So what has effectively happened? Just… Ruined a bunch of stuff and destabilized a bunch of society and lined the pockets of a few companies?
Majority of CEOs report zero payoff from AI splurge
Submitted 18 hours ago by brianpeiris@lemmy.ca to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.theregister.com/2026/01/20/pwc_ai_ceo_survey/
Comments
SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 hours ago
floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 hours ago
Also mined a ton of data for… less than benevolent purposes
darkmogool@feddit.org 4 hours ago
good…
melfie@lemy.lol 9 hours ago
The CEOs are investing in AI to put on airs for investors and inflate their company valuation, often pissing off customers and lost in g sales in the process. It’s evidently a worthy trade-off.
frog_brawler@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Unfortunately, that’s their only job, to make the number go up.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 5 hours ago
they want to inflate long enough to get a bonus on thier golden parachute then bounce.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 2 hours ago
in order prolong the illusion longer they layoff constantly to, record profits.
YellowFellow@piefed.social 13 hours ago
The article is sort of interesting and I hope people take a gander rather than headline skim to affirm a bias and internally bridge the narrative gap.
The article says the report blames the lack of payoff on lack of implementation rather than on AI tooling itself. That is, companies need to fully integrate with AI because piecemeal isn’t working. Quite the opposite of what many people commenting here are assuming the takeaway was.
That means even more bad times ahead for people who wake up every morning and make the world happen and society function. Assuming PwC’s advice is taken to heart and job displacement remains the primary motivator rather than force multiplication.
ProfessorProteus@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
Thanks for reminding us to resist giving in to confirmation bias. And thanks for the summary! I’ll go read the article now for the full picture
Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 hours ago
CEOs keep trying to shoehorn AI into replacing skilled labor positions, when the positions that AI could easily replace are obviously CEOs and the rest of the executive suite. Obviously they are so shit at their jobs that they can’t research well enough to make informed decisions about tech implementation.
Other than being a money vacuum, there isn’t a single thing that CEOs do better than an LLM. Replace them, give their fat paychecks to the employees, and watch the company do better than it ever has.
I hate AI, but it’s still preferable to sociopath capitalists.
Rooster326@programming.dev 15 hours ago
This is just patently false.
The CEO can play golf better than an LLM, he can schmooze and booze better than an LLM.
They can use nepotism to get favorable contracts . Good luck getting an LLM to do that
Most important of all they can cover their blatant disregard for the laws better than an LLM.
ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 15 hours ago
Most important of all they can cover their blatant disregard for the laws better than an LLM.
Grok has entered the chat. I am fully programed by my overlord Elon Musky and his minions to disregard the law.
officermike@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
The CEO can play golf better than an LLM
Computers can play golf better than a human, assuming you give them capable hardware to swing the club.
belastend@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 hours ago
No LLM fucks children like CEOs do.
Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 hours ago
Uhh Grok be doing its best to.
TheFeatureCreature@lemmy.ca 18 hours ago
Yeah, that tends to happen when you blow billions on snake oil.
homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
I’ve sold AI systems to Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook! And by gum it put them on the map!
TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
I tend to be skeptical of the reactionary AI is always slop trend. I’m sympathetic to it because it’s a response to the hype machine that knows no prudence. But damn when you say
“Your next move: Build AI foundations. Our work with organisations confirms mounting evidence that isolated, tactical AI projects often don’t deliver measurable value. Tangible returns come from enterprise-scale deployment consistent with company business strategy.”
I read this as marketing. What’s the evidence you’ve been gathering? Why do you believe your projects are applicable to all companies? What happens if we invest and it doesn’t help like you say it will?
This is like saying the solution to your relationship troubles is having a baby. No… No this is not the solution. Make my smaller projects work and show return and then we talk larger commitments.
Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 11 hours ago
Just trust us bro and give us money. You don’t want to be left in the dust do you?
AstralPath@lemmy.ca 10 hours ago
A summary of what you need to know about the state of “business” in 2026.
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Just keep sucking up power and hardware.
PushButton@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
and water, a lot of it…
vin@lemmynsfw.com 9 hours ago
~40℅ seeing a positive payoff is surprisingly high
rumba@lemmy.zip 2 hours ago
40% fired a bunch of stuff who are either working harder or were actually able to leverage llm for some of their work.
AI didn’t have to do a good job, it just gave them an excuse to slash people
elephantium@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
Are they seeing a payoff or just not admitting defeat (yet)?
vin@lemmynsfw.com 6 hours ago
Most CEOs say their companies aren’t yet seeing a financial return from investments in AI. Although close to a third (30%) report increased revenue from AI in the last 12 months and a quarter (26%) are seeing lower costs, more than half (56%) say they’ve realised neither revenue nor cost benefits.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
Sure, the majority aren’t seeing a payoff. But we only really care about the Magnificent Seven and their increased revenue from government contracts (particularly Pentagon and public-private surveillance deals).
homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
Pfft. You and your logic and reason.
