Do you think the director was truly convinced AI was a good technical solution despite the evidence? Or is it possible they were participating in an emperor-has-no-clothes situation, i.e. the CEO has mandated all teams implement AI somewhere, anywhere?
I'm not saying it was a sensible decision, but I think at that level you kinda need to have a few balls in the air. Having a few projects using ML or whatever else is in vogue is defensible, might be a win, might build some expertise, shows you're in touch with the current thing etc.
I think this was a folly by our director. About a year after I left I learnt that he had "left to pursue other opportunities", which is corporate speak for "he got canned".