首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 商潮 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

美国企业AI转型速度缓慢,部分原因是专业人才储备稀缺

Ryan McManus
2026-09-28

如果企业迟迟不能认清AI的深远影响,那么它们自身的发展很可能会陷入停滞。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

美国公司董事协会纽约分会主席瑞安·麦克马纳斯。图片来源:courtesy of Ryan McManus

近日,Anthropic研究员雅各布·考克森公开辞职,理由是AI可能导致人类灭亡,这让“放慢AI发展速度”的呼声骤然高涨。随后,Anthropic首席执行官达里奥·阿莫代伊发表了一篇近4,000字的文章,主张为AI踩刹车。萨姆·奥尔特曼、埃隆·马斯克等人罕见地迅速达成一致,支持这一主张。尽管如此,目前政府出台干预措施、放慢AI发展的可能性依然不大。

围绕支持还是反对放慢AI发展的争论日益激烈,但另一种风险却几乎无人讨论:如果企业迟迟不能认清AI的深远影响,那么它们自身的发展很可能会陷入停滞。正因如此,除最前沿的AI实验室外,美国企业界亟需全速跟进。

美国企业采用AI之所以进展缓慢,部分原因是目前真正懂行的专业人才储备仍然稀缺。这就要求企业开展技能提升和转岗培训,以满足自身业务需求,并填补新出现的AI岗位。但另一方面则源于企业的谨慎观望,甚至纯粹出于自保。那些试图明哲保身的企业必须明白,竞争对手绝不会停下脚步。

我的工作,是帮助各行各业的企业高管和董事会应对AI带来的机遇与风险。这些企业遍布国防、食品分销、再保险、公用事业、制造业、消费品、零售、工程和跨国银行业等截然不同的行业。我每天都能感受到高管们急于参透AI、抢占先机的迫切感。

美国企业正承受着加快采用AI的巨大压力。最近一项调查显示,65%的上市公司董事认为,AI如今已经成为董事会的头号议题。这并不令人意外。AI迭代速度极快,其跨行业颠覆的轮廓也初现端倪。美国企业界深知其中的利害关系,并未坐等联邦监管机构帮忙——或者添乱。

至少目前,决策层仍把有关AI的重大问题留给企业自己解决。美国企业界也明白,真正需要直面AI挑战的是它们自己。令人担忧的是,AI发展如此之快,而真正知道该如何应对这一时代决定性议题的企业领导者,却寥寥无几。

标普500指数成分股中,只有22%的公司披露了董事会对AI的监督情况;罗素3000指数成分股中,这一比例仅为6%。与此同时,只有29%的企业领导者认为,自己的董事会拥有指导AI落地的专业能力。在联邦政府尚未出台重大监管规定、为企业采用AI划定边界的情况下,AI究竟该如何部署,许多关键决策实际上是在企业董事会而非国会山做出的。

对私营部门来说,好消息是它们习惯于比国会行动得更快。坏消息则是,如果尚未真正吃透AI的种种复杂性就贸然加速,可能会付出惨痛代价。

福特(Ford)就是一个“未学爬先学跑”的例子。为了提升汽车质量,福特大举引入AI,部署了900台AI辅助检测摄像头和自动化质量控制系统,希望用它们取代经验丰富的工程师。然而,这些AI系统未能兑现外界吹捧的神奇效果。福特负责车辆硬件工程的副总裁曾表示:“我们当时错误地以为,只要引入人工智能,再把现有的设计要求输入系统,就能得到高质量产品。”这次操之过急的尝试让福特付出了时间和金钱的双重代价。

尽管遭遇挫折,福特也吸取了教训。公司重新聘用经验丰富的安全工程师,由他们训练自动化系统,并指导年轻员工。在人的参与下,相关技术得到改善,而福特也重新登上了君迪(J.D. Power)汽车质量与安全相关排名的榜首。

那么,企业领导者该如何在快速行动的迫切性与决策失误的风险之间做出权衡?

