Why Technology Alone Cannot Fix Organisational Complexity
Around 95% of large companies worldwide already have an AI strategy. However, only 8% of organisations achieve a measurable return on investment, while just 11% can be considered leaders in successfully scaling the technology, according to KPMG data.
IDC forecasts that by 2028, 60% of multinational companies will split their AI environments across different regulatory and technological zones. This could increase integration costs by as much as three times.
The figures point to a broader issue. Organisations have more data, systems, applications and automation than ever before, but that does not necessarily translate into greater effectiveness. Technology was meant to simplify how companies operate. Increasingly, it is exposing just how complex they have become.
Companies are buying more solutions, deploying platforms, testing artificial intelligence and automating selected tasks, but they are not always changing the way they work. The result is often not transformation, but another layer of complexity.
Technology Does Not Solve Organisational Chaos
In many companies, new tools are simply added to existing structures. The organisation continues to operate in the same way as before, only with a greater number of systems.
The company may look modern from the outside, but internally it may still be slow, siloed and reactive. KPMG points out that the biggest challenge is no longer access to AI tools. It is integrating technology with business processes, organisational structures and decision-making systems.
“Companies are not losing today because they have too little technology. They are losing because they cannot organise the way they operate. If data is fragmented, processes have no owners and decisions are made in silos, a new tool will only accelerate the chaos,” says Sebastian Kopiej, CEO of Commplace.
A Pilot Is Not Transformation
One of the most common mistakes is confusing a technology test with genuine organisational change. A pilot project can be launched quickly and often runs alongside the existing organisation.
Scaling, however, requires accountability, data quality, system integration, process redesign and a clear decision about who is responsible for delivering the result.
According to EY research, 77% of companies plan to increase their AI investments. At the same time, 49% of businesses admit that their implementations failed to meet expectations. Another 17% say that, with their current knowledge, they would not decide to implement AI again.
This is an important signal. The market is not turning away from technology. Instead, organisations are beginning to understand that investment alone is not enough.
Without putting the organisation in order, new tools can increase costs, frustration and the risk of poor decisions.
More Data Does Not Mean Better Decisions
Companies are collecting more data, but they do not always know how to use it. Information is often scattered across departments, systems and external providers. It may vary in quality, rely on different definitions and lack a single owner.
According to data cited in EY’s research, fewer than 40% of companies have the information resources required to build their own, more advanced AI solutions instead of relying exclusively on ready-made tools.
At the same time, 39% of businesses identify security as the biggest barrier to implementing artificial intelligence.
The data problem is no longer just an IT issue. It has become a management, reputational and financial issue. If a company does not know which data it relies on, it also does not know the basis on which it makes decisions.
Buying Technology Instead of Changing the Organisation
In Polish e-commerce, more companies are investing in new tools. Major players are developing solutions in personalisation, customer service and process automation.
However, market experts point out that many organisations still treat AI implementation as simply buying access to a tool, without integrating it with internal systems or organising the underlying data.
This reflects a wider problem. Companies buy technology because they want to demonstrate progress. But technology alone does not change an organisation.
Change begins when a company knows which process it wants to improve, what result it wants to achieve, what data is needed and who is responsible for the outcome.
“Buying technology is easier than changing an organisation. That is why companies often choose what is visible: a tool, a licence, a pilot project or a presentation. Yet real transformation happens where it is less spectacular: in data, processes, accountability and decision-making,” says Sebastian Kopiej of Commplace.
Complexity Is Becoming a Cost
The more systems and processes an organisation has, the greater the risk that it loses transparency. Technology maintenance costs rise, exceptions multiply, manual supervision becomes necessary and the risk of errors increases.
Employees may use multiple tools while still correcting data manually, transferring information between systems and agreeing on decisions outside formal processes.
IDC forecasts that by 2028, 60% of multinational companies will divide their AI environments across different regulatory and technological zones, while integration costs may rise by as much as three times.
The reasons include regulatory fragmentation, geopolitical risks and the need to maintain parallel technology environments.
This means companies will not only pay for the technology itself. Managing its complexity will become an increasingly significant cost, including integration, security, compliance, data governance and accountability.
Technological Sovereignty Changes the Economics
Until recently, cloud and digital technologies were mainly designed around scalability and efficiency. Today, regulations, geopolitics and data security are becoming increasingly important.
IDC reports that 63% of organisations are now more inclined to choose sovereign cloud services as a result of recent geopolitical developments.
Organisations increasingly need to design parallel architectures for different jurisdictions, regulations and security requirements. In practice, technology is no longer a neutral tool. It is becoming an element of strategic risk.
The New Advantage: The Ability to Simplify
In a world overloaded with technology, the strongest advantage will not belong to companies with the most tools. It will belong to those that can reduce complexity.
This means being able to connect data, processes, communication and decisions into one coherent operating system.
The key question is no longer: “Which technology should we buy?”
It is: “Which process do we want to change, who is responsible for the result and how will we measure the outcome?”
“The greatest advantage in the coming years will not be access to technology, because it will become increasingly widespread. The advantage will be an organisation’s ability to manage complexity. The winners will be companies that can understand more quickly what is truly blocking results and translate technology into simpler decisions, simpler processes and greater accountability,” says Sebastian Kopiej.
Technology Is a Tool. Change Is a Decision
Organisations cannot avoid technology. But they can stop treating it as a substitute for change.
New systems, data and automation only make sense when they serve a specific business objective. If a company does not organise its processes, define accountability and begin measuring outcomes, every additional technology will become just another layer of complication.
The question is therefore not whether companies need more tools. The real question is whether organisations can still keep up with their own complexity.
