Loading market data...

KPMG: Only 7% of Business Leaders Can Prove AI Investment Returns

KPMG: Only 7% of Business Leaders Can Prove AI Investment Returns
with

and

tags. We'll translate each element. Original first paragraph: "A new KPMG report finds that just 7% of business leaders can demonstrate a return on their artificial intelligence investments. The rest are pouring money into AI without being able to show it actually pays off." Translation: "Un nuovo rapporto KPMG rileva che solo il 7% dei leader aziendali può dimostrare un ritorno sui propri investimenti in intelligenza artificiale. Gli altri stanno riversando denaro nell'IA senza essere in grado di mostrare che effettivamente ripaga." Second paragraph: "The report paints a stark picture: most executives are convinced AI is creating value, but they can't back that conviction with numbers. That disconnect is more than an accounting problem. It's a strategic one. If a company can't measure what an AI system returns, it can't decide where to double down, where to cut, or even whether the whole effort is worth it." Translation: "Il rapporto dipinge un quadro netto: la maggior parte dei dirigenti è convinta che l'IA stia creando valore, ma non può sostenere questa convinzione con i numeri. Questo disallineamento è più di un problema contabile: è strategico. Se un'azienda non può misurare ciò che un sistema di IA restituisce, non può decidere dove raddoppiare gli sforzi, dove tagliare, o anche se l'intero sforzo valga la pena." Third paragraph: "KPMG's finding suggests the perceived value of AI is running far ahead of the hard evidence. Executives may be hearing success stories from peers, seeing flashy demos, and feeling pressure to keep up. But when asked to show the actual return on a specific AI project, most come up empty." Translation: "La scoperta di KPMG suggerisce che il valore percepito dell'IA corre molto avanti rispetto alle prove concrete. I dirigenti potrebbero sentire storie di successo dai colleghi, vedere demo appariscenti e sentire la pressione di stare al passo. Ma quando viene chiesto loro di mostrare il ritorno effettivo su un progetto di IA specifico, la maggior parte si trova a mani vuote." Heading 1: "The gap between belief and proof" -> "Il divario tra convinzione e prova" But note: in the original there is

The gap between belief and proof

after the first paragraph? Actually the structure is:

...

The gap between belief and proof

...

... So we need to preserve that. We'll translate the heading: "Il divario tra convinzione e prova" Then the paragraph after that heading: "The report paints a stark picture: ..." we already translated that. Actually we have to map correctly. Original structure:

A new KPMG report finds... pays off.

The gap between belief and proof

The report paints a stark picture: ... worth it.

KPMG's finding suggests ... come up empty.

Why cost tracking falls short

Part of the issue is that AI costs are often scattered. ... generate.

Without that tracking, accountability gets fuzzy. ... learn from failures.

What the report signals

The KPMG report doesn't offer a magic formula, ... worth it.

It also suggests that companies should treat AI like any other capital investment. ... expensive bets.

The question now is whether finance chiefs will take that warning seriously. ... cost tracking and accountability.