Skip to main content

4 Factors That Can Make or Break an AI Project

Dmitrii Evstiukhin
Provectus

Machine Learning (ML) technologies have evolved at an incredible pace over the past few years, and yet multiple studies suggest that most ML projects fail in the real world. Despite the availability of high-quality technologies, there still exist challenges in using these technologies to create and deliver complete solutions, which can be attributed to several factors.

The main causes of failure can be grouped into four categories:

■ failure to frame the ML problem from a business perspective

■ failure to build a team with the right talent, in the right roles

■ failure to select the right data and ML infrastructure

■ failure to properly manage the AI solution in production

Let's dive into each of these areas in more detail.

1. Failure to frame the ML problem from a business perspective

Firstly, failure to frame the ML problem from a business challenge or opportunity perspective is a common issue. Many companies approach ML with unrealistic expectations, or they are simply following the trend to implement ML, without a clear business need or opportunity. This can lead to wasted resources and disappointment when the project fails to deliver the expected results. To avoid this, it is crucial for the ML problem to be clearly defined, with close collaboration between business leaders and experienced engineers. This ensures that both the business and technical aspects of the problem are considered and that the solution is tailored to the specific needs of the company.

2. Failure to build a team with the right talent, in the right roles

The second factor of AI project failure is the failure to put the right talent in the right roles on the team. When a company has a problem to solve, it is important to get the right talent to work on it. However, this can be a challenging task, as it requires the ability to recognize genuine expertise and skill, which in turn requires the presence of that talent within the organization. To address this, companies should invest in training and development programs to develop talent with the necessary skills within the organization. They should also look for external experts who can bring in specialized knowledge.

3. Failure to select the right data and ML infrastructure

The third cause of failure is not having the right data and ML infrastructure. Even with the right talent, a project can still fail if the appropriate data and infrastructure are not in place. Data is the backbone of any ML project, and without quality data, the model cannot deliver accurate results. Infrastructure is also crucial for the success of the project. This includes hardware and software used for data processing, storage, and model training. Without the right infrastructure, the project will be unable to scale and deliver the expected results.

4. Failure to properly manage the AI solution in production

The final major reason for failure is the failure to properly maintain the AI solution in production. This is the final step of any ML project, and it is where many companies stumble. Once the model has been trained and tested, it needs to be integrated into the current business systems, and work at the scale of the business. This requires talent with yet another expert skillset, and it can be challenging to manage the model in production. This includes monitoring the model, updating it as necessary, and addressing any issues that arise.

Essential Capabilities for ML Infrastructure

These four horsemen of AI project failure are common issues that companies face when implementing ML solutions.

The first two issues are not so much technical as organizational. Clearly, when starting such initiatives, the company's leadership should closely watch for any discrepancies in the organizational structure and processes.

The last two factors that often contribute to an ML project’s failure can be attributed to MLOps and can be resolved by an appropriate implementation.

MLOps, or Machine Learning Operations, is a highly fragmented space, and it can be overwhelming to keep up with all the frameworks and platforms available. But there are certain capabilities that are essential for any real-world ML infrastructure solution. One of the most important is scalability. Organizations and use cases often need to be able to scale up and down, to adjust to the usage patterns of end users. Without scalability, an ML solution may be unable to meet the demands of a production environment.

Another important capability is reproducibility. The platform should be able to successfully reproduce an experiment from a month ago, which requires versioning of everything: data, ML code, pipeline configuration, infrastructure code, experiments, and more. This capability ensures that the results are consistent and can be trusted.

Security and observability are also key capabilities for an ML platform. Properly configured security ensures that the data and models are protected from unauthorized access. In its turn, observability ensures that the platform has full visibility into everything, including data, models, infrastructure, code, and users. This allows for a better understanding and management of the solution.

In conclusion, while ML technologies have advanced rapidly in recent years, the implementation of ML solutions in real-world environments remains a challenge. To overcome challenges, companies should clearly define the ML problem through collaboration between business leaders and experienced engineers. They should invest in training and development programs to build the necessary skills within the organization and seek external experts to bring in specialized knowledge.

