“I don’t care what the technology does; I care about what I can do with it!” Pactitioner Feedback (2025)
I have one question in the context of the above:
“You are taking a step toward responsible AI, but how do you ensure deployment avoids historical traps in complex ecosystems? And what has been the historical success rate for those following this strategy?”
Here is what my research indicates, but I am open to any productive feedback or supporting documentation you have to provide added clarity:
PROCUREMENT INSIGHTS 2007 TO 2025 PROPRIETARY ARCHIVES ASSESSMENT
MODEL 5
The visualization emphasizes that while Gartner’s framework shows awareness of AI complexity, it fundamentally lacks the practitioner-focused, outcome-predictive methodology that the Hansen archives demonstrate leads to higher implementation success rates. The Hansen approach prioritizes organizational readiness and adaptive technology deployment over traditional feature-focused selection criteria. This aligns with the archives’ core thesis that successful procurement transformation requires technology that adapts to organizational needs rather than forcing organizations to adapt to technology limitations.
MODEL 6
Oversimplification of Complex Systems: Gartner’s model, while acknowledging multiple sources, still presents a simplified view of “coordination”. The Hansen Method, using its Metaprise framework, would argue that the enterprise is a “complex adaptive system” where human and digital agents interact in a non-linear way. Gartner’s focus on managing “BYOAI” and “embedded AI” addresses a symptom of the issue. At the same time, the Hansen Method seeks to diagnose the root cause: the lack of a unified, agent-based foundation that can manage all these inputs seamlessly.
MODEL 1
What Gartner gets right
- Reality check: AI will arrive from three directions—embedded in vendor apps, built/blended by data/engineering, and “bring-your-own AI” from business teams. Coordination and governance are necessary.
What’s missing (why past waves fizzled in the archives)
- It’s still framed as a portfolio choice (build/buy/blend) rather than a runtime fitness test. The archive shows SOA, RPA, and “cloud first” all failed when teams scaled without proving adaptivity, human guardrails, and lineage in their actual flows.
- No operational pass/fail gates. Governance and roadmaps don’t predict success; observable behavior in live workflows does.
MODEL 2
Viewed through the Procurement Insights archives by Jon Hansen, this would be assessed as a familiar narrative of AI’s promise in procurement/supply chains—optimistic on integration but critiqued for linear sourcing and vendor hype, risking the 75–85% historical failure rates. The Hansen Method™ (process archaeology, agent-based modeling, strand commonality) and Fit Score (HFS, 0–10 for alignment, bias mitigation) would rate it moderately (hypothetical 6–7/10): Praising blended/human focus but deducting for overlooking non-linear realities, behavioral gaps, and procurement-specific risks like supply chain security
MODEL 3
Procurement Insights Archives would conclude that the Gartner “AI Will Come From Everywhere” model reinforces existing market structures that benefit vendors and consultants but systematically underestimates the importance of practitioner fit, readiness, adaptive orchestration, and real business context—the key ingredients that the Hansen Method and Fit Score deliver for sustainable success in procurement and AI transformation. The Procurement Insights Archives would view the Gartner “AI Will Come From Everywhere” diagram and article as a perfect example of a vendor- and technology-first approach that falls short of the practitioner-centric, outcome-oriented mindset fundamental to the Hansen Method and Fit Score.
- The Gartner visual sorts AI into streams by source (business, IT/data science, and SW vendors), and frames the problem as one of coordination, security, and integration. Procurement Insights would critique this for emphasizing tool orchestration and IT complexity—not adaptation to business context, practitioner pain points, or process alignment.
- Hansen-aligned models start with behavioral/process readiness, dynamic fit scoring, and measurable practitioner impact—documented to deliver 15–30% higher success rates and ROI in digital transformation projects.
- The image and Gartner’s philosophy reinforce complexity by requiring organizations to “blend” and “integrate” multiple vendor ecosystems rather than reducing friction and focusing on practitioner outcomes, resilience, and adaptability.
- According to archive assessments, successful adoption comes not from the source of AI, but from what practitioners can do with it—how it fits into real workflows, addresses behavioral barriers, and can be validated by empirical performance and change-management outcomes, all core to the Hansen Fit Score.
