Month: August 2024

Discover how businesses are responding to the GenAI disruption.

Since the Generative AI explosion at the beginning of last year, digital industry has been grappling with the implications of such a significant technological disruption. With Global AI investment set to soar to more than $800 billion in 2030, businesses small and large will be faced with both opportunities and threats.

AI tools have the potential to completely transform the market landscape, displacing current market leaders and even leaving the biggest names struggling to stay relevant. The key to survival and success will be the ability to adapt quickly and leverage AI. Gartner found that 30% of GenAI projects are expected to be abandoned by 2025, yet only 7% of businesses feel they are meeting or exceeding their digital transformation targets. What’s a contributing factor to this gap?

As AI’s evolution continues at rapid pace, it’s not going to be perfect. We need to acknowledge both the potential and pitfalls in this phase – when it gets things right, and when it gets things wrong. A recent thinktank report even called for a system to record AI’s misuse and malfunction in order to learn from the technology and use it successfully. But we can’t sit around and wait for government and policymakers to act. Organizations need to apply their own guardrails and careful sense of judgment to truly reap the benefits of this technology.

When considering the threat, organizations typically respond in one of three ways: Fight, Flight, or Freeze.

Fight

Organizations in “Fight” mode are proactive in their approach to adopting GenAI. They recognize the transformative potential of GenAI and are committed to integrating it into their operations. In fact, four in five businesses expect AI to have a positive impact on their business, while three quarters have already started to use GenAI or plan to do so this year.

Successful organizations tend to take a highly coordinated and value-focused approach, setting up a dedicated GenAI taskforce to ensure every initiative aligns with broader strategic goals. This involves thorough planning, prioritization of high-impact areas, and proper resource allocation. Starting with small, focused experiments, allows them to learn quickly, gain initial traction, and demonstrate the technology’s value. This not only helps assess the return on investment but also communicates the value to stakeholders.

Organizations that struggle in the “Fight” mode often suffer from issues such as misaligned or disconnected leadership. Without a unified vision, different departments might pursue their own GenAI projects in an uncoordinated manner, leading to inefficiencies and wasted resources. Moreover, the lack of clear success metrics can result in ambiguity about the impact and value of these initiatives, making it challenging to justify investment.

Flight

In the “Flight” mode, organizations exhibit a more cautious or resistant attitude toward GenAI adoption. Some view GenAI as a distraction from their primary goals and objectives, fearing that it could divert resources and focus away from core activities. Others are skeptical about the potential value GenAI can add to their existing products or services, doubting the technology’s maturity or relevance to their specific industry.

Another common concern is the fear of job displacement. Employees may worry that the automation and efficiencies brought by GenAI could threaten job security. Additionally, some may dismiss GenAI as being overhyped, preferring to wait until the technology has been more widely used before investing in it. Finally, concerns about the risks associated with GenAI, including ethical considerations and the potential for misuse, can also lead to a ‘flight’ response.

While there is some validity to these concerns, if they amount to organizations walking away from actively exploring GenAI’s potential, then may be sabotaging their own future.

Freeze

Organizations in “Freeze” mode are those that, despite recognizing the potential value of GenAI, find themselves unable to move forward due to various internal barriers. Many organizations fall into this category for several reasons.

Some organizations might be in the midst of other critical transformation initiatives that take precedence, such as becoming more lean or agile, or shifting to a product-led or data-driven approach.

Additionally, organizational silos and the use of outdated legacy technology can hinder progress. Fragmentation between teams can result in duplicated efforts, inconsistent strategies, and a lack of shared understanding of GenAI’s benefits, while old IT infrastructure would necessitate costly and time-consuming upgrades to accommodate GenAI.

Legal and compliance teams may also impose strict guidelines or outright bans on exploring GenAI due to concerns over data privacy, intellectual property, or regulatory compliance.

Setting an effective action plan

With these response modalities in mind and the assumption that action is needed, what do organizations need to do to transition into action mode in a way that generates value for the organization?

To effectively engage with GenAI, organizations should start by educating and aligning executive stakeholders on its potential and risks. Establishing a centralised team to manage GenAI initiatives is crucial. Beginning with small, focused pilot projects can demonstrate value and feasibility. Implementing metrics to track and showcase the impact of GenAI efforts can help secure greater stakeholder buy-in.

By addressing these initial steps, organizations can transition into an effective action plan to harness GenAI’s transformative potential.

We list the best AI website builders.

This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro’s Expert Insights channel where we feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/news/submit-your-story-to-techradar-pro

Read More 

Lucasfilm has canceled The Acolyte after a dissapointing first season, but we aren’t surprised.

As far as Star Wars quotes go, Yoda’s “Do or do not, there is no try” is certainly up there. As first reported by Deadline, Lucasfilm has opted to “do not” regarding the possible second season of The Acolyte, with the Star Wars offshoot being canceled just over a month after the conclusion of its first season.

