Artificial Intelligence

Gartner just surveyed 350 large enterprises deploying AI. 80% cut jobs. Some by as much as 20%. The result? The companies that cut the most showed nearly identical financial returns to the ones that cut the least. In several cases, the ones that cut less performed better. No correlation between AI-driven layoffs and improved ROI. None. Gartner's Helen Poitevin was direct: "Workforce reductions may create budget room, but they do not create return." Cutting people frees up cash. It does not generate value. Most leadership teams are conflating the two. So what actually works? Upskilling staff to work alongside AI. Redesigning roles around what humans do well vs. what AI does well. Building operating models where people guide autonomous systems instead of getting replaced by them. There's a real difference between using AI to do the same work with fewer people and using AI to unlock work that was previously impossible. The first saves money on paper. The second compounds over time. We've already seen the pattern. Klarna cut 700 CS roles, watched quality decline, and started rehiring. IBM automated HR functions and reversed course. The Commonwealth Bank of Australia reversed 45 AI-driven layoffs after realizing those roles were never redundant. Gartner predicts half of companies that attributed headcount cuts to AI will rehire under new titles by 2027. If someone in your org is building an AI business case around headcount reduction, share this data. The assumption that fewer people equals better margins equals better returns is not supported by the evidence. AI is not leading to a jobs apocalypse. It's changing the shape of what people do. The companies that understand that difference will be the ones worth working for, and buying from, three years from now. Read the full piece on State of Brand here: https://lnkd.in/ggH-NXyM

Yesterday I had one of those rare conversations that stays with you. I sat down with Dr. Rebecca Hinds, PhD from Glean to unpack her new research, The AI Transformation 100, and it completely reframed how I think about AI in organizations. In the article I just published, I share the insights that hit me hardest — because they match exactly what I see with executives and teams every day. Here’s what you’ll learn: 🔸80% of AI transformation is just… transformation. The same human issues, politics, and leadership gaps — simply amplified by AI. 🔸AI is a megaphone. Healthy cultures accelerate. Broken workflows break faster. Rebecca’s data makes this painfully clear. 🔸Leadership behavior is the biggest adoption driver. If leaders don’t use AI themselves, their teams won’t either. 🔸100 practical ideas from 100+ leaders. Not hype — real moves happening right now. This is one of the most grounded and useful reports I’ve come across. The AI Transformation 100 releases today and I strongly encourage every business leader to read it. Access the full report and join the conversation: https://lnkd.in/e7YYwBrt And if you want the deeper story, don’t miss my full interview with Rebecca — you’ll want to watch it to the end: https://lnkd.in/egsdhVaA #GleanAmbassador #AITransformation #Leadership #ArtificialIntelligence #DigitalTransformation #ChangeManagement #FutureOfWork #BusinessStrategy #Innovation

I recently received an email titled “An 18-year-old’s dilemma: Too late to contribute to AI?” Its author, who gave me permission to share this, is preparing for college. He is worried that by the time he graduates, AI will be so good there’s no meaningful work left for him to do to contribute to humanity, and he will just live on Universal Basic Income (UBI). I wrote back to reassure him that there will still be plenty of work he can do for decades hence, and encouraged him to work hard and learn to build with AI. But this conversation struck me as an example of how harmful hype about AI is. Yes, AI is amazingly intelligent, and I’m thrilled to be using it every day to build things I couldn’t have built a year ago. At the same time, AI is still incredibly dumb, and I would not trust a frontier LLM by itself to prioritize my calendar, carry out resumé screening, or choose what to order for lunch — tasks that businesses routinely ask junior personnel to do. Yes, we can build AI software to do these tasks. For example, after a lot of customization work, one of my teams now has a decent AI resumé screening assistant. But the point is it took a lot of customization. Even though LLMs can handle a much more general set of tasks than previous iterations of AI technology, compared to what humans can do, they are still highly specialized. They’re much better at working with text than other modalities, still require lots of custom engineering to get it the right context for a particular application, and we have few tools — and only inefficient ones — for getting our systems to learn from feedback and repeated exposure to a specific task (such as screening resumés for a particular role). AI has stark limitations, and despite rapid improvements, it will remain limited compared to humans for a long time. AI is amazing, but it has unfortunately been hyped up to be even more amazing than it is. A pernicious aspect of hype is that it often contains an element of truth, but not to the degree of the hype. This makes it difficult for nontechnical people to discern where the truth really is. Modern AI is a general purpose technology that is enabling many applications, but AI that can do any intellectual tasks that a human can (a popular definition for AGI) is still decades away or longer. This nuanced message that AI is general, but not that general, often is lost in the noise of today's media environment. [Truncated for length. Full text:  https://lnkd.in/gAuQcZ8M ] 

