could influence customer decisions or access to services – require documentation, risk assessments, and human oversight. If your company serves EU customers or operates in Europe, compliance isn't negotiable.

Beyond Europe, there are laws in the UK like GDPR and other laws that cover AI, with a few AI laws awaiting approval and enactment in Parliament. The EU AI Act does apply to any organization outside of the EU conducting business in the EU. There are also California's AI transparency laws that require disclosure when AI significantly influences decisions affecting consumers. But many rules, such as Canada's Bill C-27, that address algorithmic accountability, have been halted or are facing significant hurdles.

Global organizations do need to navigate a patchwork of requirements that differ by jurisdiction, industry, and use case.

This fragmentation creates complexity, but it also clarifies a crucial point: customers expect transparency about how AI affects them, regardless of their location.

The reality gap: What the numbers reveal

Here's where the conversation gets real. While Gartner cites that 80 percent of companies will either be using or planning to adopt AI-powered chatbots for customer service by 2025, the results are far more mixed than headlines suggest. Only 25 percent of contact centers have successfully integrated AI automation into their daily operations – a sobering statistic that reveals how difficult implementation is.

Perhaps most telling: 44 percent of organizations experienced negative consequences from AI implementation, according to McKinsey. That's not a small number. When customers interact with poorly implemented AI, they don't just abandon the interaction – they question whether the company is competent enough to use the technology responsibly.

On the satisfaction side, the picture is more nuanced. In 2024, Salesforce noted that only 42 percent of customers trust businesses to use AI ethically, a decline from 58 percent in 2023.

Your AI implementation might be technically sound, but if customers perceive it as unethical or invasive, you've lost trust regardless of its effectiveness.

The good news? When companies used any type of AI for their customer interactions, they saw customer satisfaction improve by 20 percent. This suggests the opportunity is real, but execution matters enormously. 

Gartner reported that it expects in 2025, 80 percent of customer service and support organizations will be using generative AI to boost agent productivity, and the applications extend well beyond chatbots. Contact centers are deploying AI for intelligent call routing that matches customers with the best agent based on interaction history and sentiment, real-time agent assist tools that surface relevant knowledge and generate response recommendations, automatic ticket classification that categorizes requests by topic and urgency, call summarization that reduces post-call work, and predictive analytics for churn prevention and proactive outreach. 

Gartner projects that in 2026, technology will automate one in 10 agent interactions. 

The strategic question for CX leaders isn't whether to implement AI – it's which applications to prioritize and how to govern them for real customer value.

Keeping customers at the center of AI governance

Here's where many organizations stumble: they build governance frameworks around compliance checkboxes rather than customer trust. These are not the same thing.

Customer-centric AI governance starts with a fundamental question: How will this AI system affect our customers' experience, privacy, and autonomy? This question should drive every governance decision you make.

Consider these customer-impact scenarios:

Personalization with privacy in mind: Your AI system learns individual preferences to tailor experiences. But customers increasingly expect control over their data. Governance frameworks should mandate transparency about data collection, clear opt-in mechanisms, and easy opt-out pathways. A customer shouldn't discover they're being profiled through targeted messaging; they should actively choose it.

Fairness in automated decisions: If your AI system routes customers to different service channels, determines support priority, or influences recommendations, bias matters intensely. Customers from underrepresented groups have experienced algorithmic discrimination in lending, hiring, and customer service. Your governance must include bias auditing, diverse testing datasets, and mechanisms to identify and correct unfair outcomes before they reach customers.

Explainability when it counts: When AI influences significant customer decisions – loan approvals, service eligibility, pricing – customers deserve to understand why. "The algorithm decided" isn't an acceptable customer service response. Governance should require that high-impact recommendations include explainability mechanisms, particularly for customers who question outcomes.

Protecting against AI manipulation: As AI becomes more sophisticated, the risk of manipulation increases. Governance frameworks should prevent using AI to exploit customer vulnerabilities or create artificial scarcity, urgency, or psychological pressure. This isn't just ethical; it builds long-term loyalty.

Building your AI governance framework: Monitoring for real impact

So how do you translate regulatory requirements and customer-centric values into operational governance? More importantly, how do you ensure your AI is helping customers, and what happens when it isn't?

The first principle: governance must include metrics that matter to customers, not just business metrics. Cost reduction and operational efficiency are important, but they shouldn't be your only measures of success. 

NVIDIA found that successful AI implementations report that nearly half (46 percent) of financial institutions using AI have seen improvements in customer experience, with strong correlations between intentional workflow redesign and meaningful business impact. But what about the implementations that aren't working? That's where governance becomes your early warning system.

Start with an AI inventory and center of excellence integration

Document every AI system your organization uses or plans to use, including third-party tools and embeddings in existing platforms. Classify them by risk level based on regulatory frameworks. A chatbot answering general questions is lower risk than an AI system deciding credit eligibility. 

