From Fear to Curiosity: How Leaders Set the Tone for AI Adoption
Why early institutional signals shape everything that follows, and why it is never too late to shift.
When ChatGPT arrived in late 2022, higher education leaders faced a choice that is still rippling through their institutions today. Some moved quickly to restrict. Others leaned in with curiosity. Most fell somewhere in between, navigating real concerns about academic integrity, data privacy, and a technology evolving faster than anyone could keep up with. What our research shows is that leaders can set the tone for how their institutions respond, and that tone matters.
Through interviews with leaders at more than 30 colleges and universities, we found that the institutions making the most progress are not necessarily the ones that got it right on day one. They are the ones that found their way to a posture of curiosity, whether that came early or after a period of caution. The good news: it is never too late to make that shift.
At one large community college, the president resisted the impulse to ban. While peer institutions were blocking ChatGPT, this leader reframed the conversation entirely:
“No, we’re not gonna ban this. We just need to adapt and learn how to use it... not to say that the students cannot use AI to do homework, but actually, how can we change the homework so that they use AI but they still think when they’re using AI?”
That shift, from policing the tool to redesigning the work, set the direction for the institution’s AI strategy. But not every institution started there, and that is perfectly normal. At several colleges we spoke with, the initial response was understandably cautious: updates to academic misconduct policies, concern about plagiarism, uncertainty about what AI could even do. What mattered was what came next. The institutions that gained momentum were the ones where someone began asking a different set of questions. What could this make possible? How do we help our people learn alongside this technology?
At another community college, the president modeled this personally: using AI in his own teaching, meeting faculty fear with empathy, and preaching “faith over fear.” He found that most people, when given practical examples and encouragement, will at least move to a place of openness.
One community college president we interviewed connected AI readiness directly to institutional relevance:
“The leader has to actually tell the people what’s at stake. If you’re an educational institution that can’t articulate to your community the impact of future-proofing, you’re not going to be able to get people to move.”
Leaders do not need to be technical experts to set this tone. They also do not need to be the most senior person at their institution. They do, however, need to be visible, curious, and willing to connect AI to the institution’s mission. At one university, a senior vice provost built the culture around piloting, socializing the idea so thoroughly that people felt safe experimenting. At another, the president is described as one of the most active AI users on campus. What these leaders share is not a single playbook, but a willingness to signal that learning is welcome.
Wherever your institution is on this journey, the research points to a few things that help. Reframe AI conversations around possibility, not just risk. Model the behavior you want to see. Create low-stakes space for people to try things. And recognize that shifting from caution to curiosity is not a sign the early response was wrong. It is a sign of a healthy, learning institution.
Want to hear directly from leaders navigating this work? Join our upcoming webinar series where college and university leaders share how they are building AI capacity on their campuses, from faculty development models to institutional strategy.
This content originally appeared on our LinkedIn page.