Every cloud provider faces the same AI infrastructure challenge: chips need to be positioned close together to exchange data quickly, but they generate intense heat, creating unprecedented cooling demands. We needed a strategic solution that allowed us to use our existing air-cooled data centers to do liquid cooling without waiting for new construction. And it needed to be rapidly deployed so we could bring customers these powerful AI capabilities while we transition towards facility-level liquid cooling. Think of a home where only one sunny room needs AC, while the rest stays naturally cool – that’s what we wanted to achieve, allowing us to efficiently land both liquid and air-cooled racks in the same facilities with complete flexibility. The available options weren't great. Either we could wait to build specialized liquid-cooled facilities or adopt off-the-shelf solutions that didn't scale or meet our unique needs. Neither worked for our customers, so we did what we often do at Amazon… we invented our own solution. Our teams designed and delivered our In-Row Heat Exchanger (IRHX), which uses a direct-to-chip approach with a "cold plate" on the chips. The liquid runs through this sealed plate in a closed loop, continuously removing heat without increasing water use. This enables us to support traditional workloads and demanding AI applications in the same facilities. By 2026, our liquid-cooled capacity will grow to over 20% of our ML capacity, which is at multi-gigawatt scale today. While liquid cooling technology itself isn't unique, our approach was. Creating something this effective that could be deployed across our 120 Availability Zones in 38 Regions was significant. Because this solution didn't exist in the market, we developed a system that enables greater liquid cooling capacity with a smaller physical footprint, while maintaining flexibility and efficiency. Our IRHX can support a wide range of racks requiring liquid cooling, uses 9% less water than fully-air cooled sites, and offers a 20% improvement in power efficiency compared to off-the-shelf solutions. And because we invented it in-house, we can deploy it within months in any of our data centers, creating a flexible foundation to serve our customers for decades to come. Reimagining and innovating at scale has been something Amazon has done for a long time and one of the reasons we’ve been the leader in technology infrastructure and data center invention, sustainability, and resilience. We're not done… there's still so much more to invent for customers.

Three AI recruiters look at the same 109 CVs. They agree only 14% of the time. That’s not the start of a joke. And that's not efficiency. That’s what I call 'Rank Roulette'. When I tested ChatGPT, Gemini and Grok against the same job spec and anonymised CV set, here’s what happened: • 14% overlap in shortlists → Four times out of five, the models disagreed. • ±2.5 places volatility → Yesterday’s #2 became today’s #5. • 55% of CVs never surfaced → Candidates vanished with no audit trail. • 96% recycled rationales → Fluent, but shallow logic. We’re told by vendors and in-house 'tinkerers' that LLMs can “shortlist in seconds”. The truth: they behave more like over-confident interns - smooth on the surface, but shockingly inconsistent. And the worst part? It’s not even random. In a follow-up piece, I explored why this happens: a technical quirk called batch non-determinism. In plain English: your candidate’s fate changes depending on what else the server was processing at that moment. Until volatility is tamed, hands-off AI screening with LLMs is more than risky. It’s completely unexplainable, indefensible and a governance nightmare. Go to the comments for 👉 Full research 👉 Follow-up on why AI recruiters play favourites

