Companies Are Drowning in Too Much AI
IT sellers are rolling out an avalanche of new generative AI features, leaving CIOs overwhelmed and workers confused
3 min
Businesses are facing an influx of new artificial-intelligence tools, many of which overlap and cause confusion for employees, as corporate-technology sellers race to capitalise on the generative AI trend.
“Since the ChatGPT excitement, I must have had at least 20 to 25 vendors in my portfolio reach out to me saying, ‘Hey, let us tell you about our generative AI co-pilot strategy,’” said Milind Wagle, chief information officer at Equinix, one of the world’s biggest data-centre landlords.
Generative AI features, which can respond to user prompts by generating images or text, often come in the forms of co-pilots, or virtual assistants that work in tandem with an IT seller’s offerings, sometimes automating certain tasks within that platform. Wagle said Equinix is drowning in a flood of co-pilots—and he is trying to figure out how, if at all, they should coexist.
“I feel like there’s a co-pilot war that needs to sort of happen,” he said, adding that to humanize AI in a meaningful way, there needs to be more coherence in how these tools are deployed.
The co-pilot proliferation is leading to confusion for employees who are looking for a single common interface to accomplish certain tasks, Wagle said. It can also create potential governance risks if there is a possibility that private data from a company that interacts with the co-pilots could make its way into public training models for generative AI tools.
Gartner analyst Arun Chandrasekaran said IT sellers are feeling pressure to move into the generative AI space or risk falling behind, meaning some half-baked features will be rushed out without the proper privacy and security guardrails in place. Established IT sellers also need to consider security concerns, including whether a customer’s data can be fed back to train the model, because this is uncharted territory, he added.
Chandrasekaran estimates that a fifth of independent software vendors have stepped into the generative AI space since ChatGPT was launched about seven months ago—a huge amount of growth in a short time, he said.
“I don’t think I’ve had a partner or vendor meeting this year where I wasn’t pitched a generative AI play,” said Brian Woodring, CIO of Rocket Mortgage, a nonbank mortgage provider.
Sometimes the co-pilots appear in system updates as a freebie, and sometimes they cost extra, Woodring said. He added that in some cases, the generative AI features are tacked on, despite not being compelling additions or the best tool for the job.
“Everyone’s trying to fit it in everywhere,” he said, adding, “It’s not something you can just spread around like peanut butter. It’s not a coat of paint you put on your product afterwards and say, now it’s AI.”
In other instances, the features are things that Rocket Mortgage could confidently and more cheaply build in house, Woodring said. For example, a number of tools on the market pull and analyse data from phone calls, a feature that Rocket Mortgage was able to build itself, he said.
Tech executives said they are looking critically at new generative AI tools to distinguish between the truly compelling ones and the ones that are just paying lip service to the hype. How well the tools will be able to integrate with each other is another consideration.
“We want clarity on how we can connect every single one,” said Noé Angel, CIO at agriculture company NatureSweet. When tools are too fragmented, it ends up creating more work for those who have to manage them, he said.
Jim Stratton, chief technology officer of Workday, a provider of enterprise cloud applications for finance and human resources, said that longer term, he expects consolidation and clearer winners to emerge when it comes to certain AI capabilities, which could simplify things for companies.
But nearer term, navigating the complexity of the landscape remains a challenge. “There’s still a lot of noise at the moment,” he said.
Copyright 2020, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. LEARN MORE
As housing drives wealth and policy debate, the real risk is an economy hooked on growth without productivity to sustain it.
Limited to 630 units, Lamborghini’s latest Urus Capsule pushes personalisation further than ever, blending hybrid performance with over 70 bespoke design combinations.
As housing drives wealth and policy debate, the real risk is an economy hooked on growth without productivity to sustain it.
3 minFor decades, Australia has leaned into its reputation as the lucky country. But luck, as it turns out, is not an economic strategy.