Summary:
Procurement Insights would find that Gartner’s approach is conceptually broad but operationally superficial—missing the deep alignment, readiness, and feedback loops that drive real transformation and measured practitioner success with AI and procurement tech.
MODEL 4
The Procurement Insights Archives would assess Gartner’s AI deployment article as directionally positive but insufficiently practitioner-centric compared to the Hansen Method and Fit Score. The Hansen approach delivers more transparent, adaptive, and practitioner-driven evaluations, validated through real-world case studies and measurable procurement outcomes. For organizations seeking both operational rigor and practitioner empowerment in AI-driven procurement transformation, the Hansen Fit Score represents a more transparent and trustworthy alternative to traditional analyst-driven approaches.
30
Procurement Insights
Through The Practitioner’s Eyes: Assessing Gartner’s AI Will Come From Everywhere Post
Posted on September 21, 2025
0
“I don’t care what the technology does; I care about what I can do with it!” Pactitioner Feedback (2025)
I have one question in the context of the above:
“You are taking a step toward responsible AI, but how do you ensure deployment avoids historical traps in complex ecosystems? And what has been the historical success rate for those following this strategy?”
Here is what my research indicates, but I am open to any productive feedback or supporting documentation you have to provide added clarity:
PROCUREMENT INSIGHTS 2007 TO 2025 PROPRIETARY ARCHIVES ASSESSMENT
MODEL 5
The visualization emphasizes that while Gartner’s framework shows awareness of AI complexity, it fundamentally lacks the practitioner-focused, outcome-predictive methodology that the Hansen archives demonstrate leads to higher implementation success rates. The Hansen approach prioritizes organizational readiness and adaptive technology deployment over traditional feature-focused selection criteria. This aligns with the archives’ core thesis that successful procurement transformation requires technology that adapts to organizational needs rather than forcing organizations to adapt to technology limitations.
MODEL 6
Oversimplification of Complex Systems: Gartner’s model, while acknowledging multiple sources, still presents a simplified view of “coordination”. The Hansen Method, using its Metaprise framework, would argue that the enterprise is a “complex adaptive system” where human and digital agents interact in a non-linear way. Gartner’s focus on managing “BYOAI” and “embedded AI” addresses a symptom of the issue. At the same time, the Hansen Method seeks to diagnose the root cause: the lack of a unified, agent-based foundation that can manage all these inputs seamlessly.
MODEL 1
What Gartner gets right
What’s missing (why past waves fizzled in the archives)
MODEL 2
Viewed through the Procurement Insights archives by Jon Hansen, this would be assessed as a familiar narrative of AI’s promise in procurement/supply chains—optimistic on integration but critiqued for linear sourcing and vendor hype, risking the 75–85% historical failure rates. The Hansen Method™ (process archaeology, agent-based modeling, strand commonality) and Fit Score (HFS, 0–10 for alignment, bias mitigation) would rate it moderately (hypothetical 6–7/10): Praising blended/human focus but deducting for overlooking non-linear realities, behavioral gaps, and procurement-specific risks like supply chain security
MODEL 3
Procurement Insights Archives would conclude that the Gartner “AI Will Come From Everywhere” model reinforces existing market structures that benefit vendors and consultants but systematically underestimates the importance of practitioner fit, readiness, adaptive orchestration, and real business context—the key ingredients that the Hansen Method and Fit Score deliver for sustainable success in procurement and AI transformation. The Procurement Insights Archives would view the Gartner “AI Will Come From Everywhere” diagram and article as a perfect example of a vendor- and technology-first approach that falls short of the practitioner-centric, outcome-oriented mindset fundamental to the Hansen Method and Fit Score.
Summary:
Procurement Insights would find that Gartner’s approach is conceptually broad but operationally superficial—missing the deep alignment, readiness, and feedback loops that drive real transformation and measured practitioner success with AI and procurement tech.
MODEL 4
The Procurement Insights Archives would assess Gartner’s AI deployment article as directionally positive but insufficiently practitioner-centric compared to the Hansen Method and Fit Score. The Hansen approach delivers more transparent, adaptive, and practitioner-driven evaluations, validated through real-world case studies and measurable procurement outcomes. For organizations seeking both operational rigor and practitioner empowerment in AI-driven procurement transformation, the Hansen Fit Score represents a more transparent and trustworthy alternative to traditional analyst-driven approaches.
30
Share this:
Related