What It Is Like to Be an AI Consultant Across Japan and the Global Market

Working as an AI consultant across both Japanese and non-Japanese companies has made one thing very clear to me:

AI adoption is not just a technology problem - it is a cultural one.

I recently started working with a large Japanese enterprise, and the contrast between how AI is entering the Japanese market versus how it is being pushed in the U.S. and the UAE is striking.

In 2025, Japan had the lowest ChatGPT adoption rate among developed countries.

That picture has changed rapidly.

In just the past six months, I rarely meet anyone who does not use it anymore. The shift is especially visible among younger generations - for example, over 84% of high school students now use generative AI to study for university entrance exams.

At the same time, inside organizations, I am noticing an interesting gap.

Despite the high adoption rate, many employees are still waiting for their companies to define how AI should be used at work. ChatGPT usage often remains limited to generic searches, personal curiosity, or even human-relationship support, rather than being applied directly to work optimization or operational improvement.

In other words, the tool is widely available, but the permission and framework to use it professionally are still missing.

Top-down vs. catch-up-driven adoption

In many of my U.S. and UAE clients, AI adoption is decisively top-down. The message is often implicit, and sometimes explicit:

If you don't adapt, you won't survive here.

The focus is on speed, efficiency, and future-state optimization. My role in these environments is usually to design what the organization could look like if AI were fully embedded, and then move aggressively toward that vision.

In contrast, Japanese enterprises take a very different approach.

Rather than forcing rapid transformation, they invest heavily in bringing everyone along. Detailed step-by-step guides, internal workshops, and dedicated AI enablement teams are created to support employees through the transition. Changes are introduced gradually, with an emphasis on minimizing disruption - both to operations and to people.

Japanese companies are willing to spend time and resources helping employees “catch up,” rather than cutting them loose when they struggle to adapt.

Neither approach is right or wrong

I do not believe one model is inherently better than the other.

Both come with clear trade-offs.

Fast, top-down adoption creates momentum and competitiveness, but can be brutal for individuals.

Slower, people-centered adoption builds long-term capability, but risks falling behind if the pace of change accelerates too quickly.

What is fascinating to me is watching these two philosophies unfold in parallel, shaped by deeply rooted cultural values rather than technology constraints.

As someone working between these worlds, my role shifts constantly - from designing bold future states, to patiently helping organizations build the foundations needed to get there.

It is just exciting to see how things evolve so differently. I cannot wait to see how it looks like in a few years.

I am genuinely curious to see how these different paths converge (or diverge) as AI becomes an unavoidable part of how we work.