5.1% Percentage point gap between Corporate Leaders (21.8%) and ICs (16.7%) adoption rates - the smallest leadership-IC gap across organizational types
AI ADOPTION / SHAPES OF WORK
Corporate Designers
Key consideration for ICs: Workflow integration and scaling capabilities
Key consideration for leaders: Competitive advantage and productivity scaling
7.9% Percentage point gap between Growth Leaders (27.1%) and ICs (19.2%) adoption rates - indicating stronger top-down AI implementation
Startup Designers
10.4% Percentage point gap between Startup Leaders (33.3%) and ICs (22.9%) - the largest leadership-IC adoption gap
Agency Designers
AI Usage patterns in design tools
100%
75%
50%
25%
0%
Agency ICs
Agency Leaders
Key consideration for ICs: Client deliverables and project efficiency
Key consideration for leaders: Service positioning and communication effectiveness
13.1% Agency Leaders show the highest overall AI adoption rate (33.9%), likely reflecting client-facing pressures and external client pressures
Independent/Solo Designers
24.7% Solo In-House Designers show higher AI adoption (24.7%) than any IC group in structured orgs.
Design Educators/Students
Design Educators/Researchers
Primary AI applications
30.7%
22.7%
12.5%
Key consideration: Pedagogical alignment and curriculum relevance
Design Students
Primary AI applications
19.0%
25.0%
32.6%
Key consideration: Skill development and portfolio readiness
12.5% Design Educators show the lowest AI adoption rate (12.5%) of any work shape, creating a significant gap with industry practice