Arnab Dey AdobeStock_1432127921
Data from EVAI’s latest industry survey highlights a growing appetite for GPT-powered tools in operations, despite the fact that usage remains in its infancy.
“The data reveals a clear desire to embrace generative AI in the fleet sector, but also underscores that we’re still in the early phases,” says Ian Gardner, founder and CEO of EVAI. “Fleet managers are asking smart questions about integration, trust, and ROI, and that’s where EVAI is helping bridge the gap, providing real-time, actionable insights while keeping human oversight in focus.”
Key takeaways:
- 40.8% of respondents report being moderately familiar with GPT-style interfaces, while 10.7% say they are very familiar and 9.7% identify as experts.
- GPT solutions are currently used in a limited way by 40.8%, and extensively by just 10.7%.
- Still, 38.8% are not currently using GPT interfaces but are actively considering them.
- 30.1% would definitely consider adopting such interfaces within 12 months, and 31.1% possibly would.
- The most common barriers include integration complexity (20.4%); lack of awareness (19.4%); data security concerns (19.4%); and worries about hallucinations/answer accuracy (19.4%).
- Fewer cited uncertain ROI (9.7%) or satisfaction with current systems (11.6%).
- Key use cases include total cost of ownership (TCO) analysis (21.4%); trip and route optimization (20.4%); data analysis (17.5%); and vehicle health monitoring (15.5%).
- 51.5% believe GPT interfaces perform better than traditional dashboards for analyzing and interpreting fleet data.
- For those already using GPT interfaces, 30.1% report 8-10% efficiency increases, while 9.7% report improvements of 15% or more.
- Among potential adopters, 29.1% anticipate a 10-12% efficiency gain if implemented.
- 39.8% feel somewhat comfortable using GPT for operational analysis; 10.7% are very comfortable.
- For trip and route optimization, 39.8% trust GPT with some reservations; 10.7% trust it completely.
- 30.1% would delegate some tasks with human oversight; 30.1% would delegate moderate tasks with periodic reviews; only 10.7% would allow high-level delegation; 9.7% would allow full autonomy.
- High perceived value in automated driver safety alerts and compliance monitoring (59.2% rate as very or extremely valuable).
- Major concerns in vehicle health monitoring:
- Data accuracy (31.1%)
- Integration with existing systems (29.1%)
- Privacy/security (20.4%)
- Real-time location and geofencing:
- 21.4% consider it very important
- 29.1% moderately important
