Boards replacing a CIO who didn't deliver on AI should settle one thing first: are they hiring for the foundation or for AI returns? Skip that step and the old job description comes back with an AI line added, which is how the same hire happens twice.
Info-Tech Research Group's CEO, Tom Zehren, opened the firm's Las Vegas conference in June by saying the past 12 months had seen more CIO transitions than at any point in the last 30 years. He described it as a mix of resignations and departures that weren't voluntary, with boards and executive teams growing impatient over the pace of AI adoption. Either way, more boards than usual are facing a second CIO search.
Back in May I argued that boards open a CIO search looking for a stronger IT operator and figure out halfway through that they need someone who can decide where AI creates business value and own the result. For boards returning to the market, the second search has its own traps.
Why Is CIO Turnover So High in 2026?
My read is that boards have tied the CIO's job to AI returns most companies still can't measure.
Dataiku's Global AI Confessions Report: CIO Edition, 2026, based on a Harris Poll of 685 CIOs, puts numbers on the pressure. 76% expect their role to be at risk if the company can't show measurable AI gains by the end of 2027, and 87% say their CEO has made clear that their job security depends on AI outcomes.
Now look at what those same CIOs can prove. Only 21% see AI costs in near real time by business unit or use case. And 72% can't consistently tell whether their AI agents produce the business outcomes they were built for.
So the CIO walks into the board meeting defending a budget with numbers that don't exist yet.
What Went Wrong in the First CIO Search?
My view is that the first search often left the CIO answerable for AI results without control over the teams producing them.
Dataiku's survey can't show how those CIOs were hired, but it does show how scattered the accountability is. It asked CIOs who is primarily responsible when an AI agent goes wrong, and the answers were all over the place: shared teams 23%, central IT 21%, the data or AI team 20%, security and risk 18%. Nobody gets even a quarter. When the numbers disappoint, though, it's the CIO the board calls.
A replacement brief that keeps the old reporting line and scorecard, with “AI experience” added to the requirements, leaves the new CIO with the same ownership problem.
It didn't help that CIOs were fielding more recruiter calls in 2025. With boards chasing the same short list of candidates, defining the job properly was the step that got rushed.
Foundation CIO or AI-Value CIO: Which Does the Board Need?
The board needs to pick one as the main job before the search starts. The two profiles come from different careers and get judged on different numbers, and a brief that asks for both can end up attracting people who are strong at neither. Two appointments this year show what it looks like when a company makes the call in public.
The Foundation Brief: Euroclear
Euroclear went internal in September. Marc De Rycke became group CIO, reporting straight to CEO Valérie Urbain with a seat on the Group Executive Committee, and the company's CISO, Claus Norup, moved up to Deputy CIO. The announcement led with production stability and cyber security before it got to speeding up technology's contribution to the business.
For a company whose platforms sit underneath securities settlement, I think that's the right order. Nothing new gets built until the plumbing is trusted, and putting the CISO beside the CIO says so without anyone spelling it out. De Rycke also starts out knowing the systems, which an outside hire would have to learn first.
The AI-Value Brief: Teradata
Teradata leaned toward AI in June, when it named Josh Fecteau its combined Chief Data and AI Officer and CIO, bringing data, AI and technology under one leader. Fecteau had run the company's Data & AI organization since November 2025. The new role added Technology Services, so the person accountable for AI results now runs the infrastructure too.
Compare that with the Dataiku split above. If an AI program at Teradata stalls, there's one office to call.
[Table 1]
To be clear, neither company was replacing a CIO who failed on AI, and I'm not suggesting either predecessor did. I picked them because each one said publicly which priority its CIO should put first.
Where This Argument Falls Short
Info-Tech's Best of 2026 Mid-Year Report found that the resources IT leaders wanted most in the first half of the year covered basics like information management, cybersecurity, infrastructure modernization, data strategy and enterprise risk. Gord Harrison, the firm's chief research officer, described it as treating "foundations as strategy."
He has a point. If your data is scattered and your security team can't see the agents people build outside approved tools, a foundation CIO is the quickest way to get any AI results at all. Hire for AI vision instead and the new CIO hits the same gaps, which is how a company ends up running a third search inside two years.
Mid-sized companies face a different problem, since they often can't pay for both profiles at the top. If the core systems are already reliable, I'd hire the CIO for AI returns and put a strong VP of Infrastructure or Head of IT Operations underneath, so neither job goes unowned. If they aren't, the foundation comes first at any size.
What Should a Replacement CIO Brief Include?
At minimum, the brief should say which job is primary and which AI outcomes the new CIO owns outright, with a budget and reporting line to match.
Questions for the Board Before the Search Opens
- Which AI results will this CIO be measured on in the first 12 months, and who owns them today?
- Does the CIO control the budget for those AI programs, or only the infrastructure underneath them?
- Will the CIO report to the CEO and sit on the executive committee?
- Can our data and security foundation support AI agents in production, and who can show that with evidence?
- If the honest answer is no, are we hiring a foundation CIO first, and does the brief say so?
Two Interview Questions and What to Listen For
- "Tell me about an AI program you shut down. What told you it wasn't working?"
You want a business metric (cost per transaction, say, or time to close) and a rough date. If the answer is all model accuracy and adoption rates, the candidate was tracking usage.
- "When an AI system you owned went wrong, who was accountable, and was that decided before it happened?"
Good answers name an owner who was agreed in advance. If you hear "it was a shared responsibility," that's the gap you're hiring to close.
Replacing a CIO: Frequently Asked Questions
Should a Replacement CIO Report to the CEO?
Yes, if the CIO owns AI returns. Reporting through the CFO or COO puts the CIO one step away from the decisions that drive those returns. Euroclear's new group CIO reports to the CEO and sits on the Group Executive Committee, a clear signal of how the company sees the job.
Should a Board Promote an Internal Candidate After a CIO Exit?
It's a good bet when the main job is the foundation, because knowing the systems can shorten the learning curve. Euroclear promoted from inside, and Teradata expanded the mandate of an executive it already had. Go external when nobody internally has run AI in production, or when the internal bench is tied to the programs that didn't deliver.
What's the Difference Between a CIO and a Chief Data and AI Officer?
The CIO has traditionally owned enterprise technology, including infrastructure, applications, IT operations and security. A Chief Data and AI Officer owns data strategy and the AI programs built on it. Teradata merged the two, which is worth a look if the board wants AI ownership settled in one hire. Whether you also need a standalone Chief AI Officer is a separate question, covered in CAIO vs CIO: Structuring Your AI Leadership Team in 2026.
How Should a Board Measure a New CIO in the First Year?
Measure the CIO against the mandate the brief set. A foundation CIO should show progress on platform stability, security readiness, data reliability and AI cost visibility by business unit, which only 21% of CIOs in the Dataiku survey have today. An AI-value CIO should show verified business results from AI programs, such as lower cost per transaction or faster time to close, and a record of which programs were scaled and which were shut down.
About Christian & Timbers
Christian & Timbers specializes in AI and technology leadership, placing CIOs, CTOs, CPTOs and board directors as well as VP of IT, VP of AI Transformation, Head of AI and VP of Engineering roles. Recent enterprise AI placements include Jerry Becker as SVP, Head of Artificial Intelligence & Digital Transformation at Smith+Nephew and Jyothi Gorti as Chief Digital Officer at SiTime. The firm's searches focus on passive candidates, and in a replacement search that's often where the right CIO is.