If your organization hasn't already established a Centre of Excellence (CoE) for AI, now is the time. A CoE serves as the hub for AI strategy, best practices, and governance – bringing together product, technology, compliance, and CX leaders. If you already have one, ensure that customer experience considerations are embedded into AI roadmap prioritization.

Your governance framework should flow from and feed back into the CoE, creating a feedback loop where learnings from deployed systems inform future AI investments. This inventory and CoE structure become your foundation for targeted, strategic governance.

Establish clear accountability and cross-functional alignment

Governance fails when everyone assumes someone else is responsible, or when decisions live in silos. AI governance requires buy-in from technology, legal, compliance, product, operations, and CX. Establish a cross-functional governance committee that meets regularly – at minimum quarterly, but monthly for actively deployed systems.

Define clear roles:

• CX serves as the customer intelligence voice, flagging when AI isn't meeting customer expectations or generating complaints.
• Technology owns implementation, performance monitoring, and technical solutions. Legal and compliance ensure regulatory adherence.
• Operations manages escalation and incident response.
• Product owns roadmap decisions about what to build or modify.

The committee structure matters less than clarity on who has input, who makes decisions, and how quickly the group can respond when issues arise.

Create transparency policies

Develop standards for when and how your organization discloses AI use to customers. Some organizations take a minimalist approach, disclosing only when required.

A more customer-centric approach goes further: explaining why AI is used, what it does, and how customers can provide feedback.

This transparency often becomes a competitive advantage.

Implement testing and auditing

Governance isn't static. Require regular testing for bias, accuracy, and fairness – ideally before deployment and periodically thereafter.

This includes stress-testing with edge cases and diverse populations. Document findings and remediation actions.

Build in human oversight

Governance frameworks should specify when human review is required.

For high-impact customer decisions, direct human review is often necessary. For moderate-impact decisions, escalation mechanisms for unusual cases may suffice. For low-impact decisions, human-in-the-loop monitoring of system performance may be appropriate.

Monitor what matters to customers

Track metrics that correlate with customer satisfaction: resolution accuracy, first-contact resolution rates, customer effort score, and sentiment.

Many organizations focus on cost reduction without measuring whether customers are better served. If your AI is 30 percent faster but wrong 20 percent of the time, you've optimized for speed, not customer value.

Compare performance against your human baseline. CX should report these findings to your governance committee on a defined cadence – monthly dashboards, quarterly deep dives. This isn't CX policing the AI; it's CX providing essential customer data that informs cross-functional decisions.

Define decision protocols for when adjustments are necessary

Governance should include predetermined decision frameworks for different scenarios. If customer satisfaction drops below the threshold, what triggers? Does CX escalate to the committee? Who decides whether to investigate, modify, or pause the system? If accuracy falls below acceptable levels, what's the process?

Create a playbook:

• Level 1 issues (minor performance dips) might require a quick technical review.
• Level 2 issues (customer complaints about bias or accuracy) require full committee review and customer communication planning.
• Level 3 issues (regulatory violations or significant customer harm) require immediate escalation to leadership.

When everyone understands the protocol beforehand, responses are faster and more coordinated.

Prepare for pivots as a collective decision

Pivoting isn't a weakness; it's wisdom.

When data shows an AI implementation isn't serving customers well, the governance committee should collaboratively decide the path forward. Perhaps your chatbot works beautifully for billing questions but fails on complex technical issues.

Technology proposes scope reductions. CX validates that this addresses customer pain points. Operations ensures the handoff to human agents is seamless. Product documents the learning for future implementations.

Or perhaps your predictive analytics show bias toward certain customer segments. Technology redesigns the model with better data. Legal ensures compliance requirements are met. CX validates with customer feedback.

The pivot isn't away from AI; it's toward AI that serves your customers – and that decision is stronger because it's informed by every function.

Governing third-party and vendor AI solutions

Many CX organizations don't build AI from scratch – they use AI embedded in platforms like Salesforce Einstein, Zendesk AI, or conversational AI vendors. This does not exempt you from governance responsibility. When your vendor's AI interacts with your customers, you own the outcomes.

Your governance framework must extend to third-party AI. During vendor selection, require transparency about how their AI works: What data does it use? How is bias testing conducted? Can you audit model decisions? What explainability features exist? 

Establish contractual requirements that align with your governance standards, including data handling agreements, bias audit reports, and incident notification protocols.

For existing vendor relationships, conduct regular reviews. Are their AI capabilities evolving in ways that increase risk to your customers? Do they provide adequate controls for you to disable or modify AI features that don't meet your standards? 

Remember: outsourcing the technology doesn't outsource accountability. Your customers hold you responsible, regardless of whether you built the AI or bought it.

Communicating AI use to your customers

Transparency isn't just a regulatory checkbox – it's a trust-building opportunity. How you communicate AI use to customers can differentiate your organization from competitors who treat disclosure as a legal obligation.

