Key Reporting:

…for 95% of companies in the dataset, generative AI implementation is falling short. The core issue? Not the quality of the AI models, but the “learning gap” for both tools and organizations. While executives often blame regulation or model performance, MIT’s research points to flawed enterprise integration. Generic tools like ChatGPT excel for individuals because of their flexibility, but they stall in enterprise use since they don’t learn from or adapt to workflows, Challapally explained.

The data also reveals a misalignment in resource allocation. More than half of generative AI budgets are devoted to sales and marketing tools, yet MIT found the biggest ROI in back-office automation—eliminating business process outsourcing, cutting external agency costs, and streamlining operations.
What’s behind successful AI deployments?

How companies adopt AI is crucial. Purchasing AI tools from specialized vendors and building partnerships succeed about 67% of the time, while internal builds succeed only one-third as often.

This finding is particularly relevant in financial services and other highly regulated sectors, where many firms are building their own proprietary generative AI systems in 2025. Yet, MIT’s research suggests companies see far more failures when going solo.

Companies surveyed were often hesitant to share failure rates, Challapally noted. “Almost everywhere we went, enterprises were trying to build their own tool,” he said, but the data showed purchased solutions delivered more reliable results.

Join the Successful 5% While 95% of companies struggle with AI implementation, you don’t have to. Book our expert assessment that sets you up for success from day one.

Copyright 2024-2026 Integral Business Intelligence. All Rights Reserved.

© 2024-2026