IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2607.23733.html

AI Strategy: How to Choose What AI Product to Implement

Author

Listed:
  • Foster Provost
  • Panos Ipeirotis

Abstract

Firms struggle to choose AI projects that pay off: two projects can look equally promising to smart, motivated stakeholders and yet deserve opposite decisions. At the residential real-estate brokerage Compass, one AI product (Likely-to-Sell recommendations) flagged sales outreach opportunities and went on to account for nine figures in annual gross commission revenue. Another championed AI product (a Time-on-Market pricing tool) was rightly shelved. A simple ROI estimate could not distinguish the two. We present expected ROI (eROI), a framework that decomposes each bet into three components and rates them separately: Value if Successful, Likelihood of Success, and Investment Required. Each maps to a question executives can answer before building: How valuable would it be if it worked? How likely is it to work? And what would it cost to implement? Separating the three breaks a common catch-22: teams cannot estimate ROI until they know whether a project will work, yet cannot know whether it will work without building it. Judging Value if Successful on its own dissolves the loop, letting a team argue that a product would be valuable if it worked while it weighs how likely that is. The framework also asks, before ranking anything, whether there are enough good ideas on the table. After ranking, it guides assembling a portfolio of bets rather than funding only the single top-ranked project. We illustrate eROI on Compass's candidate AI products. Precise ROI estimates are hard to make given the inherent uncertainty of AI projects. Coarse business-level ratings of the three components are enough to tell strong bets from weak ones.

Suggested Citation

  • Foster Provost & Panos Ipeirotis, 2026. "AI Strategy: How to Choose What AI Product to Implement," Papers 2607.23733, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2607.23733
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.23733
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cooper, Robert G., 1990. "Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 44-54.
    2. Carlos Fernández-Loría & Foster Provost, 2022. "Causal Decision Making and Causal Effect Estimation Are Not the Same…and Why It Matters," INFORMS Joural on Data Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(1), pages 4-16, April.
    3. Joshua D. Angrist & Jörn-Steffen Pischke, 2009. "Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 8769, December.
    4. Carlos Fernández-Loría & Foster Provost, 2022. "Rejoinder to “Causal Decision Making and Causal Effect Estimation Are Not the Same…and Why It Matters”," INFORMS Joural on Data Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(1), pages 23-26, April.
    5. Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, 1994. "Investment under Uncertainty," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 5474, December.
    6. Ronald A. Howard, 1988. "Decision Analysis: Practice and Promise," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(6), pages 679-695, June.
    7. DiMasi, Joseph A. & Hansen, Ronald W. & Grabowski, Henry G., 2003. "The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 151-185, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Farre-Mensa, Joan & Hegde, Deepak & Ljungqvist, Alexander, 2016. "The Bright Side of Patents," CEPR Discussion Papers 11091, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    2. Lo Nigro, Giovanna & Morreale, Azzurra & Enea, Gianluca, 2014. "Open innovation: A real option to restore value to the biopharmaceutical R&D," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 183-193.
    3. Kong, Linghua & To, Thomas & Wu, Eliza, 2026. "Trade reforms and firm value: Worldwide evidence," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    4. De Vos, Simon & Bockel-Rickermann, Christopher & Lessmann, Stefan & Verbeke, Wouter, 2026. "Uplift modeling with continuous treatments: A predict-then-optimize approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 330(1), pages 230-244.
    5. Céline Bérard & Marie Perez, 2014. "Alliance Dynamics through Real Options: The Case of an Alliance between Competing Pharmaceutical Companies," Post-Print hal-04010373, HAL.
    6. Kheiravar, Khaled H, 2019. "Economic and Econometric Analyses of the World Petroleum Industry, Energy Subsidies, and Air Pollution," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt3gj151w9, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    7. Deseatnicov, Ivan & Klochko, Olga, 2023. "Currency risk and the dynamics of German investors entry and exit in Russia," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    8. Philipp Schwarz & Oliver Schacht & Sven Klaassen & Daniel Grunbaum & Sebastian Imhof & Martin Spindler, 2024. "Management Decisions in Manufacturing using Causal Machine Learning -- To Rework, or not to Rework?," Papers 2406.11308, arXiv.org.
    9. Jason W. Miller & Jessica L. Darby & Alex Scott, 2022. "The Moderating Effect of COVID‐19 on the Relationship between Spot Market Prices and Capital Investment in the Motor‐Carrier Sector," Transportation Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 61(2), pages 151-194, March.
    10. Siavash Mohades & Giulia Piccillo & Maria Savona & Tania Treibich, 2025. "Firms’ Investment and Capacity Utilisation: The Role of Financial Constraints and Uncertainty," CESifo Working Paper Series 12108, CESifo.
    11. Jung Ho Park & Kwangsoo Shin, 2018. "R&D Project Valuation Considering Changes of Economic Environment: A Case of a Pharmaceutical R&D Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-15, March.
    12. Liu, Qing & Jia, Deting & Liu, Huiling & Wang, Kai, 2025. "Good for bad: The heterogeneous effects of export controls on firms' ESG," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    13. Zhang, Yingheng & Li, Haojie, 2026. "Causal decision-making for speed camera allocation: Methodology and an application," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    14. Margrét Vilborg Bjarnadóttir & Louiqa Raschid, 2023. "Modeling Financial Products and Their Supply Chains," INFORMS Joural on Data Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 138-160, October.
    15. Yu Xia & Ali Arian & Sriram Narayanamoorthy & Joshua Mabry, 2023. "RetailSynth: Synthetic Data Generation for Retail AI Systems Evaluation," Papers 2312.14095, arXiv.org.
    16. Ditta, Khaliq & Ali, Amjad & Audi, Marc, 2025. "Macroeconomic Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment in the GCC: A Panel Data Approach," MPRA Paper 127491, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Marcello Basili & Roberto Renò & Carlo Zappia, 2005. "Production of a New Drug: A Sequential Investment ProcessUnder Uncertainty," Department of Economics University of Siena 453, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    18. Joan Farre‐Mensa & Deepak Hegde & Alexander Ljungqvist, 2020. "What Is a Patent Worth? Evidence from the U.S. Patent “Lottery”," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 75(2), pages 639-682, April.
    19. Ángel León & Diego Piñeiro, 2004. "Valuation of a Biotech Company: A Real Options Approach," Working Papers wp2004_0420, CEMFI.
    20. Coinon, Marine, 2025. "Pesticide Externalities and Spatial Coordination Failure in Mixed Farming Landscapes," TSE Working Papers 25-1689, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2607.23733. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.