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.
That surprises me, marketing and sales being the main user of AI, I thought the back-office automation for sure was going to be by far number 1
Workforce disruption is already underway, especially in customer support and administrative roles. Rather than mass layoffs, companies are increasingly not backfilling positions as they become vacant. Most changes are concentrated in jobs previously outsourced due to their perceived low value.
So the number 1 user is sales/marketing but it’s back office admin jobs that are most impacted?
I guess it can be hard to monitor how AI impacts a business as well, I use it multiple times a day but it’s not like I can put down “i searched and found information more quickly” as a way that the company made more money
That surprises me, marketing and sales being the main user of AI, I thought the back-office automation for sure was going to be by far number 1
Generative AI is a bullshit generator. Bullshit in your marketing=good. Bullshit in your backend=bad.
> So the number 1 user is sales/marketing but it’s back office admin jobs that are most impacted?
GenAI is primarily adopted to justify mass layoffs and only secondarily to create business value. It’s the mass layoffs that drive AI adoption, not the other way around.
I read that slightly differently: the jobs “disrupted” away are customer support, generally outsourced due to their perceived low value = phone support. Basically, phone customer support is being terminated in favor of chat bots.
there would have to be a trade off for sure, if the quality of your customer support goes down people will simply move to a provider that has better support unless the prices are so cheap they stay with them because they don’t value good support as much as cheap prices, so you’d hope they’re AI bots help reduce the amount of queries people have then they get passed through to an actual human if there’s an real issue
I’m currently on a $15 AUD a month plan for 18GB’s of data that rolls over every month, company called ‘Amaysim’ in Australia, their customer service has actual humans but they’re actually about as useful as a chatbot (not an AI chatbot, the old school one that can’t do shit), but I don’t leave because tbf I’ve only interacted with them like 2 times in 15 years and I value the hundreds of dollars I’ve saved over their crappy customer support
With that said I’ve purchased some premium top of the line products lately revolving around renewables and their customer service wasn’t much better
This is really interesting but it doesn’t surprise me.
AI and implementation of AI tend to be inherently good at optimizing efficiency of a system, and they can be exceptionally good at it. Look at Nvidia DLSS realtime AI upscaling for video games for example, it’s fundamentally a conventional TAA pipeline (a normally computationally expensive Antialiasing technique) that’s super boosted in efficiency by AI in only one of the steps of the pipeline, and it’s so efficient that it can be use to make image even more clear than original and in real time. And many of the actually practical machine learning systems that have demonstrated good results in scientific and engineering applications are fundamentally conventional algorithms that’s efficiency boosted so that the computation takes merely hours instead of many decades so they became practical. Not surprising the same approach can be used for business systems and give you actually good results.
But I fortunately majority of the snake oil marketing for AI products and services seem to focus on claims for generating new content with AI, which is exactly what the marketing people would want LMAO
Think of how many ads you see and hear. From pharmaceuticals to entertainment industry ads the amount of money poured into sales and marketing is absurd. If there’s any one massively under-accounted for scourge on modern society and finance it’s ad agencies consuming huge amounts of budget, bandwidth, and just being constantly in your face. Pharma alone spends ~$20Bn on ads.
Interesting article
That surprises me, marketing and sales being the main user of AI, I thought the back-office automation for sure was going to be by far number 1
So the number 1 user is sales/marketing but it’s back office admin jobs that are most impacted?
I guess it can be hard to monitor how AI impacts a business as well, I use it multiple times a day but it’s not like I can put down “i searched and found information more quickly” as a way that the company made more money
Generative AI is a bullshit generator. Bullshit in your marketing=good. Bullshit in your backend=bad.
GenAI is primarily adopted to justify mass layoffs and only secondarily to create business value. It’s the mass layoffs that drive AI adoption, not the other way around.
Bro did you post this article thinking it was bad but only read the headline?
I read that slightly differently: the jobs “disrupted” away are customer support, generally outsourced due to their perceived low value = phone support. Basically, phone customer support is being terminated in favor of chat bots.
there would have to be a trade off for sure, if the quality of your customer support goes down people will simply move to a provider that has better support unless the prices are so cheap they stay with them because they don’t value good support as much as cheap prices, so you’d hope they’re AI bots help reduce the amount of queries people have then they get passed through to an actual human if there’s an real issue
I’m currently on a $15 AUD a month plan for 18GB’s of data that rolls over every month, company called ‘Amaysim’ in Australia, their customer service has actual humans but they’re actually about as useful as a chatbot (not an AI chatbot, the old school one that can’t do shit), but I don’t leave because tbf I’ve only interacted with them like 2 times in 15 years and I value the hundreds of dollars I’ve saved over their crappy customer support
With that said I’ve purchased some premium top of the line products lately revolving around renewables and their customer service wasn’t much better
This is really interesting but it doesn’t surprise me.
AI and implementation of AI tend to be inherently good at optimizing efficiency of a system, and they can be exceptionally good at it. Look at Nvidia DLSS realtime AI upscaling for video games for example, it’s fundamentally a conventional TAA pipeline (a normally computationally expensive Antialiasing technique) that’s super boosted in efficiency by AI in only one of the steps of the pipeline, and it’s so efficient that it can be use to make image even more clear than original and in real time. And many of the actually practical machine learning systems that have demonstrated good results in scientific and engineering applications are fundamentally conventional algorithms that’s efficiency boosted so that the computation takes merely hours instead of many decades so they became practical. Not surprising the same approach can be used for business systems and give you actually good results.
But I fortunately majority of the snake oil marketing for AI products and services seem to focus on claims for generating new content with AI, which is exactly what the marketing people would want LMAO
Think of how many ads you see and hear. From pharmaceuticals to entertainment industry ads the amount of money poured into sales and marketing is absurd. If there’s any one massively under-accounted for scourge on modern society and finance it’s ad agencies consuming huge amounts of budget, bandwidth, and just being constantly in your face. Pharma alone spends ~$20Bn on ads.