企业AI投资回报真相：74%的企业已获得实际收益
关于企业级人工智能（AI）的讨论，常常陷入两极分化：一边是AI带来爆发式增长的乐观故事，另一边则是对其注定失败的悲观预言。然而，最新研究数据揭示了一个更清晰、更具操作性的现实——那些真正实现AI投资回报的企业，靠的不是技术本身，而是系统性的执行策略。
一项历时三年、覆盖800名美国企业决策者的严谨研究显示，74%的受访企业已从生成式AI投资中获得正向回报，尤其是在大语言模型（LLM）的应用场景中。在科技和银行/金融等行业，这一比例分别高达88%和83%。生成式AI的使用率也迅速攀升：82%的企业领导者每周使用AI工具，近一半的人每天都在使用。
衡量成功：明确指标是实现AI价值的关键
真正的成功离不开结构化的衡量体系。研究发现，72%的企业已建立正式机制，通过与业务直接挂钩的具体指标来追踪生成式AI的影响。这种系统性评估，使企业能够区分“真实效益”与“表面效率提升”。
缺乏清晰度量标准的企业，往往难以证明AI的实际价值，尤其在判断短期效率波动与长期可持续收益之间时，容易陷入模糊地带。数据表明：没有量化，就没有真正的投资回报。
高回报来自“无聊”的任务，而非“炫酷”的项目
最显著的AI回报，并非来自高调的“颠覆性项目”，而是集中在那些看似平凡却高频重复的任务中：
- 数据分析
- 流程摘要生成
- 法律合同审查
- 人力资源招聘
这些专门针对劳动密集型、标准化工作的AI应用，在节省时间、提升准确性方面表现最为突出。相比之下，那些未经充分准备就部署多个AI代理（AI agents）的“激进尝试”，由于缺乏员工培训和流程适配，其投资回报指数远低于后台自动化项目。
培训危机：人才短板正成为规模化落地的瓶颈
研究揭示了一个尖锐的矛盾：近一半的企业将“招募高级AI人才”列为最大挑战，但内部培训投入却同比下降8个百分点，员工对培训效果的信心更是下降了14个百分点。
许多企业急于部署AI工具，却忽略了员工的实际使用能力，误以为“工具易用=员工会用”。这种“重技术、轻人”的做法，正在导致“技能赤字”，威胁着即使资金充足的企业的长期竞争力。缺乏扎实、实战导向的培训，企业将难以维持AI应用的持续 momentum。
文化断层：高层乐观，基层冷淡
AI落地过程中存在显著的“认知鸿沟”：
– 56%的高管和副总裁认为AI将带来积极影响；
– 而一线经理中仅有28%持相同看法。
这种落差反映出AI在执行层面的阻力：流程摩擦、采纳停滞、士气下滑。那些仅将AI视为“技术升级”而非“人员管理挑战”的企业，往往遭遇项目失败或成效不彰。真正的转型，必须从“人”开始，而非从“代码”开始。
技能悖论：AI加速，人类技能却在退化？
AI发展过快，正在动摇企业传统的“技能成长阶梯”。43%的受访者担心“技能退化”——因为AI正在自动化那些原本由初级员工完成的基础任务，而这些任务恰恰是能力成长的必经之路。
尽管89%的人认同AI能增强人类技能，但过度依赖AI可能导致核心能力的萎缩。企业必须在追求短期效率的同时，主动重建高阶人类专长，避免未来出现“无人能决策”的局面。
实现可持续AI回报的五大行动步骤
基于研究，企业若想从生成式AI中获得长期价值，应遵循以下五项核心策略：
-
强制设定正式的投资回报指标
摒弃模糊目标，持续追踪与业务成果直接关联的AI影响。 -
优先聚焦高价值、重复性任务
将资源投入已被验证的领域，如后台自动化，而非追逐“高风险、高回报”的“登月项目”。 -
先解决“人”的问题，再扩大部署
在规模化推广前，必须投资于持续、实用的员工培训，确保技术真正被用起来。 -
弥合管理层与执行层的认知鸿沟
将高层的战略乐观，与一线的实际挑战对齐，推动上下协同。 -
保护并重建人类专长
在部署AI的同时，鼓励员工技能发展，防止长期人才断层。
结语：决定成败的不是技术，而是执行
技术本身并非答案。真正的分水岭在于：企业如何管理变革、如何培训员工、如何精准衡量AI的影响。
那些在“人的转型”上投入的企业——建立清晰的ROI指标、提供实战培训、推动文化协同——已经与同行拉开差距。沃顿商学院预测，到2026年，这一差距将不可逆转：拥有可衡量、可持续AI回报的企业，将彻底甩开仍在追逐“热点”的竞争者。
对企业领导者而言，现在是时候从“追逐AI潮流”转向“构建以人为本、数据驱动的长期基础”——这才是通向AI真正价值的唯一路径。
—英文原文—
原标题: Ep 648: How 74% of Enterprises Get Real AI ROI While Pundits See Failure
原内容:
Episode Categories:
Resources:
Join the discussion: Got something to say? Let us know on LinkedIn and network with other AI leaders Upcoming Episodes: Check out the upcoming Everyday AI Livestream lineup
Connect with Jordan Wilson : LinkedIn Profile
Enterprise AI ROI: Why 74% of Companies Are Realizing Tangible Value From Generative AI
The conversation around enterprise AI often seems split between stories of unprecedented growth and dire warnings of imminent failure. In reality, recent data paints a much clearer — and actionable — picture for business leaders seeking practical answers. Drawing directly from a rigorous three-year study of 800 U.S. enterprise decision makers, here are the key insights that set apart winners from laggards in the race for AI ROI.
AI Return on Investment: The Wharton Study’s Definitive Insights
