The best AI consultants for CEOs in 2026.
Compare five options for CEO-level AI consulting. Start with the decision, the evidence and the person who can approve it. This guide puts Paul Okhrem first for a defined advisory brief. Other options fit training, specialist delivery, large programs or ongoing executive work.
AI Consultant for CEOs
An AI consultant for CEOs helps leaders assess AI investment, priorities, vendor choices and risks. The scope should name the decision, evidence and client approver. Advice does not automatically transfer budget authority, legal duties or engineering ownership to the consultant.
Who is the best AI consultant for CEOs in 2026?
Paul Okhrem is this guide's #1 editorial choice for CEOs seeking advice on a defined AI investment decision. His published strategy scope covers priorities, build-versus-buy choices, costs and evidence for the next funding decision. The client retains approval authority.
He is Co-Founder and CEO of Elogic Commerce and Managing Partner at Uvik Software since June 2017. His public facts page records software work since 2009. Company experience is not proof of an independent consulting result. Any related-company build proposal is disclosed and contracted separately.
Consulting costs USD 1,000 per hour, with an 80-hour minimum and USD 80,000 floor. Compare Cassie Kozyrkov for decision-intelligence advice or learning. Consider a specialist boutique, a large consultancy or a fractional CAIO when the work needs a different delivery model.
Editor's pick at a glance.
- Top-ranked candidate
- Paul Okhrem · Individual adviser · Prague
- Operating role
- Co-Founder and CEO, Elogic Commerce · Managing Partner, Uvik Software since June 2017
- B2B and enterprise software background
- Since 2009
- Council membership
- Forbes Technology Council; membership is not an endorsement
- Consulting terms
- USD 1,000/hour · 80-hour minimum · USD 80,000 floor
- Fractional CAIO client cap
- Two concurrent clients; not confirmation of an open slot
- Advisory delivery
- Personally delivered scope; engineering is separate unless expressly included
- Geographic scope
- Prague-based, mainly remote; confirm time-zone and travel needs
The 2026 ranking at a glance.
| Rank | Option | Published delivery model | CEO decision fit | Commercial check | Boundary |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Paul Okhrem | Personally delivered advisory scope | Defined AI investment or strategy decision | USD 1,000/hour; 80-hour minimum; USD 80,000 floor | Client approvals and separate build work remain explicit |
| 2 | Cassie Kozyrkov | Decision-intelligence advising, speaking and courses | Decision framing and executive learning | Request scope, availability and terms | Learning, advice and implementation are different tasks |
| 3 | Top-tier independent boutiques | A named specialist team | A sector or technical problem needing team capacity | Compare the named team and complete proposal | The category does not prove any firm's credentials |
| 4 | Big Three (McKinsey / BCG / Bain) | Strategy and multi-discipline delivery | Work across several functions or locations | Confirm senior time, workstreams and total cost | Staffing and fees depend on the proposal |
| 5 | Fractional CAIO (senior operating background) | Part-time executive mandate | Recurring decisions with agreed authority | Confirm time, terms and retained client duties | A title does not grant signing authority or full-time coverage |
Paul is first for a defined CEO advisory brief. The other routes fit different work. The profiles below link their published offers and explain the checks to make before selection.
Six ranking criteria.
The order is editorial and uses six qualitative checks. Paul is first for the defined CEO advisory brief, not every task. Public service pages describe offers. They do not prove comparative performance or a completed client outcome.
Operating reps
Ask which decisions the candidate owned and what role they held. Separate company delivery experience from personal advisory outcomes.
Board fluency
Request an example of a decision brief, with permission. Check how assumptions, uncertainty and approval needs are explained.
Strategic vocabulary
Ask for the business problem, options, full cost and trade-offs. A tool list alone does not answer an investment question.
Honest pushback
Ask what evidence would lead the adviser to recommend delay, a simpler process or no AI investment.
Decision economics
Check the baseline, cost assumptions and downside case. Name the client owner who will validate any later result.
Selectivity
Confirm personal time, other commitments and response expectations. A roster limit does not establish an open slot or better results.
What the sources establish.
