Live data from Hacker News

McKinsey wonders how to sell AI apps with no measurable benefits

theregister.com

101–110 of 165 posts

Re: McKinsey wonders how to sell AI apps with no measurable benefits

#101

This is because they're trying to reduce the wrong headcount. The largest inefficiencies in corpo orgs lie in the ways they organize their knowledge and information stores, and in how they manage decision making. The rank and file generally have a really good grasp on their subset of the domain -- they have expertise and experience, as well as local context. Small teams, their managers -- those are the ones who actua…

I've wondered sometimes what the root of this dynamic is, and why corporations are as inefficient as they are. I've come to the conclusion that it's deliberate. When I look at top-level decision-makers at my Mag-7 employer, they are smart people. Many of them were go-getters in their earlier career, responsible for driving some very successful initiatives, and that's why they're at the top of the company. And they're…

> "Why even have employees then? Why not just milk your monopoly, keep the team lean, and let everybody involved have a big share of the profits?"

So we're seeing this play out. There are two factors that exist in tension here:

- The valuation of many of these companies depend on the perception that they are The Future. Part of that is heavy R&D spending and the reputation that they hire The Best. Even if the company mostly just wants to sit and milk its market position, keeping the stock price afloat requires looking like they're also innovative and forging the future.

- Some companies are embracing the milk-it-for-all-its-worth life stage of their company. You see this in some of the Mag-7 where compensation targets are scaling down, explicit and implicit layoffs, etc. This gear-shifting takes time but IMO is in fact happening.

The tightrope they're all trying to walk is how to do the latter without risking their reputation as the former, because the mythos that they are the engines of future growth is what keeps the stock price ticking.

Re: McKinsey wonders how to sell AI apps with no measurable benefits

#102

> while quoting an HR executive at a Fortune 100 company griping: "All of these copilots are supposed to make work more efficient with fewer people, but my business leaders are also saying they can't reduce head count yet." I'm surprised McKinsey convinced someone to say the quiet part out loud

I find it all quite strange: - AI companies of course will try and sell you that you can reduce headcount with AI - CEO's will parrot this talking point without ever talking a closer look. - Everyone lower down on the org chart minus the engineers are wondering why the change hasn't started yet. - Meanwhile engineers are ripping their hair out cause they know that AI in it's current state will likely not replace any…

> Pretty soon we will have articles like "That time that CEO's thought that AI could replace workers".

Yup, it's just the latest management fad. Remember Six Sigma? Or Agile (in its full-blown cultish form; some aspects can be mildly useful)? Or matrix management? Business leaders, as a class, seem almost uniquely susceptible to fads. There is always _some_ magic which is going to radically increase productivity, if everyone just believes hard enough.

Re: McKinsey wonders how to sell AI apps with no measurable benefits

#103
post #14

I hadn't ever tried Notion before but I sort of vaguely understood it was a nice way to make some documentation and wiki type content. I had a need for something like a table that I could filter that I would normally just do in Google Sheets. So I go check out Notion and their entire site is focused on AI. Look at what this agent can do, or that. I signed up and the entire signup flow is also focused on AI. Finally I…

Would strongly recommend avoiding notion. They have super scummy practices for billing, removing users from company account etc.

Re: McKinsey wonders how to sell AI apps with no measurable benefits

#104

> Many software firms trumpet potential use cases for AI, but only 30 percent have published quantifiable return on investment from real customer deployments. "Only" 30%. Interesting framing.

This means that only 30% are even _claiming_ to have shown anything quantifiable. Given that such claims tend to be essentially puffery, the _real_ rate is presumably far lower.

Re: McKinsey wonders how to sell AI apps with no measurable benefits

#105

This is because they're trying to reduce the wrong headcount. The largest inefficiencies in corpo orgs lie in the ways they organize their knowledge and information stores, and in how they manage decision making. The rank and file generally have a really good grasp on their subset of the domain -- they have expertise and experience, as well as local context. Small teams, their managers -- those are the ones who actua…

Logically you’re right, but power does not follow logic. And so it’s the lowest levels that get replaced by “AI”.

