When deploying AI tools, especially in sales, users exhibit no patience for mistakes. While a human making an error receives coaching and a second chance, an AI's single failure can cause users to abandon the tool permanently due to a complete loss of trust.

Many developers dismiss AI coding tools as a fad based on experiences with earlier, less capable versions. The rapid, non-linear progress means perceptions become dated in months, creating a massive capability gap between what skeptics believe and what current tools can actually do.

Users mistakenly evaluate AI tools based on the quality of the first output. However, since 90% of the work is iterative, the superior tool is the one that handles a high volume of refinement prompts most effectively, not the one with the best initial result.

A paradox of rapid AI progress is the widening "expectation gap." As users become accustomed to AI's power, their expectations for its capabilities grow even faster than the technology itself. This leads to a persistent feeling of frustration, even though the tools are objectively better than they were a year ago.

The main barrier to AI's impact is not its technical flaws but the fact that most organizations don't understand what it can actually do. Advanced features like 'deep research' and reasoning models remain unused by over 95% of professionals, leaving immense potential and competitive advantage untapped.

The perceived limits of today's AI are not inherent to the models themselves but to our failure to build the right "agentic scaffold" around them. There's a "model capability overhang" where much more potential can be unlocked with better prompting, context engineering, and tool integrations.

Recent dips in AI tool subscriptions are not due to a technology bubble. The real bottleneck is a lack of 'AI fluency'—users don't know how to provide the right prompts and context to get valuable results. The problem isn't the AI; it's the user's ability to communicate effectively.

Many technical leaders initially dismissed generative AI for its failures on simple logical tasks. However, its rapid, tangible improvement over a short period forces a re-evaluation and a crucial mindset shift towards adoption to avoid being left behind.

The true measure of a new AI model's power isn't just improved benchmarks, but a qualitative shift in fluency that makes using previous versions feel "painful." This experiential gap, where the old model suddenly feels worse at everything, is the real indicator of a breakthrough.