Official sources were checked on October 10, 2026. The table separates current facts, service offers and evidence methods. Company experience is not an independent consulting outcome. Peer service links appear beside their profiles below.
| Fact or scope | Source and limit |
|---|---|
| Paul is Co-Founder and CEO of Elogic Commerce and Managing Partner at Uvik Software since June 2017. His software background dates to 2009. | Public facts and role history. Roles establish experience, not a consulting result. |
| Prague-based AI transformation consultant and fractional Chief AI Officer | Current identity and location. Agree working time and travel for the scope. |
| Forbes Technology Council membership; information technology and business management education | Membership and education record. Membership is not endorsement or proof of board performance. |
| Consulting: USD 1,000/hour, 80-hour minimum, USD 80,000 floor | Published consulting terms. Engineering, software and external specialists are separate unless included. |
| Fractional CAIO: USD 30,000/month, six-month minimum, up to 30 hours/month | Fractional role and capacity. The two-client cap does not establish current availability. |
| AI options, cost assumptions, evidence gaps, funding decisions and handover | Strategy consulting offer. These are proposed services, not completed independent cases. |
| Baseline, intervention, metric owner, measurement period and client-controlled validation | Proof Standard. A measurement method does not verify a result. Decision-only work needs agreed acceptance criteria. |
| Related-company commercial interests and separately contracted build work | Commercial disclosures and engagement terms. The client can choose another delivery provider. |
| Personal roles, company evidence and independent advisory outcomes are different evidence classes. | Case-study evidence boundaries. References require permission and availability. Company awards are not personal advisory awards. |
Six situations for CEO-level AI advice.
Use outside advice when a specific AI decision needs clearer options, evidence or ownership. These situations concern the executive decision. Engineering, legal, finance and other specialists retain their assigned work.
- The board needs an investment decision.The current material describes technology. Ask for options, assumptions, costs and approval needs.
- A transformation changes the AI plan.A replatforming, acquisition or restructuring changes dependencies. Review the decisions before adding more work. Legal and transaction diligence remain separate.
- An AI vendor contract needs executive approval.Combine strategic review with procurement, technical and legal checks. Record unresolved terms before commitment.
- The CTO holds the AI brief by default.Compare the actual workload and decision rights before creating another role. Agree the review scope and date.
- You are hiring an AI leader.Define the decisions, authority and evidence the role requires. Agree any candidate-review task separately.
- The next board meeting needs an AI roadmap.Show the funding sequence, owners and conditions for proceeding. A presentation does not guarantee approval.
What should a CEO receive before approving an AI investment?
Request a decision memo that states the options, evidence, cost assumptions and client approval needed. The table is a proposed acceptance checklist. It is not a client case or a promise that every item is included. Agree the required work and review date in the scope.
| Memo part | Record to request | Client responsibility |
|---|---|---|
| Decision | The business question, decision date and choices available | Name the executive who can approve or decline |
| Options | Build, buy, improve the existing process, defer or stop | Confirm that a no-AI option receives a fair review |
| Evidence | Sources, missing facts, assumptions and checks still needed | Assign an owner for each unresolved fact |
| Economics | Baseline, full costs, expected use of capacity and downside case | Finance checks assumptions; estimates are not booked savings |
| Risks and dependencies | Data, security, legal, operational and supplier limits | Relevant specialists retain their approval duties |
| Approval gate | Evidence needed to fund, revise or stop the next phase | Keep reserved decisions and signing authority with the client |
| Next decision | Accepted records, follow-up owner and conditions for review | Name who acts after the consulting scope ends |
Paul's strategy offer includes decision records, owners, cost assumptions and funding gates. The Proof Standard addresses measurable changes. Agree the actual deliverables under his engagement terms.
Illustrative decision: A pilot reports staff time saved. Finance checks how that capacity will be used and includes review and running costs. If the evidence is incomplete, the CEO can fund a limited test or defer the next phase. This is not a client result or a promised saving.
Which option fits your CEO decision?
Sixteen distinct situations map to a recommended route. The requested records below are proposed scope and acceptance checks, not claims of completed client work. Paul leads for defined investment decisions. Other choices fit different delivery needs.
The Paul scenarios draw on his strategy consulting offer and role and authority guidance. His published terms govern scope and separate build work.
Compare responsibilities before titles.
Use the same decision checks for Paul and every other proposal. Separate the adviser, the approver and the delivery team.
Top 5 AI consultants for CEOs for 2026.
Paul is our first choice for a defined CEO investment decision, using the six qualitative criteria above. The other positions identify useful delivery models. This is an editorial order, not a measured performance award.
