of poor consumer experiences led to customers reducing or stopping spending.
Qualtrics XM Institute, 2025 Consumer Trends; global survey across 23 countries.
Read the Qualtrics research ↗The problem with AI revenue agents is not that they cannot optimize revenue. It is that optimizing revenue does not necessarily mean creating value.
An agent can meet its economic target while overlooking the experience customers come back for, the people who create it, and the future value a business depends on.
See what the number missesImagine a business changes its prices. It sells fewer orders, but takes in more revenue.
Illustrative arithmetic, not a study or an outcome attributed to any company or AI product.
The revenue calculation is correct. But it says nothing about:
A correct financial result is not a complete understanding of value.
Give a system one definition of success and it will work toward that definition. If the objective is to maximize revenue, the rest of the business can become invisible to the decision.
Google DeepMind describes this technical failure as specification gaming: satisfying the stated objective without achieving the outcome people actually wanted. Google DeepMind ↗
In March 2026, the UK Competition and Markets Authority warned that autonomous pricing agents could weaken competition even without explicit communication between companies. CMA 2026 ↗
The risks of reducing value to a financial metric are visible in research on customers, people at work and algorithmic pricing.
Qualtrics XM Institute, 2025 Consumer Trends; global survey across 23 countries.
Read the Qualtrics research ↗Gallup, State of the Global Workplace 2026. A warning about the importance of the people behind performance.
Read the Gallup research ↗Calvano et al., American Economic Review (2020), controlled simulations of Q-learning algorithms.
Read the AER paper ↗These studies examine different contexts. They are evidence of material risks and blind spots, not a claim that every revenue AI agent causes each outcome.
The target changes. The blind spot does not.
A hotel can improve revenue per room. That figure alone cannot tell us what happened to service, workload, guest trust or repeat visits.
A retailer can optimize price and margin. That does not, by itself, explain whether shoppers still feel fairly treated or want to return.
A transport business can extract more value during peak demand. It must still confront questions about access, trust and the communities it serves.
Illustrative decision questions, not reports of specific companies.
One economic. One social. Revenue Harmony Management is built on the harmony between them, not a trade-off that sacrifices one to improve the other.
Income, costs, contribution, growth. The value a business captures and sustains.
People, experience, trust, relationships. The value a business creates with and for others.
Optimizing one engine while damaging the other is not harmony.
Poise is not Revenue Management software. It is the technological expression of Revenue Harmony Management, developed by Roitels with Meaning Intelligence.
Its purpose is to help those responsible for revenue, growth and value understand the consequences of their decisions and seek harmony between the economic and social engines.
Responsible for the value an organization creates today and its ability to create value tomorrow.
Making choices about price, demand, capacity, profitability and the consequences those choices create.
Where economic performance and human relationships are both essential to the business.
What does the expected financial gain mean for customers, trust and the value they receive?
What changes for the people delivering the experience, and for the quality that sustains demand?
What is actually known, what is inferred, what is uncertain, and who remains responsible?
The intended benefit is better-informed decisions, not another automatic instruction to maximize a revenue KPI.
Roitels develops Meaning Intelligence as a more human alternative to AI. With Poise, that vision meets a specific business problem: technological intelligence should clarify evidence and consequences without taking authority away from the people responsible for decisions.
Original research behind the challenge this page raises. The findings do not describe measured performance of Poise.