Re: McKinsey wonders how to sell AI apps with no measurable benefits

#106
post #52
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The incentive structure for managers (and literally everyone up the chain) is to maximize headcount. More people you managed, the more power you have within the organization. No one wants to say on their resume, "I manage 5 people, but trust me, with AI, its like managing 20 people!" Managers also don't pay people's salaries. The Tech Tools budget is a different budget than People salaries. Also keep in mind, for any…

> The incentive structure for managers (and literally everyone up the chain) is to maximize headcount. More people you managed, the more power you have within the organization Ding ding ding! AI can absolutely reduce headcount. It already could 2 years ago, when we were just getting started. At the time I worked at a company that did just that, succesfully automating away thousands of jobs which couldn't pre-LLMs. Th…

> The bigger and older the company, the more ossified the structures are that have a want to keep headcount equal, and ideally grow it.

I don't know, most of the companies doing regular layoffs wheneveer they can get away with it are pretty big and old. Be it in tech - IBM/Meta/Google/Microsoft, or in physical things - car manufacturers, shipyards, etc.

Re: McKinsey wonders how to sell AI apps with no measurable benefits

#107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it all quite strange: - AI companies of course will try and sell you that you can reduce headcount with AI - CEO's will parrot this talking point without ever talking a closer look. - Everyone lower down on the org chart minus the engineers are wondering why the change hasn't started yet. - Meanwhile engineers are ripping their hair out cause they know that AI in it's current state will likely not replace any…

I am still of the conviction that "reducing employee head count" with AI should start at the top of the org chart. The current iterations of AI already talk like the C-suites, and deliver approximately same value. It would provide additional benefits, in that AIs refuse to do unethical things and generally reason acceptably well. The cost cutting would be immense! I am not kidding. In any large corps, the decision ma…

> In any large corps, the decision makers refuse to take any risks, show no creativity, move as a flock with other orgs, and stay middle-of-the-road, boring, beige khaki.

It's hard to take this sentiment seriously from a source that doesn't have direct experience with the c-suite. The average person only gets to see the "public relations" view of the c-suite (mostly the CEO) so I can certainly see why a "LLM based mouthpiece" might be better.

The c-suite is involved in thousands of decisions that 90% of the rest of the world is not privy to.

FWIW - As a consumer, I'm highly critical of the robotic-like external personas the c-suite take on so I can appreciate the sentiment, but it's simply not rooted in any real experience.

Re: McKinsey wonders how to sell AI apps with no measurable benefits

#108
post #53

We have to accept that sometimes technology that was envisioned to change the future one way, may be beneficial in other ways instead - and that's okay. We are very clearly still in the phase of "throw AI at everything and see where it is useful." For example, just yesterday I was sent a contract to sign via DigiSign. There was a "Summarize contract with AI" button. Having read the contract in full, I was curious how…

I wonder if the AI summary could be legally perilous in this case

I assume it had the usual "this is AI, and thus probably bullshit" disclaimers that one finds on such things.

Re: McKinsey wonders how to sell AI apps with no measurable benefits

#109
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's upfront about a backloaded earnout? You model it as a fixed %, variable cost and run revenue sensitivities. It either meets your investment criteria or doesn't.

I'd imagine the opportunity cost and man power. Even though McKinsey should do the work they will need access to people and information to accomplish it.

Parent said McK's fee is 100% contingent.

If the company doesn't have the resources available to execute something they've validated, then that's a funding issue that can be solved.

Either way, McK's structure doesn't make it "hard for a company to manage." The investment committee approves or rejects.

Re: McKinsey wonders how to sell AI apps with no measurable benefits

#110

> while quoting an HR executive at a Fortune 100 company griping: "All of these copilots are supposed to make work more efficient with fewer people, but my business leaders are also saying they can't reduce head count yet." I'm surprised McKinsey convinced someone to say the quiet part out loud

[deleted]
Post reply on HN