90% of EU finance firms use AI. Only 9% feel ahead
90% of EU finance firms use AI, but only 9% feel ahead. Why the gap?
Simply adding AI doesn't guarantee better results.
Research from MIT shows human-AI teams often failed to outperform the top individual result (whether achieved by the human alone or the AI alone), especially in decision tasks.
Key Factors visualized in the resulting framework:
Creation tasks: Collaboration often boosts performance.
Decision tasks: Collaboration often performs worse than the best individual; relying solely on that top performer (Human or AI) is usually better.
The Takeaway: Stop uniform AI rollouts. Use a strategic framework:
Task Type: Creation or Decision?
Relative Performance: Who's currently better – Human or AI?
Apply AI where it truly adds value. Focus the debate on HOW and WHERE, not IF.
Before your next HR AI project, ask:
-Creation or decision task?-Who performs better now?
Nuanced application is key. What's your experience?
Related posts
- The AI winter is coming: what Festo and TRUMPF built instead498 AI unicorns worth $2.7 trillion, 13% of firms with measurable value, and what Festo, TRUMPF and BMW built while the market burned cash.
- 94% of the German Mittelstand still run without AIKfW counts 20% of SMEs using AI, 36% among medium-sized firms. Pricing, risk, planning and quality still run on Excel, gut feel and habit.
- If the AI bubble bursts, Europe falls softer. That is a warning, not an advantageEurope has invested less in AI and would lose less in a crash. Many call that an advantage. Marc reads it as a reminder of the year 2000.