Stuart MacDonald, Chief Operating Officer at TechnologyOne, argues that councils embracing AI must get the basics right first — because without strong data foundations, skills and governance, the technology risks accelerating inefficiencies rather than solving them.

Artificial intelligence is no longer a distant ambition for local government. Councils across the UK are moving beyond pilots and beginning to explore how AI can support service delivery, improve responsiveness and ease pressure on stretched teams.

Yet while the technology is advancing quickly, the conditions needed to make it work at scale are still catching up. The challenge is not whether councils should adopt AI, but how they do so in a way that delivers real value.

AI is only as strong as its foundations

A consistent theme from recent sector discussions is that AI cannot be treated as just another system to implement. Unlike earlier waves of technology, its effectiveness is dependent on data quality, system integration and the clarity of the processes it supports.

Many councils are still working in a fragmented manner where data sits in multiple systems shaped by years of incremental change. This fragmentation is not only technical but organisational and those who understand the data are often the same people delivering frontline services, which makes alignment essential. Without addressing these foundational issues, there is then a risk that AI accelerates inefficiencies rather than resolving them.

Skills are the quiet constraint

Capability remains one of the most significant barriers to progress. Gaps in data science, enterprise architecture and the practical use of AI continue to limit ambition.

However, the issue goes beyond being confined to specialist roles. In fact, many organisations are still grappling with basic data literacy across their workforce. Staff may have access to new tools, but not the confidence to use them effectively or understand how they fit into wider service delivery.

Closing this gap requires more than just recruitments, instead, we need to upskill the existing workforce. This is particularly relevant to those on the frontline, who will be essential. Partnerships with suppliers and sector bodies also have a role to play, not only in delivering systems but in building capability.

Governance determines outcomes

Whilst skills form the foundation, governance ultimately determines whether programmes will succeed or fail. The lessons from large-scale transformation programmes remain highly relevant. Birmingham’s ERP challenges are a clear example of how quickly projects can drift when oversight is weak. The issue here was not the technology itself, but a combination of escalating costs, insufficient governance and a tendency to adapt systems to existing processes rather than simplify them.

Strong governance is not about slowing progress but rather ensuring that change is delivered in a controlled and accountable way. That includes clear ownership through senior responsible officers, robust financial monitoring and a disciplined approach to benefits realisation.

Too often, organisations begin transformation programmes with a compelling vision but without defining what success looks like or how it will be measured. Without that clarity, it becomes difficult to demonstrate value or sustain momentum.

Leadership creates the conditions for change

In an environment of high scrutiny and limited resources, leadership plays a decisive role. Senior leaders must set direction, balance risk with opportunity and ensure governance is proportionate as transformation cannot be confined to digital teams; it requires engagement across the organisation, supported by clear communication and visible leadership.

Practical approaches, such as embedding digital champions within services, can help bridge the gap between strategy and day-to-day delivery, building confidence and supporting adoption.

Avoiding familiar mistakes

One pattern that we see over and over again in public sector transformation is the tendency to over-customise, attempting to reshape new systems to mirror legacy processes often introduces unnecessary complexity and risk.

Instead, a far more effective approach is to simplify processes and align with proven system capabilities, even where this requires organisational change. This becomes even more important in an AI context, where consistency underpins reliable outcomes.

From managing risk to creating value

Local government is entering a period where incremental change is unlikely to be sufficient, as demand continues to rise while resources remain constrained, creating a pressing need to rethink how services are delivered. AI offers a genuine opportunity to support this shift, whether through automating routine processes, enabling earlier intervention or improving the quality of decision-making.

We are already seeing examples of councils beginning to take this step in a structured way. Islington Council, for instance, is modernising its financial management and operations through the adoption of an AI-enabled enterprise platform, with a clear focus on improving productivity for staff and delivering better value for residents. This kind of approach reflects a broader shift in the sector, where AI is being embedded into core systems to support more informed decision-making and more efficient day-to-day operations.

At the same time, developments in the market are beginning to extend AI beyond internal operations, with more intuitive and conversational ways for residents to access services helping to reduce the complexity that often sits behind traditional systems. However, these advances will only translate into real value if they are underpinned by strong governance, the right skills and a clear alignment between technology and organisational priorities.

The councils that succeed in this next phase of transformation are unlikely to be those that move fastest, but those that combine ambition with discipline, ensuring that the foundations are in place before scaling new capabilities. In doing so, AI can move from being perceived primarily as a risk to becoming a practical tool for improving outcomes, increasing efficiency and delivering lasting public value for the communities councils serve.