Companies are still misreading LLM workflows, and ROI is hard to prove
teropa · x · 2026-07-25
The thread argues that companies are still getting AI adoption wrong: natural-language interfaces feel intuitive, but LLMs are not humans and have very different strengths and failure modes.
- Simply giving everyone access and asking them to “figure it out” has not produced reliable workflows.
- Many companies are spending heavily but cannot measure outcomes.
- Where ROI is measurable, some are seeing engineering spend rise while output only improves modestly, with the poster citing a 10–30% curve lift as the kind of result that is already surprising.
- The core point: natural language is a deceptively easy interface, but productive AI use still needs deliberate workflow design, not just broad access.
More from Companies & People
- AIE Code Summit 2026 opens applications: 800 seats, keynotes streamed free — trq212 · 2026-10-27
- After Microsoft's 60K layoffs, pundit predicts 50-60% headcount cuts at big companies — krishnan · 2026-10-27
- 'Explain how AI isn't impacting productivity': 27% workforce cut sparks debate — alvelda · 2026-10-27
- Together AI sits down with Meta to explain Muse Spark Open — togethercompute · 2026-10-27
- Anthropic's S-1 unusually discusses AI sentience and moral status risks — birchlse · 2026-10-27
- Resy goes scorched earth on agent-based bookings; big agent platforms may force the issue — kevinakwok · 2026-10-27