# Agentic AI in Industry: Adoption Level and Deployment Barriers

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.14675 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.14675/

## Key facts

- Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use.
- Builds on 9 of its 26 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 14 May 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM agents and tool use / [Software engineering coding agents](https://mlsanity.com/agents/software-engineering-coding-agents/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 9 of 9)

- [LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems for Software Engineering: Literature Review, Vision and the Road Ahead](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.04834/) (2024)
- [On the Robustness of Code Generation Techniques: An Empirical Study on GitHub Copilot](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.00438/) (2023)
- [On the Use of Agentic Coding: An Empirical Study of Pull Requests on GitHub](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.14745/) (2025)
- [AgileCoder: Dynamic Collaborative Agents for Software Development based on Agile Methodology](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11912/) (2024)
- [Security Weaknesses of Copilot-Generated Code in GitHub Projects: An Empirical Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.02059/) (2023)
- [Conversational AI as a Coding Assistant: Understanding Programmers' Interactions with and Expectations from Large Language Models for Coding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.16508/) (2025)
- [Developer Productivity With and Without GitHub Copilot: A Longitudinal Mixed-Methods Case Study](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.20353/) (2025)
- [Walking the Tightrope of LLMs for Software Development: A Practitioners' Perspective](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2511.06428/) (2025)
- [Agentic Pipelines in Embedded Software Engineering: Emerging Practices and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.10220/) (2026)

## Built on by (most cited first, 4 of 4)

- [The Integrator Advantage: Controlled Agentic AI for Small and Medium-Sized Companies](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.16649/) (2026)
- [Verification of Adaptive Agentic Controllers through Finite Rule Revision](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2607.09770/) (2026)
- [Developing a Roadmap to an AI-first Organization: A Case Study in Embedded Software Development](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.30863/) (2026)
- [AgentStripes: An Evidence-Graded Maturity Model for AI Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2610.18603/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Agentic AI systems are entering software engineering workflows, yet empirical evidence on how industrial organizations actually adopt them remains sparse. We present a qualitative interview study with sixteen practitioners across twelve companies of varying size and domain. This study characterizes the current agentic AI adoption state of these companies, employing a six-level maturity framework adapted from established AI-driven organizations. The findings reveal that seven companies operate at Level~1 (AI Assistants), four companies at Level~2 (AI Compensators), and only one in Level~3 (Multi-Agent Orchestration), with large and safety-regulated organizations among the most advanced adopters. The primary finding is a capability-deployment verification gap, four companies demonstrated higher-level experimental AI capabilities but cannot integrate them into production workflows because adequate output verification mechanisms are absent, leaving human-in-the-loop as the only trusted verification mechanism. This gap is shaped by four recurring barriers: context window of LLMs constraints especially when diverse knowledge aggregation is needed, under-performance on proprietary programming languages and protocols, non-determinism incompatible with qualification standards, and data confidentiality concerns. Two interdependent dimensions of this gap emerge from these findings (information asymmetry and qualification absence) framing a core open problem for industrial agentic integration.