第一步应重战略,轻技术:设定愿景、赋能管理层,并着手构建组织架构、制度规范以及能快速见效的试点项目。对大多数企业而言,短期内最容易获得的回报,并不是用AI取代员工,而是借助AI提升员工的效率和能力。也正因为当前AI的能力本身仍存在不少局限,这个“爬行阶段”才显得格外重要。

学会“爬”之后,便可开始“走”。这一阶段涉及开发更复杂的AI应用场景,持续跟踪并修正操作,同时密切监控风险和投资回报率。企业应该思考的是如何招聘合适的人才、提升现有员工的技能,而不是进行大幅裁员。接下来,便可将这些新的组织能力在全公司铺开,实现AI应用的规模化落地,推动新试验,并构建合适的合作关系和基础设施。

最后,企业才能真正进入“跑”的阶段,真正的红利将在这一阶段释放:开发下一代技术、探索新解决方案,并构想前所未见的产品。到了这个阶段,企业可以放开手脚,跨越单纯的效率提升,直接迈向纯粹的新价值创造。

对大多数企业而言,真正的风险在于,它们还停留在“爬”的阶段,竞争对手却已在谋划该如何“跑”。

本周吸引了几乎所有注意力的争论,都集中在“谁来开发AI”上,却鲜少有人讨论“谁来部署AI”。但对绝大多数美国人而言,后一个问题才是真正牵涉切身利益的关键。AI行业还会继续推出令人惊叹的新工具,同时不断提升安全性。但在其他实体经济领域部署这些能力时,必须有人来进行治理。其中的机遇和风险都太过重大,绝不能听天由命。在华盛顿决策层权衡如何介入之际,这项重任实际上落到企业董事会的肩上——无论董事们是否已经做好准备。

本文作者瑞安·麦克马纳斯现任美国公司董事协会(National Association of Corporate Directors,NACD)纽约分会主席,也是techtonic.io的创始人兼首席执行官,为企业董事会、首席执行官和投资者提供AI相关咨询。

Fortune.com上发表的评论文章中表达的观点,仅代表作者本人的观点,不代表《财富》杂志的观点和立场。(财富中文网)

译者:刘进龙

审校:汪皓

近日,Anthropic研究员雅各布·考克森公开辞职,理由是AI可能导致人类灭亡,这让“放慢AI发展速度”的呼声骤然高涨。随后,Anthropic首席执行官达里奥·阿莫代伊发表了一篇近4,000字的文章,主张为AI踩刹车。萨姆·奥尔特曼、埃隆·马斯克等人罕见地迅速达成一致,支持这一主张。尽管如此,目前政府出台干预措施、放慢AI发展的可能性依然不大。

围绕支持还是反对放慢AI发展的争论日益激烈,但另一种风险却几乎无人讨论:如果企业迟迟不能认清AI的深远影响,那么它们自身的发展很可能会陷入停滞。正因如此,除最前沿的AI实验室外,美国企业界亟需全速跟进。

美国企业采用AI之所以进展缓慢,部分原因是目前真正懂行的专业人才储备仍然稀缺。这就要求企业开展技能提升和转岗培训,以满足自身业务需求,并填补新出现的AI岗位。但另一方面则源于企业的谨慎观望,甚至纯粹出于自保。那些试图明哲保身的企业必须明白,竞争对手绝不会停下脚步。

我的工作,是帮助各行各业的企业高管和董事会应对AI带来的机遇与风险。这些企业遍布国防、食品分销、再保险、公用事业、制造业、消费品、零售、工程和跨国银行业等截然不同的行业。我每天都能感受到高管们急于参透AI、抢占先机的迫切感。

美国企业正承受着加快采用AI的巨大压力。最近一项调查显示,65%的上市公司董事认为,AI如今已经成为董事会的头号议题。这并不令人意外。AI迭代速度极快,其跨行业颠覆的轮廓也初现端倪。美国企业界深知其中的利害关系,并未坐等联邦监管机构帮忙——或者添乱。

至少目前,决策层仍把有关AI的重大问题留给企业自己解决。美国企业界也明白,真正需要直面AI挑战的是它们自己。令人担忧的是,AI发展如此之快,而真正知道该如何应对这一时代决定性议题的企业领导者,却寥寥无几。