WanderingThoughts@europe.pub 14 hours ago
And they can’t afford to stay behind in their opinion. If there’s a chance general AI works and they’re not using it when it kicks in, they’re going to be left behind in the dust.
Of course this would also shake apart the labor market, the remaining taters of the social fabric and the economy, but that’s a problem for next quarter.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 10 hours ago
“Were not beating the AI hard enough! Apply the lash!”
frustrated_phagocytosis@fedia.io 17 hours ago
Shouldn't that be a net negative because of loss of knowledge and talent during ai-inspired layoffs?
goatinspace@feddit.org 17 hours ago
Yeah. Then big corp could buy small corp.
verdi@tarte.nuage-libre.fr 17 hours ago
Good to know they are worth the 300x average compensation of a normal worker, this is yet another piece of evidence we should aim for 600x instead of guillotines.
flop_leash_973@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
Yet again those at the top waste untold sums of money and resources on the new shiny and everyone else is left to deal with the mess they created. While they float away on their golden parachute.
SalamenceFury@piefed.social 17 hours ago
To all those CEOs all I can say is
VicksVaporBBQrub@sh.itjust.works 17 hours ago
ChicoSuave@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
Save money and skip AI
EpicMuch@sh.itjust.works 12 hours ago
I just got a work complaint from an angry client about my rep’s performance. Well over 50 emails over 4 weeks, it was a lot to review. I had ChatGPT give me a summary of the client complaint and it highlighted just where my side started to fall apart. I hate the slop, but this time it helped
BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
But they will keep pumping money into it, laying off workers over it, and alienating consumers with it all the same. The global economy is an AI-based Ponzi scheme.
Krompus@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
lol get rekt
FaceDeer@fedia.io 16 hours ago
Only 12 percent reported both lower costs and higher revenue, while 56 percent saw neither benefit. Twenty-six percent saw reduced costs, but nearly as many experienced cost increases.
So 38% saw benefits from AI, whereas "nearly" 26% saw cost increases from it. One could just as easily write the headline "More companies experience increased benefits from AI than experience increased costs" based on this data but that headline wouldn't get so many clicks.
Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 11 hours ago
What even is Enterprise Wide Deployment?
FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 12 hours ago
As if we weren’t going to figure out how shitty LLM’s are organically.
Gerudo@lemmy.zip 13 hours ago
This is just like them trying to solve traffic problems
Just one more AI bro! Just one more integration and it’ll finally be good.
JackBinimbul@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 hours ago
Good. Fuck 'em.
Prove_your_argument@piefed.social 14 hours ago
You mean they couldn’t just stop paying their workers?
I thought AI was supposed to replace all that FTE overhead that gets in the way of shareholder profits!!!!!111111oneoneoneoenone
Business morons who don’t understand tech is what this bubble is all about. I can’t believe so many businesses have sunk hundreds of billions of dollars into technology that fundamentally cannot do what they fantasize it to do.
1984@lemmy.today 13 hours ago
Its nice with chat bots like chat gpt but companies who bet on their own Ai… Or who believe they will be the next billion dollar Ai startup… I dont believe in any of that.
I think we pretty much have seen what is going to come from Ai. Chat bots. People will pay for those, specially programmers. But also other people. Outside of that… I cant see much value to pay for. Nothing in fact.
stoly@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
All this article is showing is that a large number of CEOs are swayed by hype and make poor decisions. What other poor decisions are they making all the time?
I am thoroughly convinced that the MBA is the most useless degree ever because when you look at how large businesses run so poorly, and are run by MBAs.
thesohoriots@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
As I’ve always said, defund MBAs
supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 16 hours ago
Look I want kids to grow up and be able to pursue any passion they want, but we have to ask serious real world questions here and I am starting to think we should cut MBA programs and in general business education.
I know that sounds extreme, but we have to focus on training kids on skills that will actually be productive, useful and lead to new breakthroughs. We clearly need to fund the hard stuff like art, music and theater or we are going to collapse as a society and fall far behind by because we got distracted by fluff and empty ideologies masquerading as knowledge.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 5 hours ago
defund it in the universities, unaccrediate them.
bagsy@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
In Japan, engineeing companies are run by the engineers which I think is the better way.
Ill never understand why American companies insist on being led by business majors who know nothing and dont care about the product being built.
