If you've been waiting for your board to greenlight an AI initiative, you're not alone. Board buy-in is a common blocker association professionals cite when asked why they haven't moved forward with AI projects. The technology is ready. The opportunities are clear. But the board? They're not quite there yet.
A recent podcast conversation with Jay Gilbert, Director of Scientific Programs and Product Development at the Institute of Food Technologists (IFT), offered a different perspective on this challenge. IFT recently launched CoDeveloper, an AI-enabled platform that helps food scientists accelerate product development. Getting board support for this initiative required a deliberate approach—one that treated the board as partners in a learning process rather than gatekeepers to convince.
What stood out most from the conversation was how IFT reframed the relationship with their board entirely. They didn't pitch and wait for approval. They built a partnership.
Separate the Tactics from the Strategy
One of IFT's smartest moves was recognizing that board meetings aren't the right venue for technical education. Board members needed to understand generative AI, retrieval augmented generation, and how these technologies could serve members. But cramming that learning into a strategic meeting meant neither the education nor the strategy got the attention it deserved.
IFT's solution was simple: office hours. Before board meetings, staff held informal sessions where board members could ask questions, explore the technology, and get comfortable with the basics. These weren't formal presentations. They were conversations designed to bring everyone up to speed.
By the time board meetings happened, the conversation could focus on strategy. Should we invest in this? What are the risks? How does this align with our mission? Board members weren't stuck asking what a large language model is—they'd already covered that ground.
If your board discussions about AI keep getting derailed by basic questions or skepticism rooted in unfamiliarity, consider whether the learning is happening in the right setting. Sometimes the best thing you can do is create space for education outside the boardroom.
Treat It Like a Startup Investment
IFT's board didn't approve CoDeveloper as a single, massive initiative. Instead, they approached it with a startup mentality. Staff came to the board seeking seed funding with clear deliverables. The board acted as investors, evaluating progress over time rather than making one high-stakes yes-or-no decision.
This framing changes the dynamic considerably. A startup investment model allows for incremental commitment. The board can say yes to a pilot, evaluate results, and decide whether to continue funding. That's far less daunting than approving a multi-year technology project with uncertain outcomes.
It also creates accountability on both sides. Staff have clear milestones to hit. The board has defined moments to assess progress. Everyone knows what success looks like at each stage.
If your board is hesitant to commit to a big AI initiative, consider breaking it into smaller investment rounds. A modest pilot with clear deliverables is an easier yes than a sweeping transformation.
Tie It Directly to Mission Language
When IFT made the case for CoDeveloper, they didn't rely on industry trends or competitive pressure. They pointed to their own mission statement: "to advance the science of food and its application."
An AI platform that helps food scientists accelerate R&D by accessing trusted research? That's a direct expression of advancing science and its application. The mission language made the case almost self-evident.
This approach does two things. First, it grounds the conversation in something the board already believes in. They adopted that mission. Arguing against an initiative that clearly fulfills it becomes difficult. Second, it gives staff a framework for evaluating features, pricing, and priorities. When decisions get hard, you can return to the mission and ask which option better serves it.
Take a look at your association's mission statement. Where could AI initiatives serve as a direct expression of that language? The case for AI might already be written into your founding documents. You just need to connect the dots.
Make Learning a Shared Journey
Here's something Jay emphasized that's easy to overlook: IFT's board members are experts in food science, not artificial intelligence. They were learning about generative AI at the same time as the staff. That shared learning became part of the partnership.
When boards feel like they're being sold something they don't understand, resistance is natural. When they feel like they're exploring something new alongside staff, the dynamic shifts. They have skin in the game. They're invested in figuring it out, not just evaluating whether someone else figured it out correctly.
This also takes pressure off staff to have all the answers. You don't need to present AI as a solved problem. You can present it as an opportunity you want to explore together. That honesty tends to build trust rather than undermine confidence.
If your board feels like a hurdle to clear, consider whether you've invited them into the learning process or positioned yourself as the expert asking for permission.
Start with Research, Not Technology
IFT's AI initiative didn't begin with generative AI. It began in 2020 with research into why members come to the organization and what problems they're trying to solve. Staff used a jobs-to-be-done framework to understand member needs at a fundamental level.
When generative AI became viable a few years later, IFT wasn't scrambling to figure out what to build. They already knew what problems needed solving. The technology was a means to address those problems, not a shiny object to chase.
Boards are far more likely to support initiatives grounded in clear member needs than technology for its own sake. If you can show that members struggle with a specific problem, that you've researched that problem thoroughly, and that AI offers a promising solution, the conversation shifts from "should we do AI?" to "how do we solve this problem?"
If you haven't done this foundational research yet, it might be the best place to start. Understanding your members deeply gives any future AI initiative a solid foundation—and gives your board confidence that you're not just following a trend.
Rethinking the Relationship
Getting board buy-in doesn't have to mean perfecting a pitch deck or waiting until you have all the answers. IFT's experience suggests a different path: create the conditions for partnership.
That means separating tactical learning from strategic decisions. It means framing initiatives as incremental investments rather than all-or-nothing approvals. It means tying proposals directly to mission language the board already believes in. It means inviting the board into the learning process rather than positioning yourself as the expert seeking permission. And it means grounding everything in solid research about member needs.
If your board feels like a blocker, the approach might matter more than the idea itself. The goal isn't to convince skeptics. The goal is to build a partnership where everyone is invested in figuring out how AI can serve your members.
IFT moved from concept to launch in about 18 months once development began, with board support throughout. Your timeline and your initiative will look different. But the underlying principle holds: boards aren't obstacles to overcome. They're partners to bring along.
.svg)