标普500指数成分股中,只有22%的公司披露了董事会对AI的监督情况;罗素3000指数成分股中,这一比例仅为6%。与此同时,只有29%的企业领导者认为,自己的董事会拥有指导AI落地的专业能力。在联邦政府尚未出台重大监管规定、为企业采用AI划定边界的情况下,AI究竟该如何部署,许多关键决策实际上是在企业董事会而非国会山做出的。

对私营部门来说,好消息是它们习惯于比国会行动得更快。坏消息则是,如果尚未真正吃透AI的种种复杂性就贸然加速,可能会付出惨痛代价。

福特(Ford)就是一个“未学爬先学跑”的例子。为了提升汽车质量,福特大举引入AI,部署了900台AI辅助检测摄像头和自动化质量控制系统,希望用它们取代经验丰富的工程师。然而,这些AI系统未能兑现外界吹捧的神奇效果。福特负责车辆硬件工程的副总裁曾表示:“我们当时错误地以为,只要引入人工智能,再把现有的设计要求输入系统,就能得到高质量产品。”这次操之过急的尝试让福特付出了时间和金钱的双重代价。

尽管遭遇挫折,福特也吸取了教训。公司重新聘用经验丰富的安全工程师,由他们训练自动化系统,并指导年轻员工。在人的参与下,相关技术得到改善,而福特也重新登上了君迪(J.D. Power)汽车质量与安全相关排名的榜首。

那么,企业领导者该如何在快速行动的迫切性与决策失误的风险之间做出权衡?

第一步应重战略,轻技术:设定愿景、赋能管理层,并着手构建组织架构、制度规范以及能快速见效的试点项目。对大多数企业而言,短期内最容易获得的回报,并不是用AI取代员工,而是借助AI提升员工的效率和能力。也正因为当前AI的能力本身仍存在不少局限,这个“爬行阶段”才显得格外重要。

学会“爬”之后,便可开始“走”。这一阶段涉及开发更复杂的AI应用场景,持续跟踪并修正操作,同时密切监控风险和投资回报率。企业应该思考的是如何招聘合适的人才、提升现有员工的技能,而不是进行大幅裁员。接下来,便可将这些新的组织能力在全公司铺开,实现AI应用的规模化落地,推动新试验,并构建合适的合作关系和基础设施。

最后,企业才能真正进入“跑”的阶段,真正的红利将在这一阶段释放:开发下一代技术、探索新解决方案,并构想前所未见的产品。到了这个阶段,企业可以放开手脚,跨越单纯的效率提升,直接迈向纯粹的新价值创造。

对大多数企业而言,真正的风险在于,它们还停留在“爬”的阶段,竞争对手却已在谋划该如何“跑”。

本周吸引了几乎所有注意力的争论,都集中在“谁来开发AI”上,却鲜少有人讨论“谁来部署AI”。但对绝大多数美国人而言,后一个问题才是真正牵涉切身利益的关键。AI行业还会继续推出令人惊叹的新工具,同时不断提升安全性。但在其他实体经济领域部署这些能力时,必须有人来进行治理。其中的机遇和风险都太过重大,绝不能听天由命。在华盛顿决策层权衡如何介入之际,这项重任实际上落到企业董事会的肩上——无论董事们是否已经做好准备。

本文作者瑞安·麦克马纳斯现任美国公司董事协会(National Association of Corporate Directors,NACD)纽约分会主席,也是techtonic.io的创始人兼首席执行官,为企业董事会、首席执行官和投资者提供AI相关咨询。

Fortune.com上发表的评论文章中表达的观点,仅代表作者本人的观点,不代表《财富》杂志的观点和立场。(财富中文网)

译者:刘进龙

审校:汪皓

The case for slowing AI down got turbocharged last week when Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon publicly resigned citing AI’s potential to end humanity. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei then posted a nearly 4,000 word essay arguing for an AI slowdown. In a rare bout of unity, Sam Altman, Elon Musk and others quickly endorsed the idea of slowing down. Despite these calls, government intervention to slow down AI developments looks unlikely for now.

While an active debate on both sides of this topic gains steam, there is another kind of risk that is not getting discussed: companies that move too slowly in grasping the implications of AI will likely see their own form of a slow down. That is why outside of frontier AI labs, the rest of corporate America needs to speed up.