Additionally, organizations should focus on building a robust ML infrastructure that includes key capabilities, including scalability, reproducibility, security, and observability.

With a well-defined problem, and the right talent, data, and infrastructure in place, companies can increase their chances of success in implementing ML solutions in the real world.

Dmitrii Evstiukhin is Director of Managed Services at Provectus

The Latest

In live financial environments, capital markets software cannot pause for rebuilds. New capabilities are introduced as stacked technology layers to meet evolving demands while systems remain active, data keeps moving, and controls stay intact. AI is no exception, and its opportunities are significant: accelerated decision cycles, compressed manual workflows, and more effective operations across complex environments. The constraint isn't the models themselves, but the architectural environments they enter ...

Like most digital transformation shifts, organizations often prioritize productivity and leave security and observability to keep pace. This usually translates to both the mass implementation of new technology and fragmented monitoring and observability (M&O) tooling. In the era of AI and varied cloud architecture, a disparate observability function can be dangerous. IT teams will lack a complete picture of their IT environment, making it harder to diagnose issues while slowing down mean time to resolve (MTTR). In fact, according to recent data from the SolarWinds State of Monitoring & Observability Report, 77% of IT personnel said the lack of visibility across their on-prem and cloud architecture was an issue ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 23, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses the NetOps labor shortage ... 

Technology management is evolving, and in turn, so is the scope of FinOps. The FinOps Foundation recently updated their mission statement from "advancing the people who manage the value of cloud" to "advancing the people who manage the value of technology." This seemingly small change solidifies a larger evolution: FinOps practitioners have organically expanded to be focused on more than just cloud cost optimization. Today, FinOps teams are largely — and quickly — expanding their job descriptions, evolving into a critical function for managing the full value of technology ...

Enterprises are under pressure to scale AI quickly. Yet despite considerable investment, adoption continues to stall. One of the most overlooked reasons is vendor sprawl ... In reality, no organization deliberately sets out to create sprawling vendor ecosystems. More often, complexity accumulates over time through well-intentioned initiatives, such as enterprise-wide digital transformation efforts, point solutions, or decentralized sourcing strategies ...

Nearly every conversation about AI eventually circles back to compute. GPUs dominate the headlines while cloud platforms compete for workloads and model benchmarks drive investment decisions. But underneath that noise, a quieter infrastructure challenge is taking shape. The real bottleneck in enterprise AI is not processing power, it is the ability to store, manage and retrieve the relentless volumes of data that AI systems generate, consume and multiply ...

The 2026 Observability Survey from Grafana Labs paints a vivid picture of an industry maturing fast, where AI is welcomed with careful conditions, SaaS economics are reshaping spending decisions, complexity remains a defining challenge, and open standards continue to underpin it all ...

The observability industry has an evolving relationship with AI. We're not skeptics, but it's clear that trust in AI must be earned ... In Grafana Labs' annual Observability Survey, 92% said they see real value in AI surfacing anomalies before they cause downtime. Another 91% endorsed AI for forecasting and root cause analysis. So while the demand is there, customers need it to be trustworthy, as the survey also found that the practitioners most enthusiastic about AI are also the most insistent on explainability ...

In the modern enterprise, the conversation around AI has moved past skepticism toward a stage of active adoption. According to our 2026 State of IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous AI, nearly 90% of IT professionals view AI as a net positive, and this optimism is well-founded. We are seeing agentic AI move beyond simple automation to actively streamlining complex data insights and eliminating the manual toil that has long hindered innovation. However, as we integrate these autonomous agents into our ecosystems, the fundamental DNA of the IT role is evolving ...

AI workloads require an enormous amount of computing power ... What's also becoming abundantly clear is just how quickly AI's computing needs are leading to enterprise systems failure. According to Cockroach Labs' State of AI Infrastructure 2026 report, enterprise systems are much closer to failure than their organizations realize. The report ... suggests AI scale could cause widespread failures in as little as one year — making it a clear risk for business performance and reliability.

