Vai al contenuto

AI for small and medium-sized businesses

15.7% of Italian small and medium-sized companies use artificial intelligence. The problem is not being convinced it is useful: it is knowing where to begin.

Start from processes, not tools

The useful question is not which AI to buy, but which repetitive activity costs you the most hours every week.

One case first, measured

A pilot on one process with a verifiable result is worth more than a platform bought for the whole company.

Rules before tools

In almost every company somebody is already using AI on their own. The first job is knowing what is happening, not banning it.

The market is halfway across, and this is the useful moment

In 2025, 16.4% of Italian businesses with at least ten employees use at least one artificial intelligence technology. It was 8.2% in 2024 and 5.0% in 2023: the share has more than tripled in two years. But among small and medium-sized enterprises it stops at 15.7%, against 53.1% of large companies.

That gap is an exact photograph of the situation: AI is no longer a laboratory bet, but in smaller companies it has only just started. And the main reason is not cost. Istat finds that a lack of adequate skills holds back adoption in almost 60% of cases — meaning the problem is not being convinced it is useful, it is knowing where to start without causing damage.

(Source: Istat, “Imprese e ICT”, 2025.)

Where to start: from processes, not tools

This is the most widespread and most expensive mistake: choosing the tool first, then looking for something to use it on. It almost always ends with a licence paid for and nobody using it.

The order that works is the reverse. You start from a concrete question: which repetitive activities consume the most hours every week? In most smaller companies the list is surprisingly similar.

Then you check which of these have data already available in usable form, because that is where AI produces a result in weeks rather than months. Out of those two lists comes a priority based on impact and feasibility.

One case, measured, before anything else

The most useful thing a smaller company can do is pick one process and take it to a verifiable result. Not out of caution: because it is the only way to know whether it works in your company with your data.

A well-set-up pilot has three characteristics: a defined process with a clear boundary, a starting measurement — how long it takes today — and a date by which the result gets looked at. If the number does not move, you have learned something cheaply. If it does move, you extend with experience already gained.

The alternative — buying a platform for the whole company before verifying a single result — is the fastest way of turning AI into a cost with nothing on the other side.

What has to be put in order first

This is the part nobody talks about and it determines success more than the technology does.

The documents. An assistant that searches company archives works if those archives have a logic. If they sit in folders accumulated over ten years under different conventions, that is the first job — and it is worth doing anyway.

Access rights. If AI searches everything there is, it hands anybody things they should not see. The permissions have to be the person’s, not the system’s.

The rules. What may be entered and what may not, who checks the output. One page that gets read is worth more than a long document that gets filed.

Somebody in the company is already using it

This is the situation we find practically everywhere: no company decision, but somebody pasting a document into a free service to have it summarised. It is not disobedience — it is a real need the company has not yet answered.

Banning without replacing moves the behaviour instead of removing it. The method that works is census, replace, then close: know which tools are in use, offer an official one that does the same job without data leaving, and only then take the alternative away.

This work is needed for another reason too: the European regulation on artificial intelligence is fully applicable and requires, among other things, that organisations using these systems know which they are and that the people operating them have adequate training. We cover it under AI Act, GDPR and AI governance.

The rest

See also AI consulting for companies, process automation, custom software development where automation needs a tool that does not yet exist, and smaller companies for the infrastructure side.

The first step

An analysis of your processes: where the hours go, which activities genuinely lend themselves to this and which do not, and what is worth putting in order first. Free and without obligation.

Frequently asked questions

How many Italian smaller companies genuinely use artificial intelligence?

According to Istat, in 2025 16.4% of Italian businesses with at least ten employees use at least one artificial intelligence technology, up from 8.2% in 2024 and 5.0% in 2023. Among small and medium-sized enterprises the share is 15.7%, while among large companies it reaches 53.1%. That gap says two things - that the phenomenon is real, and that in smaller companies it has only just begun.

Where do you start, concretely?

Not with choosing a tool. You start by listing the repetitive activities that consume the most hours every week - sorting incoming documents, answering the same questions, rekeying data from one system into another, hunting for scattered information - and checking which of them have data already available in usable form. From there comes a priority based on impact and feasibility rather than on impression.

What does introducing AI cost a small company?

It depends what you want to achieve, but the heaviest item is almost never the tool's licence - it is the work of putting in order the data and processes it has to operate on. A pilot project on a single use case is within a smaller company's reach; a platform bought for the whole company before verifying a single result is the fastest way to spend badly.

Do the data have to be in order before starting?

Largely yes, and it is the main reason projects fail. An assistant that searches company documents works if those documents are filed with some logic; if they sit in folders accumulated over ten years under different conventions, that is the first useful job. It is worth doing anyway, with or without AI - and it is also why Istat finds that a lack of adequate skills holds back adoption in almost 60% of cases.

Are our staff already using it?

Almost certainly yes, and it is the situation we find in nearly every company we visit - somebody pasting documents into a free service to have them summarised. Banning it without offering an alternative does not work, because the need is real. The method that works is to census what is in use, provide an official tool that does the same job safely, and only then close the alternative.

Which of your processes genuinely deserve AI?

Before choosing a tool it is worth knowing which activities justify it and which data is ready. The first assessment is free and without obligation.