The reality of agentic AI is catching up with the hype. For some time, the idea of multi-agent systems – hundreds of agents communicating and collaborating – was more a conceptual vision than a practical reality. Now, the autonomous element of artificial intelligence (AI) agents is becoming far more concrete, and enterprises are beginning to explore what it means to allow these systems to act with greater independence.
This shift brings a critical question: how much autonomy should enterprises give AI, and how can they design a system of “bounded autonomy” – where AI has the freedom to take initiative, but always within clear rules and oversight?
The Rise of Agentic AI in Enterprises
Generative AI has proven transformative for content creation, coding assistance, and countless other tasks. But it comes with a fundamental limitation: it needs constant prompting. Each interaction is transactional, placing a cap on efficiency and creating bottlenecks.
Agentic AI removes that bottleneck. Instead of waiting for instructions, it can take initiative. It can review data, plan, execute and validate its own actions. That ability to think, strategise and act is the true differentiator. It is what elevates AI from being a helpful assistant to becoming an active collaborator.
This autonomy is especially relevant in complex, process-heavy environments like financial services, insurance, and healthcare. For years, businesses in these sectors have struggled to build fully automated workflows because the orchestration was too complicated. And no matter how well thought through, these workflows would inevitably require human intervention at critical points. Agentic AI changes the equation by handling complexity end-to-end, while humans focus on what matters most: innovation, judgment, and the customer experience.
ALSO READ: The First-Mover’s Guide to Agentic AI: A 5-Step Framework for Success
The Autonomy Paradox
The promise of agentic AI is its ability to empower scale within organisations. Imagine a company of 50 being able to operate with the output and impact of a company of 500. That is the real game-changer, giving organisations more opportunity, more revenue potential, and a greater share of the market.
But for all the promise autonomy brings, it also introduces tension. Enterprises want the scale and efficiency that agentic AI offers, but they hesitate to hand over too much control. This is the autonomy paradox: the desire to automate is tempered by the fear of unintended consequences.
That fear is not unfounded. Trust remains a significant barrier because large-scale, real-world examples of agentic AI in production are still relatively few. The pace of innovation adds another layer of uncertainty; new frameworks and platforms are emerging so quickly that no business wants to invest heavily only to find its chosen technology eclipsed within months. Then there is regulation. The EU AI Act, for example, will shape how autonomy can be deployed in areas such as hiring or credit approvals. Until these frameworks settle into something predictable, most leaders will take a cautious approach.
And finally, process maturity matters. In software engineering, for example, established disciplines and documentation make it easier to introduce autonomy safely. But in industries that rely heavily on tacit human knowledge, those boundaries and rules often have to be made explicit before autonomy can be introduced. That makes the journey slower, but it also makes the case for bounded autonomy even stronger.
ALSO READ: The GenAI Paradox: Why Widespread Adoption Hasn’t Led to Widespread Value
Designing for Bounded Autonomy
There is no single answer to how much autonomy AI should be given, but there are guiding principles.
Organisations should begin with relatively low-risk, high-value use cases. By building trust and confidence step by step, they can expand the scope of autonomy over time without taking unnecessary risks. The right level of oversight depends on context. A sports brand using AI to generate marketing content will require less scrutiny than a bank using AI to approve mortgages. Enterprises need to calibrate autonomy to the risk profile of the activity.
Alongside this, each organisation also needs to consider how the critical role of human oversight fits into the process. People bring contextual awareness, ethical reasoning, empathy and creativity; qualities that AI, no matter how advanced, cannot fully replicate. Keeping them in the loop ensures that when AI systems face ambiguity, conflicting objectives or ethical dilemmas, decisions are ultimately shaped by human values. In practice, this means designing workflows where humans make the critical decisions, while AI accelerates execution in the background.
One of the advantages of agentic AI is that it can naturally create an audit trail of its actions. By logging plans, documenting steps and recording outcomes, enterprises can build transparency and accountability into their AI workflows. This is particularly important in regulated industries, where the ability to demonstrate compliance is non-negotiable.
Bounded autonomy is not about constraining innovation; it is about enabling it responsibly. By setting clear parameters, enterprises give AI the space to act while ensuring that human oversight remains in place where it matters most.
ALSO READ: Autonomy or Augmentation? What AI Is Really Doing Inside Enterprises
From Copilot to Colleague
Agentic AI represents the next stage in the evolution of enterprise technology. By combining efficiency and scale with governance and oversight, businesses that embrace this shift thoughtfully will move beyond copilots and assistants to a model where AI actively collaborates with people to drive better business outcomes.
