Home / Technology / AI Value Gap: Only 13% of CIOs See Real Returns
AI Value Gap: Only 13% of CIOs See Real Returns
24 Oct
Summary
- Just 13% of chief information officers report significant value from AI initiatives.
- Most companies face pressure to cut costs via AI, yet expect higher technology expenses.
- AI requires new funding models due to unpredictable, runtime costs.
A significant majority of companies are failing to derive substantial value from their artificial intelligence (AI) investments, according to a recent Gartner survey. Only 13% of chief information officers (CIOs) reported that AI has added considerable value to their organizations.
The survey, conducted between May and July 2026 with 2,002 CIOs, indicated that while 58% face increased pressure to cut costs using AI, 51% expect AI to raise overall technology ownership expenses. This paradox suggests a disconnect between AI implementation and tangible business outcomes.
Experts like Alicia Mullery, VP Analyst at Gartner, emphasize that "volume is not value." Companies often lack the foundational disciplines to define AI use-case value upfront and establish clear exit criteria. This deficiency hinders the realization of true AI benefits.
Furthermore, traditional funding models built for cloud and software subscriptions are inadequate for AI. Unlike predictable legacy costs, AI expenses are probabilistic and determined at runtime. As enterprise technology funding shifts towards generative AI and agentic AI, new approaches to funding, governance, and cost accountability are essential.
Contrary to some beliefs, AI is not expected to drastically reduce overall headcount. Instead, it is projected to cause a dual workforce shift. While 40% of respondents anticipate an increase in IT headcount by 2027, particularly in cybersecurity and data analytics, distinct role types may diminish.
AI blurs the boundaries between existing technology jobs, potentially leading to fewer distinct role types. For instance, designers may increasingly perform testing, and testers may engage in design activities. Consequently, organizations might require fewer specialized roles, even as the scope of responsibility within each role expands.