The AI divide is real. We have to do something about it.
I’ve been thinking about something that should unsettle all of us who work in the technology industry.
We talk a great deal about AI as an equalizer: a tool that gives everyone access to knowledge, support, and capability that was once reserved for those with money or connections. And I do believe that’s possible. But right now, it isn’t what’s happening.
Right now, AI is widening the gap.
Access is not evenly distributed
The people who benefit most from AI today are people who already have significant advantages: good internet connections, devices capable of running modern applications, enough digital literacy to know what prompts to ask, and the disposable income or employer support to pay for the best tools.
The women entrepreneurs I meet through Vital Voices, running small businesses in underserved communities and building something from almost nothing, often have none of those things. And yet they are precisely the people for whom a knowledgeable, always-available, non-judgmental AI assistant could be transformative.
“We cannot let the next wave of technology become another mechanism for entrenching existing advantage.”
This is why we made a decision that felt obvious once I said it out loud: we funded ChatGPT accounts for the women in our Vital Voices network.
What happened when we did it
I won’t pretend we have a rigorous study. But what I’ve heard back anecdotally has been remarkable. Women who had never used an AI tool before were, within days, using it to write grant applications, draft business proposals, research suppliers, and practice pitches.
Not because anyone told them exactly what to do. Because once they had access, they figured it out. They found the use cases that mattered to them.
That’s the thing about capability: when you give people real access, they usually don’t need to be told what to do with it.
What this means for business leaders
I think there’s a challenge here for all of us who lead organizations. We can talk about AI adoption as if it’s simply a matter of will, of people choosing to engage. But access is a prerequisite for adoption. And access is something we control.
If you are leading a team, you have the power to make sure everyone on it, not just the most senior or technically comfortable people, has genuine access to the tools they need. That’s a budget decision. It’s a training decision. It’s a culture decision.
Do the people on the front lines of your organization have access to the same AI tools as the people in leadership?
Are you measuring AI adoption by role or just by overall headcount?
Do people in your organization feel safe to experiment, to make mistakes, to share what’s working?
These questions matter. And the answers reveal a great deal about what your organization actually believes about its people.
The builder’s responsibility
I have always believed that people with access to resources and networks have a particular responsibility. Not because it makes us better people (it doesn’t automatically), but because we can.
The digital divide didn’t start with AI. But AI has the potential to either narrow it or accelerate it. That choice isn’t made by algorithm. It’s made by us.
I’m not naive about how much there is to do. But I do think that each organization, each leader, that decides access matters and acts on it, shifts something. And shifts, compounded, become change.