Companies feel immense pressure to integrate AI to stay competitive, leading to massive spending. However, this rush means they lack the infrastructure to measure ROI, creating a paradox of anxious investment without clear proof of value.
Related Insights
New McKinsey research reveals a significant AI adoption gap. While 88% of organizations use AI, nearly two-thirds haven't scaled it beyond pilots, meaning they are not behind their peers. This explains why only 39% report enterprise-level EBIT impact. True high-performers succeed by fundamentally redesigning workflows, not just experimenting.
The AI race has been a prisoner's dilemma where companies spend massively, fearing competitors will pull ahead. As the cost of next-gen systems like Blackwell and Rubin becomes astronomical, the sheer economics will force a shift. Decision-making will be dominated by ROI calculations rather than the existential dread of slowing down.
![Gavin Baker - Nvidia v. Google, Scaling Laws, and the Economics of AI - [Invest Like the Best, EP.451] thumbnail](https://megaphone.imgix.net/podcasts/d97fee14-d4d7-11f0-8951-8324b640c1c1/image/d3a8b5ecbf3957de5b91f278a191c9ff.jpg?ixlib=rails-4.3.1&max-w=3000&max-h=3000&fit=crop&auto=format,compress)
Marketing leaders pressured to adopt AI are discovering the primary obstacle isn't the technology, but their own internal data infrastructure. Siloed, inconsistently structured data across teams prevents them from effectively leveraging AI for consumer insights and business growth.
Enterprises struggle to get value from AI due to a lack of iterative, data-science expertise. The winning model for AI companies isn't just selling APIs, but embedding "forward deployment" teams of engineers and scientists to co-create solutions, closing the gap between prototype and production value.
An "optimization-execution gap" reveals that while 96% of CMOs prioritize AI, only 65% make meaningful investments. This lack of commitment leaves teams stuck in an experimentation phase, preventing the deep workflow integration needed for significant productivity gains.
A large-scale Wharton study found 75% of business leaders see positive ROI from AI, directly contradicting a widely-cited but methodologically questionable MIT report claiming 95% of pilots fail. This confirms that despite the hype, businesses are successfully generating tangible value from their AI investments.
The true enterprise value of AI lies not in consuming third-party models, but in building internal capabilities to diffuse intelligence throughout the organization. This means creating proprietary "AI factories" rather than just using external tools and admiring others' success.
Historically, labor costs dwarfed software spending. As AI automates tasks, software budgets will balloon, turning into a primary corporate expense. This forces CFOs to scrutinize software ROI with the same rigor they once applied only to their workforce.
The primary reason multi-million dollar AI initiatives stall or fail is not the sophistication of the models, but the underlying data layer. Traditional data infrastructure creates delays in moving and duplicating information, preventing the real-time, comprehensive data access required for AI to deliver business value. The focus on algorithms misses this foundational roadblock.
AI's growth is hampered by a measurement problem, much like early digital advertising. The industry's acceleration won't come from better AI models alone, but from building a 'boring' infrastructure, like Comscore did for ads, to prove the tools actually work.