Adoption without Capability Reporting: 

How 22 Major Firms Publicly Describe their AI Programmes

Abstract

This study examines how 22 publicly listed organisations described their artificial intelligence programmes in prepared management remarks and, where necessary, supplementary public reporting from the 2025 and 2026 reporting period.

The coded inventory applies a three-part taxonomy. Adoption and Containment records statements about usage, deployment scale, cost, efficiency, investment, and governance coverage. Capability Reporting records measured business outcomes directly attributed in the reporting to AI reasoning or synthesis. Product and Marketing Claim records feature descriptions, comparative assertions, positioning language, and capability assertions that cannot be verified from outside the firm.

Across the 22 organisations recorded in the reconciled table, the inventory contains 404 Adoption and Containment statements, 2 Capability Reporting statements, and 308 Product and Marketing Claims. The ratio is 202 to 1 to 154. Both Capability Reporting statements come from Alphabet. No other organisation in the sample produced a statement meeting the stated threshold.

The study is a disclosure study. It reports what appeared in prepared public communication. The performance of the AI programmes covered, the quality of internal measurement, and the business value generated by those programmes fall outside its scope. The finding is that, in this sample, public reporting gives considerably more visibility into AI adoption, usage, scale, efficiency, investment, governance, and product positioning than into measured AI contribution to business work.

Keywords: Enterprise AI, AI Reporting, Generative AI, Artificial Intelligence, Corporate Disclosure, Earnings Calls, AI Governance, Management Reporting, Capability Measurement, Public Companies