- The study finds that 42% of the leaders are identified as skeptics with exaggerated expectations
- Skeptics are concerned with the financial, psychological and physical risks of the adoption of AI
- Realists report clear benefits, including better work quality and time efficiency
Artificial intelligence has been remodeling workplaces around the world with the promise of efficiency, smarter decisions and new business opportunities.
However, as adoption accelerates, the evidence suggests that not all leaders are adopting AI tools with equal confidence.
Recent research of the adaptive group reveals a growing division between those who trust their company’s statements and those who fear that technology is overloaded.
A hard division between skeptics and realistic
The report found that almost half (42%) of leaders identify themselves as “skeptics” of AI, believing that their company’s statements are exaggerated, while 36% are considered “realistic” of AI, trusting that expectations are realistic.
For skeptics, the adoption of tools such as AI writers often comes with concern: 65% care that the approach of their organization puts customers at financial, psychological or physical risk.
Almost half of the skeptical leaders are afraid to be mistakenly accused of misuse of AI, and 42% hides its use of the work to avoid repercussions.
Realists report much lower anxiety levels, which shows that perception plays a central role in the configuration of work experiences with AI and LLM technology.
In companies where skeptics dominate, the adoption of AI is more promoted by the obligation than the measurable results.
Eighty -four percent of skeptical leaders encourage the use of AI because they feel they should, instead of why it offers specific value.
The expense remains high, with more than a third of investing between £ 1m and £ 10 million in AI initiatives during the past year.
However, insufficient pressure and training (59% do not inform the formal education of AI) continue to limit effectiveness.
In comparison, realists encourage experimentation, provide training and measure the results in a way that supports both technology and people.
Leaders in realistic organizations report lighter benefits of AI, including improvements in work quality, time efficiency and production.
Ethical concerns such as plagiarism, bias and hallucinations are much less pronounced: only 37% of realists marked ethical risks versus 74% of skeptics.
They also spend less time correcting the outputs of AI, reflecting stronger orientation and support.
These findings are aligned with the recent MIT, affirm that 95% of the generative pilots of AIs are failing, suggesting that organizational culture and preparation are decisive factors in the success of AI.
The rapid proliferation of the tools of the division worsens. Seventy -four percent of skeptics feel overwhelmed by too many tools too fast, while realists continue to trust the value of AI.
“The contrast between the leaders who trust in the trip of their organization and those who deal with bad results, hurried implementations and a reluctant workforce is marked,” said Jon Mort, CTO of the adaptive group.
“To unlock the true value of AI, organizations must be quick to experiment, but take the time to carefully implement investing in training and creating an environment where people and technology can prosper.”
