Artificial intelligence has become the loudest conversation in trucking, promising faster compliance checks, deeper video analytics, and instant answers to complicated regulatory questions. But according to Rustin Keller, President and CEO of J. J. Keller & Associates, Inc., the technology's expanding footprint has not changed who is ultimately accountable when something goes wrong.

"AI is going to accelerate business, not just in high tech places where it can be awe inspiring, but also in the back office," Keller said. "It gives employees the ability to quickly do analysis of a lot of data. It's amazing."

Speed and insight, however, do not remove responsibility. "At the end of the day, humans are still responsible for outcomes," Keller said. "Humans still have to run the operation, site, or fleet safely. You're responsible for incidents and the programs you implement to make things safer. When an incident occurs, you don't get to say 'AI is to blame.'"

That accountability carries real weight in a federally regulated industry. Motor carriers operate under safety rules enforced by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), and the agency's Safety Measurement System tracks carriers on indicators including crashes, hours-of-service compliance, and vehicle maintenance. Responsibility for compliance ultimately rests with the carrier, a point that matters as fleets weigh how much decision-making to hand to automated tools.

Fleets today have access to a volume of operational data that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago. The value of that visibility is immense, but it does not solve every problem. "You now have footage of the drivers, yards, warehouses, and all aspects of the operation," Keller said. "You now can get more data than ever on all accidents from a given period and you can analyze root causes."

In his view, the harder problem begins once the data is in hand. "You still need to know what to do next," Keller said. "Getting better information is awesome, but now what?"

AI can generate options, but it cannot make the call. "You still own it and you still have to decide what's appropriate. AI can't understand your team and your operation's nuances. You have to take the next step forward."

The gap between data and action is where experts bring the most value. "That's what we do at J. J. Keller," Keller said. "We make great safety and compliance products and platforms, but we're an advisory company first."

That identity as an advisory firm is baked into the company's origin story, which Keller traces back to his grandfather. The company was founded in 1953 by John J. "Jack" Keller in Neenah, Wisconsin. "My grandfather started the company as a one-man consulting firm to help motor carriers navigate complex new interstate trucking regulations under the ICC and DOT," Keller said. "Our first product was advising customers, and that's still our roots."

The advisory pedigree shows up in engagement numbers today, and Keller says demand for direct human expertise has climbed even as new technologies have arrived. "We do more than 350 webcasts and seminars every year," Keller said. "Some people might think AI will slow that down, but we're seeing all time records on attendance. More people are seeking our seminars than ever before."

According to Keller, what is driving that appetite is not AI adoption itself but what he considers the industry's real adversary. "We always say that our number one competitor is complacency," he said. "Doing nothing is number one. Companies often decide that what they have is just fine."

What is shifting, he argued, is fleets' willingness to tolerate that complacency. "What's happening now, though, is that people are getting more educated and now are seeking more information from experts when they run into the difficult issues," Keller said. "More people can see the pitfalls and the legal cases, and they know they have to do something."

Keller has also noticed a change in tone from customers who once pushed back on regulatory requirements they did not want to accept. "Customers used to argue with our consultants on the little nuances of regulations," he said. "They would insist they didn't need CDLs or hazmat certifications for their operations when they most certainly did, but that kind of attitude is largely going away."

Basic regulatory facts are easier to find than ever, he said, but that has not eliminated the need for guidance. "AI can't sit down with you and talk about improvement plans."

Even as J. J. Keller builds its own AI capabilities, there are limits to what the technology can accomplish. "Our team is building AI tools, trained off of our own data," Keller said. "But AI can only do so much. It's making its best estimate. Ultimately, it's still up to our consultants to walk through real actionable steps."

With so many vendors marketing faster, AI-driven answers, Keller offered a simple standard for separating substance from hype: can the tool's output hold up under scrutiny?

"Can your software defend an approach you decided to take or processes you implemented?" Keller asked. "Can it explain why you made a choice or exercised professional judgment? You still need experts to explain the options you had and what course you took and why."

That standard, he said, also draws a line between using AI to gather information and using it to make decisions that carry legal or safety weight. "It's good to get a synthesized assessment from AI," Keller said, "but you need specific advice and people with specific experience in the field."

On regulation specifically, Keller sees real value in AI's ability to summarize fast-moving rules and case law — up to a point. "AI is helping people understand what is required of them," he said. "You can use tools now to explain rules and court cases. AI can give you a good summary and explanation of what applies to you and what rules are in play."

Where it falls short, he argued, is translating that summary into an operational plan. "You still have the issues of priorities, initiative, leadership, what tools to put in place, best practices, and procedures," Keller said. "Humans are still responsible for the ultimate outcome."

Keller pointed to video-based safety analysis as a clear example. "With tons of video footage, you can find the most common error, and now you know the Pareto distribution of problems," he said. "But what's the best approach? It's often a combination of solutions in a very particular set of circumstances. You have to figure out the best approach based on your unique situation, leadership team, and employees. Generic solutions are often going to cause problems."

As AI tools become table stakes across the industry, Keller does not expect them to be the deciding factor in which fleets pull ahead. "It ultimately comes down to leadership," he said. "More information doesn't mean better decisions. You still need great leadership and a team that can identify the approach that's best for you."

That belief shapes what Keller hears directly from fleet leaders weighing how far to lean into automation. "We get a lot of questions about customer service," he said. "A lot of companies are taking a gamble that they can automate everything and that humans aren't necessary for a lot of work. Our clients want to know, can we still reach people? Can I still call an actual expert on the phone? We're an advisory company, so we still have people on the phone every day and we still help people face to face."

The appetite for automation, Keller added, has its limits: "Companies don't want to rely on chat bots for everything."

J. J. Keller's roots as a credible, regulation-first advisory firm predate the AI era by decades, and that remains the company's core identity. "We're unique in that what we offer is not simply a product," Keller said. "We're here to help you improve outcomes. We do make products, but our goal is a combination of helping you understand your situation, helping you make the best decisions, and helping you make your operation safer and reduce your risk."