How do you prove AI capability to leadership and the board?
You prove AI capability to leadership with evidence from real work, not activity reports. Show specific tasks the team can now do better with AI, verified before-and-after results, and how capability has grown over time. That is far more convincing to a board than licences bought or courses completed.
Leaders have learned to discount training metrics, because completion rates have never predicted performance. Presenting them as proof of an AI programme's success invites the obvious question: but did the work actually change?
The answer that lands is concrete: here are the workflows we rebuilt, here is the before and after, here is the trend line of capability by team. Evidence tied to real output turns an AI budget request into a story a board can back.
Verified before-and-after results on real work, the number of workflows genuinely changed, capability trends by team, and what that unlocked. Keep completion rates out of it; they persuade no one.