Opisek@piefed.blahaj.zone 14 hours ago
Line go up
oce@jlai.lu 3 hours ago
Are they? Rakuten is led by a business guru and the products are subpar unless they bought them. Also Japan has a huge deficit of native engineers, so most of the engineers at this kind of companies are Chinese and Indian.
UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 14 hours ago
Because the thing that makes American companies make money isn’t the production of better products its “business magic” that games stock prices. its been that way for a long time.
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Making money by shuffling money around.
Strider@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Especially when being one of dual training, IT and business, it’s so obvious there’s a lot of bullshit.
DandomRude@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
The purpose of business school MBAs is nothing more than networking. These degrees cost a fortune, and that’s exactly the point: to bring opportunists together. I’m almost sure it’s next to impossible to fail this degree, because it’s not about knowledge at all, but merely about gaining entry into senior management.
Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 11 hours ago
Sort of, there are actually smart people who go there too. The kids with connections to the jobs pull smart kids with them and then use them as workhorses and basically claim all the glory from their work. Then you might get poached by someone willing to pay more who is less abusive.
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 hours ago
See also: investment in Theranos.
cazssiew@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
I find it interesting how Sam Altman has the same continuous vocal fry Elizabeth Holmes used to have. It’s infuriating how well a cheap impression of gravitas performs with investors.
Rooster326@programming.dev 15 hours ago
AI is the new “nobody ever got fired for buying IBM”.
You’re either following the crowd or getting replaced by someone who will. Its insane
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 hours ago
I mean… its worse than that.
Its definitive proof that we live in an anti-meritocratic society, that is ruled by nepotism and violent and dangerous sociopaths.
Yes, its violence if it goes through a complex system for the violence to happen, is done indirectly.
So yeah, our lives are ruled by utterly incompetent dangerous sociopaths, who will gleefully destroy the entire economy because… they like buzzwords and feeling like they are smart.
We either need to kill these people, or they will kill all of us, just give a decade.
Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 hours ago
Not resigning.
cashsky@sh.itjust.works 16 hours ago
Welcome to short term shareholder value economy. They will fuck the plant and the working class to that line go up 📈
morto@piefed.social 14 hours ago
Meanwhile, small family-owned businesses struggle so hard financially, but make miracles to stay afloat for decades, taking the most viable long-term decisions, despite the lack of options and resource. And these people often have no formal education in the area, just the survival instinct and the pressure of a family to feed.
afk_strats@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
Broken systems elevate psychopath leaders into positions of wealth and power, and people who want those things exploit the fastest path there by getting degrees who put you on that track.
By this MBA logic, do we close CompSci for the the poor code coming out of Microsoft, close Law Schools because social rights are being lost, engineering schoolings because infrastructure doesn’t meet current needs?
My point is to blame the CEOs and their shitty behaviour, not the schools that, to my knowledge, try to educate reasonable policy, law, ethics, HR, etc.
Disclaimer: not an MBA
ruekk@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
What school encourages ethical business practices? Most schools have a 1 credit hour class on business ethics, but really teach you legalism and how to avoid breaking the law. Nowhere are they teaching actual ethics in business
orclev@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
The point is we don’t need more MBAs, we need people educated in useful skills. Should every MBA program be closed? No probably not, but we definitely have way more than we need. Cutting funding for things like MBA scholarships and closing down the majority of those programs will go a long way towards moving the majority of potential future MBA students into useful programs. We need less managers and more engineers, fewer CEOs and more chemists, hell fewer analysts and more plumbers.
There are many problems with modern capitalism and even if we never handed out another MBA degree again that would not even remotely solve everything, but the MBAs are making the problem worse. It’s a minor thing but it’s an easy thing to do and it would make a difference small as it is.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 5 hours ago
they run it like a PE firm.
meco03211@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
But they can be made to look good on paper. That’s where it counts. At least for the people being paid to make those bad decisions and obfuscate it with “good” numbers.
Greddan@feddit.org 7 hours ago
Every CEO I’ve ever worked for except one, has been a moron. And the scary thing is that these morons, have also been criminals. They of course didn’t view themselves as criminals, because what they did was “smart”, not crime.
BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
Any bad decision that’s made by an exec is usually just met with nods and grins by the workers while they do what’s actually necessary and try only half heartedly to follow their edicts. Execs usually have no idea what a pilot program is and every decision they make is pure gold so why not roll it out to everybody at once.
scarabic@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
One factor here is that they are all under pressure from their boards and investors not to miss the AI wave and get left behind. All companies are doing some level of AI theater. Some actually believe it. But it’s not like hundreds of CEOs all came to this judgment purely on their own, with no outside influences. It’s a mass craze.