Develop clear principles for customer-facing AI communication. When do you proactively disclose AI use versus waiting for customers to ask? At a minimum, high-impact AI decisions (pricing, eligibility, routing to different service tiers) warrant upfront disclosure. 

But thoughtful organizations go further, explaining why AI improves customer experience and offering opt-out mechanisms where feasible.

Your communication should be accessible, not legalistic. "We use AI to match you with the agent best equipped to help" is better than "We employ algorithmic routing based on historical interaction data." Include a clear path for customers to raise concerns or request human review.

When issues arise – a bias incident, an accuracy failure, a system malfunction  – communicate promptly and honestly. Customers are remarkably forgiving of organizations that acknowledge problems and explain corrective actions. They're unforgiving of organizations that hide behind technical complexity or blame algorithms. 

Your governance framework should include pre-drafted communication templates for common AI incidents, reviewed by legal, approved by leadership, and ready to deploy when needed.

Building AI literacy across your CX organization

Governance frameworks fail when the people responsible for implementing them lack the knowledge to make informed decisions. If you're asking CX leaders to evaluate AI performance, flag bias issues, or participate in governance committees, they need foundational AI literacy – not data science degrees, but enough understanding to ask the right questions and recognize problems.

Invest in targeted training across three levels:

1. Leadership needs strategic AI literacy: understanding risk classifications, recognizing governance gaps, evaluating vendor claims, and making investment decisions.
2. Your governance committee members need operational AI literacy: interpreting performance metrics, identifying bias signals, understanding when accuracy thresholds warrant intervention, and evaluating customer impact.
3. Frontline agents need practical AI literacy: explaining AI decisions to customers in plain language, recognizing when AI fails and when human intervention is required, and documenting customer feedback that informs AI improvement.

This doesn't require months of training. A well-designed program might include quarterly workshops for leadership, monthly sessions for governance committee members, and ongoing coaching for agents as new AI systems deploy.

Partner with your technology teams or external experts to develop training that's accessible, relevant to CX roles, and regularly updated as AI capabilities evolve. The goal isn't to turn CX professionals into technologists – it's to ensure they can fulfill their governance responsibilities with confidence and competence.

The competitive advantage of responsible AI: Learning from setbacks

Here's the perspective that transforms governance from burden to opportunity: the organizations winning with AI aren't those that got it right on the first try. They're the ones with governance frameworks that let them learn, adjust, and improve quickly.

Consider Klarna, the fintech company that deployed an AI assistant in 2024. Within one month, it was handling two-thirds of customer service conversations – equivalent to 700 full-time agents. Importantly, it achieved similar customer satisfaction scores to human agents while reducing repeat inquiries by 25 percent. But Klarna's success wasn't inevitable. It required clear governance: testing for multilingual support, monitoring for accuracy, comparing against human baselines, and iterating based on performance data.

Contrast this with 42 percent of organizations, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence, that had to rework or pull back their AI implementations due to errors. What distinguished success from failure? Governance.

Companies that built in monitoring, maintained realistic expectations, involved human oversight, and committed to iteration survived. Those that deployed AI as a "set and forget" solution failed.

Customers increasingly prefer companies that demonstrate this kind of thoughtful implementation. Trust metrics show that 73 percent of customers believe AI can positively impact their experience, but only 42 percent trust businesses to use AI ethically – a gap that represents opportunity for organizations that demonstrate responsible practices.

When competitors deploy AI without governance guardrails, those organizations are taking reputational risk. When you deploy with clear governance, you're taking the principled approach that builds lasting trust.

Moving forward: AI as an ongoing organizational evolution

As you implement AI and scale its use in customer experience, remember that governance isn't the obstacle to innovation – it's the guardrail that keeps innovation on track.

More fundamentally, AI implementation isn't a project with an end date. It's an ongoing process of evolution that mirrors how your customers' needs and the technology itself evolve.

Your AI roadmap shouldn't live solely in product teams. It should be a business-wide strategic document that reflects how AI will transform customer experience, operations, and internal capabilities over time. This roadmap needs to be revisited quarterly or bi-annually as new technologies emerge, regulations shift, and customer expectations change.

The governance framework you've built ensures that as you evolve – adding new AI applications, sunsetting others, expanding into new use cases – every decision is grounded in customer value, regulatory compliance, and cross-functional alignment.

The organizations that win in AI aren't those that move fastest or implement the most systems. They're the ones that move smartly and continuously, keeping customers at the center, treating AI governance as a strategic capability rather than a compliance checkbox, and building organizational structures (like a Centre of Excellence) that evolve AI practice alongside their business.

Regulations will continue to evolve, frameworks will become more detailed, and customer expectations will rise. Your governance structures need to flex with these changes.

Your customers are watching. Make sure they see an organization that's serious about getting AI right.

Quick links

• A comprehensive guide to navigating the EU AI Act
• How to get generative AI governance in place
• A guide to procuring trustworthy AI solutions