4 Factors That Can Make or Break an AI Project

Dmitrii Evstiukhin
Provectus

Machine Learning (ML) technologies have evolved at an incredible pace over the past few years, and yet multiple studies suggest that most ML projects fail in the real world. Despite the availability of high-quality technologies, there still exist challenges in using these technologies to create and deliver complete solutions, which can be attributed to several factors.

The main causes of failure can be grouped into four categories:

■ failure to frame the ML problem from a business perspective

■ failure to build a team with the right talent, in the right roles

■ failure to select the right data and ML infrastructure

■ failure to properly manage the AI solution in production

Let's dive into each of these areas in more detail.

1. Failure to frame the ML problem from a business perspective

Firstly, failure to frame the ML problem from a business challenge or opportunity perspective is a common issue. Many companies approach ML with unrealistic expectations, or they are simply following the trend to implement ML, without a clear business need or opportunity. This can lead to wasted resources and disappointment when the project fails to deliver the expected results. To avoid this, it is crucial for the ML problem to be clearly defined, with close collaboration between business leaders and experienced engineers. This ensures that both the business and technical aspects of the problem are considered and that the solution is tailored to the specific needs of the company.

2. Failure to build a team with the right talent, in the right roles

The second factor of AI project failure is the failure to put the right talent in the right roles on the team. When a company has a problem to solve, it is important to get the right talent to work on it. However, this can be a challenging task, as it requires the ability to recognize genuine expertise and skill, which in turn requires the presence of that talent within the organization. To address this, companies should invest in training and development programs to develop talent with the necessary skills within the organization. They should also look for external experts who can bring in specialized knowledge.

3. Failure to select the right data and ML infrastructure

The third cause of failure is not having the right data and ML infrastructure. Even with the right talent, a project can still fail if the appropriate data and infrastructure are not in place. Data is the backbone of any ML project, and without quality data, the model cannot deliver accurate results. Infrastructure is also crucial for the success of the project. This includes hardware and software used for data processing, storage, and model training. Without the right infrastructure, the project will be unable to scale and deliver the expected results.

4. Failure to properly manage the AI solution in production

The final major reason for failure is the failure to properly maintain the AI solution in production. This is the final step of any ML project, and it is where many companies stumble. Once the model has been trained and tested, it needs to be integrated into the current business systems, and work at the scale of the business. This requires talent with yet another expert skillset, and it can be challenging to manage the model in production. This includes monitoring the model, updating it as necessary, and addressing any issues that arise.

Essential Capabilities for ML Infrastructure

These four horsemen of AI project failure are common issues that companies face when implementing ML solutions.

The first two issues are not so much technical as organizational. Clearly, when starting such initiatives, the company's leadership should closely watch for any discrepancies in the organizational structure and processes.

The last two factors that often contribute to an ML project’s failure can be attributed to MLOps and can be resolved by an appropriate implementation.

MLOps, or Machine Learning Operations, is a highly fragmented space, and it can be overwhelming to keep up with all the frameworks and platforms available. But there are certain capabilities that are essential for any real-world ML infrastructure solution. One of the most important is scalability. Organizations and use cases often need to be able to scale up and down, to adjust to the usage patterns of end users. Without scalability, an ML solution may be unable to meet the demands of a production environment.

Another important capability is reproducibility. The platform should be able to successfully reproduce an experiment from a month ago, which requires versioning of everything: data, ML code, pipeline configuration, infrastructure code, experiments, and more. This capability ensures that the results are consistent and can be trusted.

Security and observability are also key capabilities for an ML platform. Properly configured security ensures that the data and models are protected from unauthorized access. In its turn, observability ensures that the platform has full visibility into everything, including data, models, infrastructure, code, and users. This allows for a better understanding and management of the solution.

In conclusion, while ML technologies have advanced rapidly in recent years, the implementation of ML solutions in real-world environments remains a challenge. To overcome challenges, companies should clearly define the ML problem through collaboration between business leaders and experienced engineers. They should invest in training and development programs to build the necessary skills within the organization and seek external experts to bring in specialized knowledge.