Unlike viral studies with questionable methodologies, the Wharton Human AI Research report analyzed implementation and outcomes of generative AI across organizations with over 1,000 employees and $50M+ in revenue. Findings reveal that 74% of enterprises surveyed already report a positive return on generative AI investments — specifically in large language model applications. In sectors like tech and banking/finance, ROI figures soar as high as 88% and 83% respectively. Usage rates have skyrocketed, with 82% of leaders now relying on generative AI weekly, and nearly half using it daily.
Measuring AI Success: Formal Metrics Drive Business Impact
Success is consistently tied to structured measurement. 72% of organizations formally track generative AI ’s impact using concrete, business-linked metrics . This discipline separates genuine ROI from anecdotal productivity claims. The study signals that without clear measurement, value attribution remains murky — especially as companies struggle to distinguish between superficial boosts and sustainable gains.
Productivity Gains: The Unsexy Tasks Powering Enterprise AI ROI
The highest returns aren’t coming from headline-grabbing moonshot projects. Instead, “boring” productivity wins — such as data analysis, process summarization, legal contract review, and HR recruitment — deliver the bulk of ROI . Specialized applications of AI for labor-intensive but routine tasks scored highest in tangible time savings and accuracy improvements.
Conversely, more speculative deployments, such as deploying multiple AI agents without proper workforce training, showed limited ROI with index scores lagging far behind the back-office automation efforts.
Training Crisis: The Bottleneck to Scalable AI Value
A sharp paradox emerged: while nearly half of leaders cite the recruitment of advanced AI talent as their top challenge, internal training investment has declined by eight points , and confidence in training effectiveness dropped 14 points. Too many organizations have rushed to implement AI tools without equipping staff to use them effectively, assuming ease of adoption. The ongoing underskilling threatens even well-funded enterprises; those failing to invest in robust, hands-on training risk losing momentum to better-prepared competitors.
Culture & Execution: Bridging the AI Perception Gap
A critical culture gap persists. The optimism surrounding AI is strongest in the C-suite and VP ranks, where 56% anticipate positive impact, compared to only 28% of frontline managers. This disconnect reflects stalled adoption, friction, and declining morale at the operational level — where implementation must actually happen. Organizations that view AI rollout strictly as a technical upgrade, instead of a people management challenge, see lagging results and failed projects.
