99% of UK advertisers now use GenAI — but most are chasing the wrong prize
- 5 days ago
- 4 min read
Updated: 3 hours ago
Almost every UK advertiser is now using generative AI, but a new ISBA survey shows most are using it to cut costs rather than grow — and the minority chasing effectiveness are more than twice as likely to see transformational business results.
A major new survey from ISBA, the UK body representing brand advertisers, finds that generative AI has become near-universal — but that most brands are aiming it at the wrong target. Based on responses from 200 advertisers across marketing, media and procurement, the study reports that 99% have begun their GenAI journey and 65% now use the tools at work, according to ISBA and reporting from VideoWeek.
The uncomfortable finding sits underneath that adoption. Some 76% of advertisers say they are prioritising efficiency — doing the same work faster or cheaper — up from 65% in 2025. Only 24% are focused on effectiveness, or using AI to make marketing work harder, down from 35%. Yet effectiveness-led firms report significant or transformational impact at roughly 25%, versus just 11% for efficiency-led businesses.
Efficiency is easy to measure — and easy to over-value
It is not hard to see why efficiency is winning. Time saved on a first draft, a resized asset or a media brief is immediate and visible; it shows up in this quarter's costs. Effectiveness — better ideas, sharper targeting, stronger creative that actually shifts behaviour — is slower, harder to attribute and demands more judgement. So teams default to the metric they can see, and quietly under-invest in the one that grows the business.
That is a familiar trap. Efficiency gains are real but finite: you can only strip so much cost out of a process before you hit the floor. Effectiveness gains compound. A brand that uses AI to test more creative routes, personalise at scale and understand its audience more deeply is building an advantage that cheaper drafts can never match. The ISBA numbers put a figure on that gap — better than two-to-one on transformational impact.
Marketing Minute's read: a simple test for your AI use
Here is a practical way to audit your own GenAI use. For every AI-enabled task, ask whether it is saving you time or making the work better. If almost everything falls in the first column, you are optimising for efficiency and leaving the bigger prize on the table. The goal is not to stop saving time — it is to reinvest that saved time into effectiveness work you previously had no capacity for.
The survey also flags that GenAI is reshaping agency relationships: 63% of advertisers report significant or some change in how they work with content-production agencies over the past year, 49% with creative agencies and 42% with media agencies. That is not a reason to in-house everything. The brands winning with AI still lean on partners for the judgement, craft and strategy that models cannot supply — they just scope the relationship differently.
Governance is the third piece. Among firms with AI policies, the top priorities are IP and copyright (75%), AI transparency (68%) and bias prevention (63%). For UK businesses, getting these basics written down is not bureaucracy — it is what lets you scale AI use confidently without a legal or reputational surprise down the line.
Quick FAQ
What did the ISBA GenAI survey find?
That 99% of the 200 UK advertisers surveyed are engaging with generative AI and 65% use it regularly, but 76% prioritise efficiency over effectiveness. Effectiveness-focused firms are more than twice as likely to report transformational business impact.
Why does efficiency vs effectiveness matter for AI?
Efficiency gains are finite — you can only cut so much cost. Effectiveness gains compound through better creative, targeting and testing. The ISBA data shows effectiveness-led firms see roughly 25% transformational impact versus 11% for efficiency-led ones.
How should a small business apply this?
Audit each AI task: is it saving time or improving the work? Reinvest the time you save into higher-value effectiveness work — more creative testing, deeper audience insight — and put a simple AI policy in place covering IP, transparency and bias.
Generative AI is the cheapest productivity win most marketers will ever get — which is exactly why it's dangerous. If all you do is make the same work faster, you've automated mediocrity. The brands that win will spend the time they save on making the work better, not just cheaper.
— Daniel Nikolla, Founder of Merx Marketing
AI adoption is now universal, so it is no longer the advantage — how you point it is. Aim it at effectiveness, not just efficiency, and reinvest saved time into work that actually grows the brand.
Is your team using AI to save time, to do better work, or both? We would love to hear where the real gains have come from.
If you would like to know more about this topic, please contact us on danieln@merxmarketing.co.uk
Related reading
Written by Daniel Nikolla, Founder of Merx Marketing Ltd and Marketing Minute
Comments