Some of corporate America’s slowness in adopting AI is because the talent pool who know what they are doing is still small. This argues for upskilling and reskilling to meet demand and fill emerging AI job categories. However, some of the slowness can be attributed to a cautious approach or even self-protection. But those who are covering themselves need to know they have competitors that won’t wait.

I help the executives and boards of companies from numerous industries grapple with the opportunities and risks of AI. Everyday I see their urgency to understand and get ahead with AI in industries as varied as defense, food distribution, reinsurance, utilities, manufacturing, consumer products, retail, engineering, and international banking.

American companies are under tremendous pressure to accelerate their AI adoption. AI now ranks as the top issue on public company board agendas for 65% of public company directors in a recent survey. And that makes sense. AI is evolving fast and beginning to show the outlines of cross-industry disruption. Corporate America understands the stakes, and they are not waiting for federal regulators to help (or hinder) them.

For now, the powers that be are leaving the big questions about AI to the companies themselves. Corporate America knows they are the ones who need to grapple with AI. The worry is that given how fast AI is moving, very few corporate leaders know exactly how to approach the defining issue of our time.

Only 22% of S&P 500 companies and 6% of the Russell 3000 disclosed board oversight of AI while only 29% of leaders say they have the right expertise on their boards to advise on AI implementation. Without major federal regulations setting the guardrails for how companies adopt AI, the big decisions about how AI is being deployed are being made in the boardroom, not the halls of Congress.

The good news for the private sector is they are used to moving faster than Congress. The bad news is if they move too fast without getting their heads fully around the nuances of AI, it can cost them dearly.

Take the example of Ford trying to run before they could crawl. Ford leaned hard into AI for vehicle quality, installing 900 AI-assisted inspection cameras and automated quality systems meant to replace veteran engineers. Their AI systems, however, failed to live up to the hype. Ford’s VP of vehicle hardware engineering was quoted as saying “mistakenly, we thought that by just introducing artificial intelligence and ingesting the design requirements that we had, that would produce a high-quality product.” The false start cost them time and money.

Despite the set-backs, Ford learned from their mistakes. They re-hired veteran safety engineers who set about training the automated systems and mentoring young workers. The technology improved with human input and Ford just returned to the top of the JD Power rankings that measure vehicle quality and safety.

So how do leaders balance the need to act quickly with the risks of getting it wrong?

The first step is strategy, not technology: set a vision, educate leadership and work to set up structures, policies, and quick-win pilots. For most companies, the quickest gains are going to be realized through making humans more productive and powerful, not by getting rid of them. This crawl phase is all the more important because of some of the limitations inherent in today’s AI capabilities.

After you crawl, you can start to walk. That involves developing complex use cases, tracking and revising what you do, and monitoring risk and ROI closely. Think how to recruit and upskill your workforce, not decimate it. Next you can start to apply these new organizational skills across the entire business, scale AI capabilities, drive new experimentation, and build out the right partnerships and infrastructure.

Finally, you can run. This is where the real rewards are unlocked: developing next-generation technology, discovering new solutions and conceptualizing never-before-seen products. This stage is where companies can get really bold and shoot past efficiency gains and towards raw, new value creation.

The risk for most companies is that they are stuck in the crawl phase while their competitors are already planning how they will run.

The argument consuming all the attention this week is about who builds AI. Almost nobody is discussing who deploys it. This is where the rubber hits the road for the vast majority of Americans. The AI industry will continue to create incredible new tools while improving safety. But someone has to govern how the rest of the economy deploys these capabilities. The opportunities and risks are too important to be left to chance. As Washington D.C. decides how to engage, the job belongs to the boardroom, whether directors are prepared for it or not.

Ryan McManus is the President of the National Association of Corporate Directors New York chapter. He is also the founder and CEO of techtonic.io, where he works with boards, CEOs, and investors on AI.

The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

财富中文网所刊载内容之知识产权为财富媒体知识产权有限公司及/或相关权利人专属所有或持有。未经许可,禁止进行转载、摘编、复制及建立镜像等任何使用。
0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开