Preserving Human Expertise: Addressing the Skills Paradox
AI is advancing so rapidly that it threatens the traditional “ladder” of skill growth within organizations. 43% of survey respondents fear “skill atrophy,” as AI automates baseline and junior-level tasks critical for employee development . While 89% agree that AI augments skills, unchecked reliance may erode essential human capabilities. Enterprises must now balance leveraging AI for immediate gains with ongoing development of expert-level human skills to ensure long-term competitiveness.
Action Plan: Five Steps for Sustainable Enterprise AI ROI
The Wharton study highlights a practical playbook for companies seeking lasting value from generative AI :
Mandate Formal ROI Metrics : Eliminate vague goals and consistently measure business-linked outcomes.
Mandate Formal ROI Metrics : Eliminate vague goals and consistently measure business-linked outcomes.
Prioritize High-Value, Routine Tasks : Focus investments on proven areas such as back-office automation rather than speculative moonshots.
Prioritize High-Value, Routine Tasks : Focus investments on proven areas such as back-office automation rather than speculative moonshots.
Solve the People Problem First : Invest in ongoing, practical workforce training before scaling adoption.
Solve the People Problem First : Invest in ongoing, practical workforce training before scaling adoption.
Bridge Hierarchical Divides : Align strategic optimism in leadership with operational realities among managers and staff.
Bridge Hierarchical Divides : Align strategic optimism in leadership with operational realities among managers and staff.
Preserve and Rebuild Human Expertise : Encourage skill development alongside AI deployment to avoid long-term talent erosion.
Preserve and Rebuild Human Expertise : Encourage skill development alongside AI deployment to avoid long-term talent erosion.
Conclusion: Why Execution, Not Hype, Differentiates the AI Winners
Technology alone isn’t the answer. The real differentiator is how organizations manage change, train their people, and tightly measure the impact of AI. Those investing in the “human transformation” side of the equation — with clear ROI metrics, practical education , and cultural alignment — are already separating themselves from the pack.
By 2026, Wharton predicts, the gap will be permanent: the companies with actionable, measured ROI from generative AI will leave the rest behind. For business owners and decision makers, now is the time to shift strategy from chasing the latest AI trend to building measured, people-centric foundations for long-term success.
Topics Covered in This Episode:
Wharton Three-Year GenAI ROI Study
74% Enterprises Achieve GenAI ROI
Enterprise AI Success vs. Failure Narrative
MIT Viral Study Debunked (95% Failure)
Productive AI Focus: Boring Tasks Win
Enterprise AI Training Crisis Analysis
Executive vs. Manager AI Optimism Gap
Skills Paradox: AI Use vs. Atrophy
Keywords:
AI ROI, enterprise AI success, generative AI , return on investment, Wharton study, 74% of enterprises, AI failure narrative, viral MIT study, 95% AI pilots fail, enterprise transformation, productivity gains, large language models, AI agents, back office automation, executive alignment, moonshot AI projects, specialized killer apps, legal contract review, HR recruitment, agentic AI, algorithmic trading, DeepSeek saga, OpenAI business customers, Nvidia valuation, technology adoption, formal ROI metrics, business linked metrics, top down AI implementation, training crisis, investing in people over technology, human potential, skills paradox, skill atrophy, people management issue, perception gap, VP optimism, manager skepticism, culture divide, organizational change, AI native organization, reverse engineering workflows, measuring boring tasks, bridging friction, unlearning and rebuilding, upskilling with AI, reskilling with AI, human in the loop, expert driven loops, career path redesign, recruiting advanced AI talent, legacy IT cuts, internal R&D budgets, measuring tech sector AI impact, public company AI adoption, AI implementation challenges, competitive leapfrogging
Podcast Transcript