Additionally, organizations should focus on building a robust ML infrastructure that includes key capabilities, including scalability, reproducibility, security, and observability.

With a well-defined problem, and the right talent, data, and infrastructure in place, companies can increase their chances of success in implementing ML solutions in the real world.

Dmitrii Evstiukhin is Director of Managed Services at Provectus

The Latest

In live financial environments, capital markets software cannot pause for rebuilds. New capabilities are introduced as stacked technology layers to meet evolving demands while systems remain active, data keeps moving, and controls stay intact. AI is no exception, and its opportunities are significant: accelerated decision cycles, compressed manual workflows, and more effective operations across complex environments. The constraint isn't the models themselves, but the architectural environments they enter ...

Like most digital transformation shifts, organizations often prioritize productivity and leave security and observability to keep pace. This usually translates to both the mass implementation of new technology and fragmented monitoring and observability (M&O) tooling. In the era of AI and varied cloud architecture, a disparate observability function can be dangerous. IT teams will lack a complete picture of their IT environment, making it harder to diagnose issues while slowing down mean time to resolve (MTTR). In fact, according to recent data from the SolarWinds State of Monitoring & Observability Report, 77% of IT personnel said the lack of visibility across their on-prem and cloud architecture was an issue ...

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 23, Shamus McGillicuddy, VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, at EMA discusses the NetOps labor shortage ... 

Technology management is evolving, and in turn, so is the scope of FinOps. The FinOps Foundation recently updated their mission statement from "advancing the people who manage the value of cloud" to "advancing the people who manage the value of technology." This seemingly small change solidifies a larger evolution: FinOps practitioners have organically expanded to be focused on more than just cloud cost optimization. Today, FinOps teams are largely — and quickly — expanding their job descriptions, evolving into a critical function for managing the full value of technology ...

Enterprises are under pressure to scale AI quickly. Yet despite considerable investment, adoption continues to stall. One of the most overlooked reasons is vendor sprawl ... In reality, no organization deliberately sets out to create sprawling vendor ecosystems. More often, complexity accumulates over time through well-intentioned initiatives, such as enterprise-wide digital transformation efforts, point solutions, or decentralized sourcing strategies ...

Nearly every conversation about AI eventually circles back to compute. GPUs dominate the headlines while cloud platforms compete for workloads and model benchmarks drive investment decisions. But underneath that noise, a quieter infrastructure challenge is taking shape. The real bottleneck in enterprise AI is not processing power, it is the ability to store, manage and retrieve the relentless volumes of data that AI systems generate, consume and multiply ...

The 2026 Observability Survey from Grafana Labs paints a vivid picture of an industry maturing fast, where AI is welcomed with careful conditions, SaaS economics are reshaping spending decisions, complexity remains a defining challenge, and open standards continue to underpin it all ...

The observability industry has an evolving relationship with AI. We're not skeptics, but it's clear that trust in AI must be earned ... In Grafana Labs' annual Observability Survey, 92% said they see real value in AI surfacing anomalies before they cause downtime. Another 91% endorsed AI for forecasting and root cause analysis. So while the demand is there, customers need it to be trustworthy, as the survey also found that the practitioners most enthusiastic about AI are also the most insistent on explainability ...

In the modern enterprise, the conversation around AI has moved past skepticism toward a stage of active adoption. According to our 2026 State of IT Trends Report: The Human Side of Autonomous AI, nearly 90% of IT professionals view AI as a net positive, and this optimism is well-founded. We are seeing agentic AI move beyond simple automation to actively streamlining complex data insights and eliminating the manual toil that has long hindered innovation. However, as we integrate these autonomous agents into our ecosystems, the fundamental DNA of the IT role is evolving ...

AI workloads require an enormous amount of computing power ... What's also becoming abundantly clear is just how quickly AI's computing needs are leading to enterprise systems failure. According to Cockroach Labs' State of AI Infrastructure 2026 report, enterprise systems are much closer to failure than their organizations realize. The report ... suggests AI scale could cause widespread failures in as little as one year — making it a clear risk for business performance and reliability.