Something VERY cool just happened in California and… it could be the future of energy.   On July 29, just as the sun was setting, California’s electric grid was reaching peak demand.   However, instead of ramping up fossil fuel resources, the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) and local utilities decided to lean on a network of thousands of home batteries.   More than 100,000 residential battery systems (made up primarily by Sunrun and Tesla customers) delivered about 535 megawatts of power to California’s grid right as demand peaked, visibly reducing net load (as shown in the graphic).   Now, this may not seem like a lot but 535 megawatts is enough to power more than half of the city of San Francisco and that can make all the difference when a grid is under stress.   This is what’s called a Virtual Power Plant or VPP. It’s a network of distributed energy resources that grid operators can call on in an emergency to provide greater resilience to our energy systems. Homeowners are compensated for the dispatch, grid operators are given another tool for reliability, and ratepayers are saved from instability. It’s a win-win-win.   Now, this was just a test to prepare for other need-based dispatches during heat waves in August and September. But it’ historic.   As homeowners add more solar and storage resources, the impact of these dispatch events will become even more profound and even more necessary. This was the second time this summer that VPPs have been dispatched in California and I expect to see even more as this technology improves.   Shout out to Sunrun, Tesla, and all companies who participated. Keep up the great work.

This week MIT dropped a stat engineered to go viral: 95% of enterprise GenAI pilots are failing. Markets, predictably, had a minor existential crisis. Pundits whispered the B-word (“bubble”), traders rotated into defensive stocks, and your colleague forwarded you a link with “is AI overhyped???” in the subject line. Let’s be clear: the 95% failure rate isn’t a caution against AI. It’s a mirror held up to how deeply ossified enterprises are. Two truths can coexist: (1) The tech is very real. (2) Most companies are hilariously bad at deploying it. If you’re a startup, AI feels like a superpower. No legacy systems. No 17-step approval chains. No legal team asking whether ChatGPT has been “SOC2-audited.” You ship. You iterate. You win. If you’re an enterprise, your org chart looks like a game of Twister and your workflows were last updated when Friendswas still airing. You don’t need a better model - you need a cultural lobotomy. This isn’t an “AI bubble” popping. It’s the adoption lag every platform shift goes through. - Cloud in the 2010s: Endless proofs of concept before actual transformation. - Mobile in the 2000s: Enterprises thought an iPhone app was strategy. Spoiler: it wasn’t. - Internet in the 90s: Half of Fortune 500 CEOs declared “this is just a fad.” Some of those companies no longer exist. History rhymes. The lag isn’t a bug; it’s the default setting. Buried beneath the viral 95% headline are 3 lessons enterprises can actually use: ▪️ Back-office > front-office. The biggest ROI comes from back-office automation - finance ops, procurement, claims processing - yet over half of AI dollars go into sales and marketing. The treasure’s just buried in a different part of the org chart. ▪️Buy > build. Success rates hit ~67% when companies buy or partner with vendors. DIY attempts succeed a third as often. Unless it’s literally your full-time job to stay current on model architecture, you’ll fall behind. Your engineers don’t need to reinvent an LLM-powered wheel; they need to build where you’re actually differentiated. ▪️Integration > innovation. Pilots flop not because AI “doesn’t work,” but because enterprises don’t know how to weave it into workflows. The “learning gap” is the real killer. Spend as much energy on change management, process design, and user training as you do on the tool itself. Without redesigning processes, “AI adoption” is just a Peloton bought in January and used as a coat rack by March. You didn’t fail at fitness; you failed at follow-through. In five years, GenAI will be as invisible - and indispensable - as cloud is today. The difference between the winners and the laggards won’t be access to models, but the courage to rip up processes and rebuild them. The “95% failure” stat doesn’t mean AI is snake oil. It means enterprises are in Year 1 of a 10-year adoption curve. The market just confused growing pains for terminal illness.

