The biggest reason why AI pilots fail: The knowledge gap

Every business today is chasing AI-driven efficiency.

The pressure is real, the promise is real, and the budgets are following.

But across industries, a pattern is emerging that nobody wants to talk about in their quarterly updates: the pilots aren't landing.

Not because the technology is broken. Not because the teams aren't capable. But because there's a layer missing, one that most organisations don't even know to look for until it's too late.

We call it the discovery gap. And until you close it, no amount of AI investment is going to deliver what you're expecting.

The map is not the territory

Here's what happens in almost every enterprise AI deployment.

A team identifies a process — onboarding, procurement, claims handling — and they set about documenting it.

They pull up the SOPs. They review the workflow diagrams. They sit with a few subject matter experts for a couple of hours. Then they hand all of that to an AI system and wait for the efficiency gains to roll in.

What they've actually done is automate a fiction.

Because the documented process and the real process are rarely the same thing.

Every organisation runs on two operating systems simultaneously.

There's the official one — the org charts, the process documents, the procedures filed away in folders that get opened maybe twice a year.

And then there's the real one: the tacit knowledge, the workarounds, the institutional wisdom that has built up over years of people figuring out how to actually get things done.

The official operating system is what you show to auditors and new hires. The real one is what keeps the business running.

AI can only act on what it's been given. Feed it the official version, and it will follow that version faithfully — right up until reality arrives with an exception it wasn't prepared for. A client with a non-standard structure. A contract that doesn't fit the template. A decision that requires context that was never written down because everyone who needed to know already knew.

That's when the pilot breaks. And that's when the post-mortems begin.

Mapping knowledge that doesn’t leave with your staff

There's a deeper problem sitting underneath the failed pilots, and it predates AI entirely.

Organisations are carrying enormous amounts of unstructured, undocumented operational knowledge — and almost all of it lives in people's heads.

The senior partner who knows exactly how to handle a tricky client escalation.

The operations manager who has spent a decade building informal processes that make the official ones actually work.

The team lead whose institutional memory is, functionally, the company's risk management system.

This knowledge is extraordinarily valuable. It's also extraordinarily fragile.

When that person leaves — and people always eventually leave — the knowledge walks out with them. The organisation feels the gap for months, sometimes years, and often can't fully articulate what it's lost because it was never captured in the first place.

AI has made this risk more visible, but it didn't create it. The discovery gap was always there. We just didn't have a reason to look at it closely until we started trying to hand complex work off to systems that can only operate on what they've explicitly been told.

The businesses treating this purely as a technology implementation challenge are solving the wrong problem. This is a knowledge infrastructure challenge. And without addressing it, every agentic system you build is one exception away from failure.

What closing the gap actually looks like

Real discovery — the kind that actually prepares an organisation for intelligent automation — means surfacing how work actually moves through a business.

Not the idealised version. The real one, complete with handoffs, edge cases, judgment calls, and the informal logic that sits between the official steps.

That means understanding not just what happens, but why. Who makes which decisions and under what conditions. Where the exceptions live. Which steps are genuinely repeatable and which ones require a human to exercise judgment that nobody has ever formally acknowledged.

When you have that picture — structured, accurate, machine-readable — two things become possible that weren't before:

1. You can automate intelligently, targeting the parts of a workflow that are genuinely suited to automation while designing around the parts that aren't.
2. You protect what you've built. The institutional knowledge that currently sits inside a handful of people becomes an asset that belongs to the organisation, not just to the individuals carrying it.

The foundation for AI that actually works

The businesses that will get lasting, compounding value from AI are not the ones moving fastest. They're the ones building on solid ground, starting with a clear, honest picture of how their operations actually function before they hand any of it to a machine.

Discovery isn't the slow part. It's the part that makes everything else work.

****

Decidr’s latest acquisition, Sugarwork, uncovers this diagnostic layer — to close the gap between what organisations think they do and what they actually do, and to turn that clarity into the foundation for AI that performs in the real world, not just in the demo.

Because the question was never whether AI can automate your processes. It's whether you understand your processes well enough to automate them.