![](\"https:\/\/fortune.com\/img-assets\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/10\/image_2880x1920.jpg?w=2048\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
New technologies have a history of reshaping C-suite responsibilities. Three years ago, few companies had a chief AI officer on the C-suite but, as the technology became embedded in the workplace, having a dedicated leader to set AI strategy and governance became a necessity for many organizations.\u00a0<\/p>\n
In 2023, just 11% of organizations had someone with a chief AI officer title, according to IBM\u2019s Institute for Business Value. Now, 76% of organizations surveyed by IBM have a CAIO. \u00a0<\/p>\n
The complexity, opportunities, and risks posed by quantum computing means that it could be the next technology that requires its own dedicated role.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Quantum computers harness quantum mechanics to solve computational problems significantly faster than even the largest supercomputers. The technology has the potential to help\u00a0design and test drugs, optimize airline and\u00a0logistics routes, or sharpen financial risk modeling for banks.\u00a0<\/p>\n
In 2025, HSBC and IBM found that using a quantum computer made the bank up to 34% better at predicting whether its price would win a client\u2019s bond trade. Meanwhile, AstraZeneca, AWS, and Nvidia worked with U.S. quantum company IonQ to cut the simulation time for a key drug-synthesis reaction roughly twentyfold. \u00a0<\/p>\n
Despite its potential business applications, the chief quantum officer title remains rare and is held mostly inside quantum companies. Swiss chipmaker SEALSQ appointed a chief quantum officer in August, while the innovation hub QuantumBasel\u2019s chief quantum officer has been in place since April. Quantum Computing Inc.\u2019s chief quantum officer was promoted to CEO last year.\u00a0<\/p>\n
At many of Europe\u2019s largest companies, however, the job typically sits further down the organizational chart. HSBC created a group head of quantum technologies in 2021, BMW has a dedicated quantum computing team inside its IT organization, and Airbus has a central coordinator for quantum technologies.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Only 46% of CEOs have a team in place for identifying specific quantum use cases and the associated business value, according to a survey by IBM.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
Lionel Martellini, founding director of the EDHEC Quantum Institute in France, argues quantum deserves its own title and a direct line to the board. \u201cQuantum should be a board-level discussion. It\u2019s not an IT discussion,\u201d he says.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
His reasoning is that quantum carries both tremendous risk and opportunity. A powerful enough quantum computer could one day crack the encryption that keeps banking and business communications secure, exposing confidential deals, customer data, or payments. \u00a0<\/p>\n
Companies are being urged to start upgrading their security. Under an EU roadmap, operators of critical infrastructure, including energy and finance, are expected to move their highest-risk systems to quantum-safe encryption by the end of 2030.\u00a0<\/p>\n
At the same time, quantum could one day deliver commercial value in almost every industry, from pharmaceuticals and finance to logistics and energy. \u201cCount the sectors, and that\u2019s pretty much everyone,\u201d Martellini says. \u00a0<\/p>\n
However, it does not fit neatly into any existing executive job, he adds. Someone must decide where to invest and, with regulatory deadlines looming, companies can\u2019t wait until the technology matures. \u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cAnyone who\u2019s not starting to prepare now is already late,\u201d Martellini says. He expects most of the largest companies to have a designated quantum lead by 2030. Whether that person reports to the board is less certain. \u201cThat is not always the case,\u201d he says, \u201cbut it definitely should be.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
Without senior ownership, quantum may struggle for funding. In a Fujitsu survey of 300 executives, 96% expected quantum to benefit their organization, yet 63% said they divert investment from it toward AI and other nearer-term technologies.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Martellini also warns against \u201cquantum washing,\u201d his term for overstated claims about the technology. One example is when a use case is chosen because it suits quantum hardware rather than because it makes economic sense. He advises companies to start with the business problem and decide whether classical or quantum computing would be best suited to solving it.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s more important to understand what quantum cannot do for you than to understand what quantum can accomplish for you,\u201d he says.\u00a0That judgment is harder for boards to make with quantum than with AI, he adds, because most executives have experience of using AI.\u00a0<\/p>\n
German utility company E.ON is exploring whether quantum can help it balance an increasingly complex grid and make more accurate financing decisions when setting energy contracts. Electric vehicles, heat pumps, and weather-dependent solar and wind are adding variables that make these calculations more complicated and demand harder to predict. The company is not yet using quantum hardware in operations.\u00a0<\/p>\n
E.ON has no chief quantum officer. Its program is overseen by Victoria Ossadnik, chief operating officer for digital and innovation, who holds a PhD in the field. She calls a dedicated quantum executive \u201coverkill\u201d for most businesses.\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cIt completely depends on the company,\u201d she says. \u201cFor a non-tech company, quantum is a tool to solve technical problems.\u201d In her view, this can be overseen by an existing technology leader, such as a chief digital officer. \u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cWhen you drive a car, you don\u2019t need to understand how the different parts of your electric engine fit together,\u201d she says. \u201cAs long as it gives reasonable results, it\u2019s all good.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
Technology companies that run frontier research divisions are a different case, she says. Other businesses can treat quantum as\u00a0\u201can emerging technology which starts to create value but is a very small part of what the company is doing.\u201d \u00a0<\/p>\n
However, capitalizing on the potential of quantum computing still requires someone who is capable of turning a business problem into a mathematical equation that a quantum computer can run. \u201cThere are very few people in the world who can do that,\u201d Ossadnik adds.\u00a0<\/p>\n
In E.ON\u2019s case digital chief happens to be a quantum physicist. Few other companies have tech leaders with the same experience. \u00a0<\/p>\n
\u201cThe interesting question isn\u2019t whether quantum technology requires a specialist role with a job title,\u201d argues Charles Radclyffe, CEO of AI startup EA and former head of emerging technology at Deutsche Bank. \u201cIt\u2019s whether the risk is owned by somebody with the authority to act on it.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
Without ensuring someone has the power and resources to act, organizations risk\u00a0making \u201can impressive-sounding appointment and no meaningful change in behavior,\u201d Radclyffe adds.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
He saw the same pattern in the early years of AI governance.\u00a0 \u201cOrganizations published principles, policies and ethics statements that sounded reassuring, but often lacked ownership, accountability or any mechanism for implementation. A chief quantum officer without a mandate, budget, and governance authority risks becoming the equivalent.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
If quantum poses a real risk, Radclyffe says, it should be managed like cyber, AI, and climate risk, with a named executive in charge, regular updates to the board and scrutiny from a board committee. \u201cA chief quantum officer sitting inside a technology function does not automatically provide that,\u201d Radclyffe says.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Instead, he advises businesses to\u00a0produce an inventory of their quantum exposure, across cryptography, data, suppliers, and products to determine who owns those risks and which ones the board needs to be involved in.\u00a0\u201cMost organizations cannot answer those questions confidently, and a title alone does not solve that problem,\u201d he says.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
So, does a company need a chief quantum officer? \u201cPossibly,\u201d Radclyffe says, \u201cbut only if the role exists to strengthen governance rather than signal intent.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
Whatever the title, boards will need to understand quantum well enough to ask the right questions and judge when action or investment is necessary. With the EU\u2019s 2030 encryption deadline fast-approaching, business leaders will have to decide who is best placed to protect the company\u2019s systems\u2014and determine whether quantum could give their company an edge.\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
#company #chief #quantum #officer<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
New technologies have a histor… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":7810,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[1020,623,1126,4200,4017,4578],"class_list":["post-7809","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-finance-news","tag-chief","tag-company","tag-londonarticles","tag-officer","tag-quantum","tag-quantum-computer"],"yoast_head":"\n