One topic I often get asked about is the impact of #AI on productivity. While there’s no one-size-fits-all answer to that question, AI without doubt represents the greatest economic opportunity since the rise of the internet and is already a key driver of productivity across businesses in every industry.   At SAP, we’re seeing the huge difference AI makes both for our customers and within our own business. But when it comes to adopting and getting the most out of AI, there are a number of critical success factors. One key aspect is regulation. Regulation is a must, but we also have to be careful not to overregulate at the expense of innovation. The focus should be on regulating the outcome, not the technology.   Another reason companies struggle to realize the value of AI in their organizations is the data quality itself. High-quality data is the foundation for trusted AI, but companies often face the challenge of large data silos and how to bring together unstructured and structured data. In the age of AI, more than ever, having one common semantical data layer for your business data is key to understanding a business holistically, as well as the external trends that impact it. The third key piece is knowledge and change management. The value of AI is clear, but many companies are unsure about how they can best extract it and whether they have the skills they need to realize its potential for their business. Successfully applying AI is much more than simply implementing a piece of technology. The importance of upskilling, leadership, communication, and culture cannot be underestimated in any business transformation journey. In an increasingly unpredictable world, AI plays an important role in helping businesses thrive. Today, it's already driving agility, resilience, and productivity – and by focusing on the right regulatory frameworks, data quality, and change management, these benefits are set to increase even further. 

For decades, career growth followed a familiar formula: More headcount. More budget. More scope.  That model is changing. In the AI era, careers won’t be built on span of control, they’ll be built on innovation density. Today, anyone - from ICs to execs - can scale their impact without more headcount, more budget, or more time. The playing field is flatter. The differentiator? How fast you can learn, apply, and compound innovation with AI. If you’re thinking about career growth, stop asking: “How can I get more?” Start asking: “How can I innovate more with AI?” The people who rise fast will: See problems through an AI-first lens. Move from manual to scalable. Iterate faster than the rest. Your team size won’t define your trajectory. Your creativity will. Your budget won’t signal your value. Your innovation density will.

AI is not failing because of bad ideas; it’s "failing" at enterprise scale because of two big gaps: 👉 Workforce Preparation 👉 Data Security for AI While I speak globally on both topics in depth, today I want to educate us on what it takes to secure data for AI—because 70–82% of AI projects pause or get cancelled at POC/MVP stage (source: #Gartner, #MIT). Why? One of the biggest reasons is a lack of readiness at the data layer. So let’s make it simple - there are 7 phases to securing data for AI—and each phase has direct business risk if ignored. 🔹 Phase 1: Data Sourcing Security - Validating the origin, ownership, and licensing rights of all ingested data. Why It Matters: You can’t build scalable AI with data you don’t own or can’t trace. 🔹 Phase 2: Data Infrastructure Security - Ensuring data warehouses, lakes, and pipelines that support your AI models are hardened and access-controlled. Why It Matters: Unsecured data environments are easy targets for bad actors making you exposed to data breaches, IP theft, and model poisoning. 🔹 Phase 3: Data In-Transit Security - Protecting data as it moves across internal or external systems, especially between cloud, APIs, and vendors. Why It Matters: Intercepted training data = compromised models. Think of it as shipping cash across town in an armored truck—or on a bicycle—your choice. 🔹 Phase 4: API Security for Foundational Models - Safeguarding the APIs you use to connect with LLMs and third-party GenAI platforms (OpenAI, Anthropic, etc.). Why It Matters: Unmonitored API calls can leak sensitive data into public models or expose internal IP. This isn’t just tech debt. It’s reputational and regulatory risk. 🔹 Phase 5: Foundational Model Protection - Defending your proprietary models and fine-tunes from external inference, theft, or malicious querying. Why It Matters: Prompt injection attacks are real. And your enterprise-trained model? It’s a business asset. You lock your office at night—do the same with your models. 🔹 Phase 6: Incident Response for AI Data Breaches - Having predefined protocols for breaches, hallucinations, or AI-generated harm—who’s notified, who investigates, how damage is mitigated. Why It Matters: AI-related incidents are happening. Legal needs response plans. Cyber needs escalation tiers. 🔹 Phase 7: CI/CD for Models (with Security Hooks) - Continuous integration and delivery pipelines for models, embedded with testing, governance, and version-control protocols. Why It Matter: Shipping models like software means risk comes faster—and so must detection. Governance must be baked into every deployment sprint. Want your AI strategy to succeed past MVP? Focus and lock down the data. #AI #DataSecurity #AILeadership #Cybersecurity #FutureOfWork #ResponsibleAI #SolRashidi #Data #Leadership