The Acolyte is a prequel series, set around 100 years before Star Wars: Episode One – The Phantom Menace, following a respected Jedi Master as he investigates a crime spree, encountering a former Padawan and sinister forces.

A mystery-thriller in the Star Wars universe with a Jedi detective? That might be the coolest premise I’ve ever heard – yet I couldn’t get into it and, as it turns out, I wasn’t the only one.

The Acolyte drew almost 5 million views on its first day – making it the biggest Disney Plus launch of the year – and, four days later, it was sitting at a very healthy 11.1 million views globally. Ranking at six and seven over its first two weeks in the Nielsen Top 10 Originals chart, it fell off the grid and didn’t reappear until the final episode pushed it into 10th spot according to Deadline – with the lowest viewership for a Star Wars series finale.

It wasn’t all bad, though. While Star Wars: The Acolyte‘s audience score on Rotten Tomatoes currently sits at a rotten 18%, the ‘All Critics’ score is at a much healthier 78%. 

While controversy enshrouded this project – mostly mind-numbing complaints aimed at its female lead (Amanda Stenberg) and diverse cast – which may account for some of that rotten score, the fall-off in numbers shows the on-screen performance didn’t do much either. Even my Star Wars-obsessed colleague didn’t finish it. That said, the first season had some interesting plotlines to indicate a second season, plus it ended in a cliffhanger. So its cancellation is a bit of a shock.

Or is it? 

I have a bad feeling about this

While it would be easy to write it off as just a bad show with subpar acting and writing that had us complaining about the Sith Lord’s reveal, I think that’s unfair and only half the story.

Those things are true, at least from what I’ve heard, read and seen, but two specific nails hammered into The Acolyte‘s coffin marked its demise.

An eight-episode season with an average episode length of fewer than 35 minutes, its reported budget was an astronomical $180 million. That’s $22.5 million per episode and almost $650,000 every minute. For reference, House of the Dragon‘s second season has a reported budget of $20 million per episode ( a total of $160 million) – with episodes twice as long as The Acolyte‘s.

The Acolyte’s trailer was enough for me to forgo the show – so I can’t comment on how well that massive budget was used – but with a budget like that, a series needs every bit of help it can get.

Which leads me to my second reason that The Acolyte failed – there’s no tether.

(Image credit: Disney Plus/Lucasfilm)

Every Star Wars series has a massive budget, but they have something that connects fans to it and provides a crumb of interest. The Mandalorian had the armor and Bobba Fett’s appearance in the OG series, a baby that looked like Yoda and a well-known creator and star actor in Jon Favreau and Pedro Pascal. 

The Book of Boba Fett, Obi-Wan Kenobi and Ahsoka all have direct ties to the original trilogy or prequels that immediately perk fans’ ears, even if they eventually roll their eyes and ignore it. Similarly to The Acolyte, Andor has a premise that doesn’t scream Star Wars, while still remaining in that universe – which was a big point of interest for me. It had viewership problems too, but its supreme quality and direct link to Star Wars: Rogue One and Star Wars: A New Hope got enough people to watch it to see the confirmation of a second season. 

The Acolyte is nowhere near as good as Andor but being set during the untouched High Republic, it was never going to blow viewership numbers out of the water. Add that to its massive budget and even the Force couldn’t lift it out of the Dagobah swamp – let alone a few seconds of (spoilers!) Yoda and Darth Plagueis in the finale.

I find your lack of faith disturbing

The irony of me not having watched it and having mixed emotions over its cancellation isn’t lost on me, but I love Star Wars. I loved the first season of The Mandalorian (and enjoyed the others), I love to hate the prequel trilogy and I absolutely fell in love with Andor. And, I loved the fact that Lucasfilm was doing something different with The Acolyte. I can’t help but think its failure could see creators learn the wrong lesson.

I think the right reaction would be to release fewer shows, but increase the quality of what is produced. Continue to make unique series like Andor and The Acolyte, but maybe give audiences a point of reference they can associate with. The wrong lesson, and what I think is more likely, is that they do away with unique stories, resorting to fan service and safe content from now on. As a fan, that’s exactly what I don’t want – but a $180 million failed show is a hard experience to not be scared away by. Here’s hoping Skeleton Crew, which debuts on December 3 on Disney Plus, doesn’t disappoint or we might be watching Ewan McGregor and Hayden Christensen make spinoffs forever.

You might also like…

Apple TV Plus renews Bad Sisters for season 2 after it scored 100% on Rotten TomatoesPrime Video cancels My Lady Jane despite its 94% Rotten Tomatoes scorePrime Video releases first-look images of its new The Office Australia series

Read More