The 6% AI-high-performer cohort identified by McKinsey and the 12% high-ROI cohort identified by the Stanford Digital Economy Lab share ten measurable governance practices that an enterprise can audit in under 60 minutes. An enterprise answering YES to 8 or more of the 10 diagnostic questions has the operating profile of the high-performing segment. An enterprise answering YES to 4 or fewer has the operating profile of the 88-94% struggling cohort and is unlikely to clear break-even on agentic AI deployment without a posture rebuild. The diagnostic audits posture, not outcomes; it identifies where governance investment is needed before the next deployment commitment, not whether a specific deployment will succeed.
Re-review 10 Jun 2026 (pulled forward from 25 Jun): the Stanford DEL cohort leg failed primary-source verification — the playbook identifies no 12% high-ROI cohort (see correction below and AM-029). The McKinsey 6% leg verifies. The article body also cites a 'Stanford Digital Economy Lab 2026 Enterprise AI Productivity Study', a title that does not exist; body correction tracked in the same cycle. 10-question agentic AI readiness diagnostic. Follow-up review after the body is restated. Watches: (1) methodology changes to the Stanford Digital Economy Lab cohort identification or McKinsey AI-high-performer definition that would shift the cohort thresholds, (2) regulatory enforcement that materially changes the bar for any individual question (especially Q5 audit evidence and Q9 multi-jurisdiction posture), (3) major IAM platform releases (Okta, Microsoft Entra) that change the practical answerability of Q1 (non-human identity), (4) governance role market data revisions that change Q10 (named accountable individual).
Correction log
- 10 Jun 2026One of two cohort anchors unanchored on re-review. The claim text pairs McKinsey's 6% AI-high-performer cohort with 'the 12% high-ROI cohort identified by the Stanford Digital Economy Lab' and an '88-94% struggling cohort'. Full-text verification on 10 Jun 2026 found the Stanford DEL Enterprise AI Playbook identifies no 12% high-ROI cohort and no struggling-cohort percentage — it studies 51 successful deployments by design (full finding at AM-029, correction of 10 Jun 2026). The source article additionally cites a 'Stanford Digital Economy Lab 2026 Enterprise AI Productivity Study', a publication title that does not exist. The McKinsey 6% leg verifies (Nov 2025, n=1,993). The ten diagnostic questions stand as an editorial instrument, but the claim's cohort calibration now rests on one verified dataset, not two. The only verified figure carrying the 12/88 numerals is IDC's pilot-graduation finding (roughly 88% of AI proof-of-concepts never reach production; via CIO.com, Mar 2025), a different metric. Status Up -> Partial.
/holding/AM-042/Embed this claimiframe + oEmbed
The card auto-updates when the claim's status, last-reviewed date, or correction log changes. Embedders never need to refresh — the card is rendered live from the canonical record.
Email-me when AM-042's status, next review date, or correction log changes. One email per change. No newsletter subscription, no other mail.
The claim: The 6% AI-high-performer cohort identified by McKinsey and the 12% high-ROI cohort identified by the Stanford Digital Economy Lab share ten measurable governance practices that an enterprise can audit in under 60 minutes. An enterprise answering YES to 8 or more of the 10 diagnostic questions has the operating profile of the high-performing segment. An enterprise answering YES to 4 or fewer has the operating profile of the 88-94% struggling cohort and is unlikely to clear break-even on agentic AI deployment without a posture rebuild. The diagnostic audits posture, not outcomes; it identifies where governance investment is needed before the next deployment commitment, not whether a specific deployment will succeed.
About this register
The Reporting register tracks claims published from articles addressed to senior enterprise IT leaders — CIOs, IT directors, heads of platform. Claims are reviewed on a 30–90 day cadence; each review either reaffirms the claim, marks one substantive part as Partial, or marks it Not holding once the underlying evidence has been overtaken.
Recent corrections in Reporting
- AM-132 · Partial · 10 Jun 2026
One of four legs unanchored on re-review. The claim text attributes '12% of deployments clearing 300%+ ROI with 88% at or below break-even at 12-18 months' to the Stanford DEL 2026 Enterprise AI Playbook. Full-text verification on 10 Jun 2026 found no such figure in that source: the playbook (Pereira, Graylin, Brynjolfsson, Apr 2026) studies 51 successful deployments by design and contains no ROI distribution, no 300%-plus cohort, and no break-even measurement point (full finding at AM-029, correction of 10 Jun 2026). The only verified figure carrying the same 12/88 numerals is IDC research with Lenovo (via CIO.com, Mar 2025): roughly 88% of AI proof-of-concepts never reach production and roughly 12% graduate — a pilot-to-production graduation metric, not an ROI distribution. The Gartner 28%, McKinsey 23%/17%, and MIT NANDA 95% legs verify; they support a small high-performing tail and a large struggling body, but none documents the two-peak bimodal shape the claim asserts. Status Up -> Partial.
- AM-129 · Partial · 10 Jun 2026
One of three read-against anchors unanchored on re-review. The claim text cites 'Stanford Digital Economy Lab Enterprise AI Playbook (12/88 bimodal ROI distribution at 12-18 months)' and frames the realistic ROI band around 'the highest-discipline 12% cohort'. Full-text verification on 10 Jun 2026 found the playbook contains no 12/88 distribution, no bimodal ROI shape, and no 12-18-month ROI measurement point (full finding at AM-029, correction of 10 Jun 2026). The claim's core negative finding — no mid-market enterprise has produced a documented +240% ROI in 90 days under audited conditions — is unaffected; the McKinsey State of AI 2025 and MIT NANDA legs verify and continue to support it. The '12% cohort' framing has no verifiable referent. The only verified figure carrying the 12/88 numerals is IDC's pilot-graduation finding (roughly 88% of AI proof-of-concepts never reach production; via CIO.com, Mar 2025), a different metric. Status Up -> Partial.
- AM-201 · Partial · 10 Jun 2026
One of four named datasets unanchored on review. The claim text names 'Stanford DEL's 12% clearing 300%+ ROI vs 88% at or below break-even' as one of four independent datasets. Full-text verification on 10 Jun 2026 found the Stanford DEL Enterprise AI Playbook contains no such distribution — it studies 51 successful deployments by design and carries no ROI-realisation failure data (full finding at AM-029, correction of 10 Jun 2026). The McKinsey (23% scaling, 17% EBIT-attribution), Gartner (28% fully paying off), and MIT NANDA (95% no measurable P&L impact) datasets verify; the claim's spine stands on three datasets rather than four. The only verified figure carrying the 12/88 numerals is IDC's pilot-graduation finding (roughly 88% of AI proof-of-concepts never reach production; via CIO.com, Mar 2025), a different metric from an ROI distribution. Status Up -> Partial.
Reviews coming up in Reporting
- AM-063 · Holding · next +15d (27 Jun 2026)
AI agents executing financial transactions need a four-control bundle (action-approval gates by blast radius, kill-swit…
- AM-061 · Holding · next +15d (27 Jun 2026)
Production agentic-AI costs at scale routinely run multiples of POC projections, and a layered optimisation programme c…
- AM-003 · Partial · next +15d (27 Jun 2026)
GPT-5 Pro's tiered-subscription model forces enterprises to classify problems by computational difficulty — $200/month…