Sit with an operator long enough in 2025 or early 2026 and eventually the conversation turns to AI. The tools they're exploring. The workflows they've rebuilt. The hours they've reclaimed. And somewhere in that conversation, usually buried under their genuine excitement, is a number that doesn't quite work. A forecast that's off, a dashboard that looks right but doesn't connect to anything real, a report that's clean and fast and useless.

The complete insight. Read this and decide if the details are for you or better forwarded to someone on your team.

The operators losing ground to AI aren't just the ones ignoring it. They're also the ones adopting it on top of broken thinking.

Every forecast model, every dashboard, every automated report reflects the assumptions that were already inside the business. AI doesn't evaluate those assumptions. It executes on them faster and packages them more convincingly. A forecast built on the wrong demand inputs produces the same wrong number whether it takes four hours or four minutes. The wrong number is now just more confident-looking.

The operators actually getting leverage from AI right now share one thing: they used the implementation process as a forcing function to clarify the thinking underneath. They asked, before automating anything: what question is this actually supposed to answer? The answer changed the tool. But first it changed the inputs.

If you’re a decision maker at your company, you need to be on the bleeding edge of, well, everything. But before you go signing up for seminars, conferences, lunch ‘n learns, and all that jazz, just know there’s a far better (and simpler) way: Subscribing to The Deep View.

This daily newsletter condenses everything you need to know about the latest and greatest AI developments into a 5-minute read. Squeeze it into your morning coffee break and before you know it, you’ll be an expert too.

Subscribe right here. It’s totally free, wildly informative, and trusted by 600,000+ readers at Google, Meta, Microsoft, and beyond.

Say you're running a $22M apparel brand. You bring in a BI tool. Dashboard is clean. Daily inventory position, sell-through by SKU, demand trend lines by channel. Finance loves it. Leadership puts it on every weekly call. Twelve months in, you're sitting on $1.4M in slow-moving inventory and you can't explain why the sell-through numbers you'd been watching looked fine until they didn't.

The problem isn't the tool. The tool is working exactly as designed. The problem is that the demand signal feeding the forecast is trailing actuals by 45 days, a lag inherited from your old spreadsheet process and automated into the new system. The dashboard is beautiful. The inputs are wrong. Nobody stopped to ask whether the data structure actually reflected how inventory moved through the business.

The seductive part of AI for operators is the speed. The proposal that used to take two hours takes twelve minutes. The inventory model that used to require a dedicated planning session gets refreshed on demand. The weekly report that lived in a spreadsheet nobody trusted now lives in a system that surfaces it automatically.

Speed is real leverage when the thinking is sound. When it isn't, speed is just how you scale the wrong answer.

The brands getting actual mileage from AI right now aren't the ones with the most tools or the most integrations. They're the ones who treated the implementation process like a diagnostic. They couldn't automate a process they hadn't first clearly defined. The AI pressure forced the conversation that should have happened years earlier: what is this forecast actually for, what decisions is it supposed to make easier, and who owns the inputs?

Before anything gets automated, here are two questions we suggest exploring.

What decision does this output change? If the answer is "it keeps leadership informed" or "it creates visibility," that's not a decision. A report that informs without changing behavior is a reporting cost, not a planning tool.

Who owns the inputs, and when were they last tested? Most brands inherit their data structures from an earlier version of the business, built when they were smaller, slower, or selling through different channels. Automating those inputs doesn't fix the assumptions inside them. It hardens them.

The brands that built compounding advantage from the last decade of ecommerce infrastructure weren't the ones that adopted Shopify earliest or had the most integrations. They were the ones that used the platform to execute clear thinking at scale. The same thing is happening now.

AI will compound whatever is underneath it. If your thinking is sharp, then your leverage is real. If the inputs are garbage, then the outputs are wrong at higher speed. The opportunity that AI is presenting to brands of all sizes is obviously significant. The risk is that the dashboard looks so good you forget to ask whether it's telling you something true.