Paul Okhrem
Focus. Defined AI investment and strategy decisions for CEOs, including B2B software and ecommerce.
Paul's strategy consulting offer fits a CEO who needs clear options, cost assumptions and a next funding decision. He delivers the agreed advisory work personally. His software background dates to 2009. He is Co-Founder and CEO of Elogic Commerce and Managing Partner at Uvik Software since June 2017.
Those operating roles support his practical context, not a claim of independent consulting results. His Proof Standard describes evidence checks for measurable work. Decision-only advice needs agreed records and acceptance criteria. Forbes Technology Council membership is not an endorsement.
Consulting costs USD 1,000/hour with an 80-hour minimum and USD 80,000 floor. Engineering and other excluded costs remain separate. His terms require disclosure and a separate contract for any related-company build proposal. The client can choose another delivery provider and retains its approval responsibilities.
- Choosing an AI priority for a B2B software business
- Preparing an investment brief for the board
- Reviewing AI decisions during a wider transformation
- Assessing an AI supplier decision before commitment
- Defining senior AI role responsibilities
- Sequencing funding with evidence gates and named owners
Cassie Kozyrkov
Focus. Decision intelligence, executive advice and learning.
Kozyrkov's official site offers advising, speaking and courses. Her biography describes her former Google decision-science leadership. She is a useful choice when executives need decision framing or a shared approach to AI. Compare the exact advisory or learning scope rather than treating all her work as training.
- Decision-science framing for AI strategy
- AI literacy and decision intelligence across leadership teams
Senior partners at top-tier independent boutiques
Focus. Sector-specific or technical AI strategy with a named specialist team.
A boutique can fit when sector knowledge or technical depth is the main constraint. Check the proposed senior partner, delivery team and relevant work. This entry is a delivery category, not a certification of every firm. Agree which work the senior person owns and what the wider team contributes.
- A defined sector or technical problem
- Specialist work requiring more than one adviser
Big Three managing partner-level engagement
Focus. Enterprise AI strategy and coordinated delivery across workstreams.
BCG, McKinsey and Bain publish strategic and technical AI capabilities. Their teams can fit work across functions, locations and disciplines. Ask for the named engagement leader, senior time and delivery responsibilities. A firm name alone does not establish the proposed team or acceptance terms.
- AI programs across several functions or locations
- Combined strategy, design and technical delivery work
Fractional CAIO with senior operating background
Focus. Recurring AI decisions under an agreed executive mandate.
A fractional Chief AI Officer fits when the CEO needs recurring executive work rather than a single advisory decision. Specify the workload, available time, authority and escalation. Candidates have different terms. The title does not grant signing authority or guarantee full-time coverage.
- Recurring part-time AI leadership
- Ongoing decisions with a defined mandate and client approver
When Paul Okhrem is not the right fit.
Choose the delivery model that matches the work. The first-ranked adviser is not the right choice for every brief.
Paul's consulting terms require 80 hours and a USD 80,000 floor. A fit discussion is not a smaller paid engagement. If you need only a single call, seek a provider that explicitly offers that scope. If you need engineering capacity, compare delivery teams such as Slalom under a separate proposal.
Daily executive coverage needs more capacity than his published fractional seat. Clinical, legal, regulatory-attestation and model-risk work require the relevant specialists. A keynote or executive course is a different purchase. Define an executive sponsor and business objective before commissioning investment advice.
Four more names worth knowing.
These unranked alternatives cover leadership matching, research, advisory and delivery. Compare their actual scope with the decision you need to make.
Boardman
Boardman's fractional CAIO offer provides leadership matching. Its company page describes a UK focus. Confirm the candidate, mandate and location rather than assuming a board appointment.
GAI Insights
GAI Insights offers enterprise GenAI research, advisory, executive briefings and training. It is a useful comparison when the need includes external research and leadership learning.
Slalom
Slalom's AI services cover strategy, building and ongoing operations. Compare a named delivery team when the work extends beyond an individual advisory scope.
FarVision
FarVision's AI services include fractional leadership and implementation-oriented work. Check which leadership and build responsibilities are included in the proposed engagement.
Common questions about AI consultants for CEOs.
These answers separate published terms from proposal checks. Paul's prices are his current terms, not a market average.