Although 72% of supply chain organisations are now leveraging generative AI (GenAI), new research suggests the technology’s impact on productivity and return on investment (ROI) has been lacklustre. According to new findings unveiled by Gartner in its ‘Supply Chain Executive Report: The GenAI Productivity Paradox’, while GenAI is making notable strides in boosting individual efficiency, especially among desk-based workers, these gains are not scaling up effectively across teams. In fact, the tech’s rapid rollout is also fuelling employee anxiety, creating new challenges for organisations trying to unlock its full potential.
“Early GenAI deployments within supply chain reveal a productivity paradox,” said Gartner’s supply chain practice senior director Sam Berndt. “While its use has enhanced individual productivity for desk-based roles, these gains are not cascading through the rest of the function and are actually making the overall working environment worse for many employees. CSCOs [Chief Supply Chain Officers] need to retool their deployment strategies to address these negative outcomes.”
Gartner’s August 2024 survey, which polled 265 supply chain professionals globally, paints a picture of GenAI’s uneven performance. On paper, the numbers look promising. Desk-based employees are saving an average of 4.11 hours per week thanks to GenAI tools, translating to faster output and improved work quality. But when viewed at the team level, those time savings drop to just 1.5 hours per team member weekly, with no clear link to better output or higher-quality work.
However, while 71% of team managers reported that GenAI improved individual work output and 63% saw a boost in work quality, those numbers drop sharply when it comes to team performance. Only 54% of managers believe GenAI improved team output and just 44% say it has enhanced teamwork quality.
Gartner also suggested that time saved by GenAI at the individual level does not automatically translate into team-wide efficiency. The firm found that while individual time savings are positively correlated with better output and higher work quality, team-level time savings show no such correlation. In simple terms, while GenAI might help one person work faster, that does not guarantee the whole team becomes more productive.
Employee anxiety about AI also appears to be rising. According to Gartner, the average supply chain worker is now juggling around 3.6 GenAI tools, leaving many employees feeling overwhelmed by the rapid influx of new tools and unsure of how GenAI might reshape their roles. In the long-term, suggests the research firm, this may actively undermine supply chain management productivity.
One remedy for this, Gartner argued, is for CSCOs to refrain from scrutinising individual productivity metrics so closely and instead focus on organisational alignment. This, in turn, would mean rethinking GenAI strategies to prioritise creativity-driven use cases, not just time-saving hacks. GenAI should also be a tool for enhancing strategic thinking and fostering innovation, said Gartner, especially among frontline workers who have yet to see the same productivity gains as their desk-based peers.
Broader trends highlight GenAI productivity potential
While Gartner’s survey highlights mixed results within supply chain organisations, other industries have reported significant productivity gains from GenAI adoption. A July 2024 Bain & Company survey found that the technology boosted productivity by 20% in financial services, with coders completing 26% more tasks, particularly benefiting less experienced developers. A McKinsey & Company report estimates GenAI could add $4.4 trillion to global productivity.
Adoption of the technology has also surged globally, rising from 33% in 2023 to 65% in 2024, according to McKinsey. Additionally, a Capgemini Research Institute study revealed that 71% of consumers demand GenAI in retail, while a September 2024 Gartner report showed AI adoption in finance functions has reached 58%.
Read more: 58% of finance functions using AI in 2024, finds Gartner survey