What once looked like resilience now appears increasingly fragile. Beneath the surface of rising property values and steady headline growth, the Australian economy is showing signs of strain that can no longer be ignored.
Recent data paints a sobering picture. Australia has recorded one of the largest declines in real household disposable income per capita among advanced economies.
Wages have failed to keep pace with inflation, meaning many Australians are working harder for less. On a per capita basis, income growth has stalled and, at times, reversed.
And yet, on paper, things still look relatively solid. GDP is growing. Unemployment remains low. But that growth is increasingly being driven by population expansion rather than productivity.
More people are contributing to output, but not necessarily improving living standards.
That distinction matters.
For years, Australia’s economic success rested on a powerful combination: a once-in-a-generation mining boom, a credit-fuelled housing market, strong migration and a property sector that rarely faltered. Between 1991 and 2020, the country avoided recession entirely, building enormous wealth in the process.
But much of that wealth is tied to property. Around two-thirds of household wealth sits in real estate, inflated by leverage and sustained by demand. It has worked, until now.
The problem is the supply side of the economy has not kept up.
Housing supply is falling behind population growth. Rental vacancies are near record lows.
Construction firms are collapsing at an elevated rate. At the same time, massive infrastructure pipelines are competing with residential projects for labour and materials, pushing costs higher and delaying delivery.
The result is a system under pressure from all angles.
Despite near full employment, productivity growth has stagnated for years. In simple terms, Australians are putting in more hours without generating more output per hour. The economy is running faster, butgoing nowhere.
Meanwhile, government spending continues to expand. Public debt is approaching $1 trillion, with spending now accounting for a record share of GDP.
The gap between spending and revenue has been filled by borrowing for decades, adding further pressure to an already stretched system.
This is where the uncomfortable question emerges.
Has Australia become too reliant on a model driven by rising property values, expanding credit and population growth?
As asset prices rise, households feel wealthier and borrow more. Banks lend more. Governments collect more revenue. Migration fuels demand. The cycle reinforces itself.
But when productivity stalls and debt outpaces real income, the system begins to depend on constant expansion just to stay stable.
It is not a collapse scenario. But it is not particularly stable either.
Nowhere is this more evident than in housing.
The National Housing Accord targets 1.2 million new homes over five years, yet current completion rates are well below that pace. With approvals falling and construction costs rising, the gap between supply and demand is widening, not narrowing.
Housing is also one of the largest contributors to inflation, with costs rising sharply across rents, construction and utilities. Yet the private sector, from small investors to major developers, is struggling to make projects stack up in the current environment.
This brings the policy debate into sharper focus.
Tax settings such as negative gearing and capital gains concessions have undoubtedly boosted demand over the past two decades. But they have also supported supply. Removing them may ease prices briefly, but risks deepening the supply shortage over time.
That is the paradox.
Policies designed to make housing more affordable can, in practice, make the shortage worse if they discourage development. The optics may appeal, but the economics are far less forgiving.
It is also worth remembering that most property investors are not institutional players. The majority own just one investment property. They are, in many cases, ordinary Australians using real estate as their primary wealth-building tool.
Undermining that system without replacing it with a viable alternative risks unintended consequences, from reduced supply to higher rents and increased inflation.
So where does that leave Australia?
At a crossroads.
The country can continue to rely on population growth and rising asset prices to drive economic activity. Or it can shift towards a model built on productivity, innovation and sustainable growth.
The latter is harder. It requires structural reform, long-term thinking and political discipline.
But it is also the only path that leads to genuine, lasting prosperity.
The question is no longer whether Australia has been lucky.
It is whether it can evolve before that luck runs out.
Paul Miron is the Co-Founder & Fund Manager of Msquared Capital.
Many of the most-important events have slipped from our collective memories. But their impacts live on.
In the remote waters of Indonesia’s Anambas Islands, Bawah Reserve is redefining what it means to blend barefoot luxury with environmental stewardship.
