When McKinsey & Company chose the topic for this year’s major analysis, it was obvious they had to address artificial intelligence — the debate centered on whether now is the right time for a comprehensive study. Jánoskuti Levente, partner and head of McKinsey & Company’s Hungary office, said at the study launch that the discussion partly revolves around whether AI is just a technological hype or already producing tangible, practical effects.
McKinsey likened the current state of AI to where Excel stood around the turn of the millennium: many companies use it instead of paper, yet in roughly nine out of ten places it primarily serves to transcribe calculations previously done on paper. The technology exists and is advancing rapidly, but firms still face questions about how to harness it for concrete value creation.
Potential boost for Hungary’s economy
Co‑author Havas András argued that Hungary needs breakout points for growth because improving productivity is the key to economic expansion. AI can automate repetitive tasks and in some cases more complex work, allowing human labor to be redirected to areas where people outperform machines.
McKinsey estimates that by 2030 AI could generate at least €15 billion in value — roughly equivalent to 6–7 percent of current GDP. The biggest opportunities appear in IT, customer service, marketing, redesigning internal operational processes and managing corporate infrastructure.
Roundtable: executives voice caution — less hype, more realism
At the roundtable discussion following the presentation, participating executives quickly shifted from praising their own AI projects to discussing why the situation is not as rosy as some might think.
Matécsa Márta, co‑author of the study, noted that AI can produce many creative outputs, such as poems and drawings, but the task is to channel AI use where it truly adds value to the organisation.
Orbán Gábor, CEO of Richter Gedeon, urged that the hype must subside. He said it is far from certain that AI will deliver large short‑term productivity gains; one must wait to see where the hype ends and where actual value creation begins. He cited the pharmaceutical industry as an example where high expectations for technical innovations have often been disappointed or realized much more slowly than anticipated.
Becsei András, Deputy CEO of OTP Bank, said the banking sector accelerated AI use and this is visible even in coding work. Still, he characterised the current phase as a “teasing” period and warned about the cost implications: AI service providers have started raising prices. Once a company adopts a provider’s AI, it often becomes locked into that supplier and obliged to pay, regardless of later outcomes.
Executives also noted that while AI is often touted as a cost‑cutting tool, it frequently amounts to cost reallocation, especially if companies do not resort to mass layoffs. They pointed to bank digitisation as an example: digitisation did not eliminate the need for in‑person service, and the combined cost of personal and digital channels has in many cases exceeded previous branch‑operation costs.
Bacsó Gergely, CEO of Allianz Hungária, was even more pessimistic: he argued that major US and Indian companies are already conducting large layoffs, kicking off a cost‑reduction race. He believes there is “panic” in the US and India over the implications of those cuts, whereas in Europe — where labour shortages are already a problem — AI is for now more often perceived as another colleague.
Nagy Péter, Deputy CEO of Magyar Telekom, was the most AI‑optimistic participant: he said AI already handles roughly one‑fifth of incoming customer calls at his company, and staff were not dismissed but redeployed to handle more complex tasks. AI has also made it easier to spot system faults requiring human intervention.
Orbán Gábor responded that expectations can run wild, especially in the pharmaceutical sector, where promises about AI advantages can dwarf the value of maintaining a telephone network. In the medium term, though, he sees AI more as a cost‑saving tool at present, with true breakthroughs still absent. He added that large firms face complex decisions, and small and medium‑sized enterprises are increasingly tempted to use AI to replace wage costs.
Becsei agreed: he compared AI in its current state to a professional golf club — it helps someone who is already very good, but an average amateur may spend a lot without improving results. As a private user one might appreciate AI’s offerings, but as a company leader the apparent risk is excessive vendor tie‑in. In a new situation it is easier to make a bad decision, and if something goes wrong, “you curse, you find out who signed the contract and then you pay ten times the price.”
Conclusion: opportunities and risks side by side
Participants concurred that while AI’s technical foundations are in place and the potential is significant, near‑term effects are likely to be felt more on the cost side, through supplier lock‑in and transitional performance risks. In many cases real breakthroughs are not yet visible in the medium term, and for SMEs the temptation to substitute wage costs with AI can be particularly risky.
The roundtable underlined the need for cautious, risk‑aware AI adoption and strategies to mitigate vendor dependence rather than uncritical embrace of the technology.
