AI skills gaps undermine returns as capability ownership divides leaders
UK survey links missed AI returns to skills gaps, with technology receiving greater spending emphasis than workforce capability.
More than a third of senior leaders surveyed by Kaplan say their organisation has failed to achieve expected returns from an AI deployment because of workforce skills gaps.
In the past 12 months, 37% of C-suite and director-level respondents reported missed returns from an AI tool or deployment as a result of AI skills gaps. A further 39% reported losing a competitive bid or client opportunity partly because of AI capability concerns.
Kaplan’s report, From AI to ROI: Who owns the problem?, draws on three independent surveys conducted by Censuswide in July, involving 1,000 UK employees, 600 HR and L&D decision-makers and 600 C-suite and director-level respondents.
Spending priorities favour technology. Among senior leaders, 54% said AI investment in the past year placed greater emphasis on tools and technology than workforce capability development. Just 20% reported greater emphasis on developing workforce capability.
The groups also gave different answers about responsibility. Among C-suite respondents, 44% identified IT or technology as the primary owner of AI capability, compared with 23% of HR and L&D respondents. HR and L&D respondents were more likely to name HR, at 26%, or L&D, at 18%. Among C-suite respondents, the corresponding figures were 11% and 6%.
More than a third of HR and L&D respondents, 36%, said they lacked sufficient authority, budget or both to act fully on workforce capability requirements.
Employees reported gaps in support. A third, 33%, said they had been asked to work with AI without sufficient training and 26% remained uncertain about how AI should be used. Among HR and L&D respondents, 45% said AI tools were underutilised by the teams expected to use them.
Confidence was considerably higher than leaders’ estimates of proficiency. Eight in ten employees felt confident using AI productively in their day-to-day role. HR and L&D respondents estimated that, on average, 37% of employees expected to work with AI were genuinely proficient. C-suite respondents estimated 46%. These are different measures across separate samples, rather than a direct assessment of employees’ skills.
Training was rated positively by those who received it. Among employees trained in the past year, 81% described it as effective. Among HR and L&D respondents who had provided AI training, 63% reported measurable improvements in workforce capability.
However, just 35% of employees said their organisation had provided structured AI training to a significant proportion of its workforce.
Kaplan, which provides professional education and apprenticeships, recommends agreeing responsibility for AI capability, measuring skills directly and widening access to structured learning.
The surveys covered selected sectors and organisations with at least 50 employees already using AI. The findings reflect respondents’ perceptions and reported business outcomes, rather than independently tested proficiency or verified financial losses.
AI returns fall short
- 37% of senior leaders reported missed AI returns because of skills gaps
- 54% reported greater spending emphasis on AI technology than workforce capability
- 36% of HR and L&D respondents lacked sufficient budget, authority or both
- 33% of employees had been asked to use AI without sufficient training
- 35% of employees reported structured AI training reaching a significant proportion of the workforce