Why Human Evaluation Matters When Choosing The Right AI Model For Your Business

Forbes

08-07-2025

Ryan Kolln, CEO and Managing Director of Appen.
As enterprises increasingly integrate AI across their operations, the stakes for selecting the right model have never been higher and many technology leaders lean heavily on standard industry benchmarks to guide their decisions.
While these metrics are useful for early filtering, they don't tell the whole story. A model's leaderboard rank doesn't guarantee it will meet business needs. What's often missing is human evaluation—and, in many cases, customized, enterprise-specific benchmarks that reflect real-world usage and deployment requirements.
In today's AI landscape, human insight is a necessary complement to automated benchmarking—essential not in isolation, but as part of a structured evaluation strategy.
The Limits Of Standard Benchmarking
Standard benchmarks—like MMLU, Humanity's Last Exam and MMMU—were designed to measure general model performance in controlled settings. When combined with metrics like F1 score (classification accuracy), BLEU (for translation tasks) or perplexity (for language models), standard benchmarks are useful for comparing general model performance in lab settings.
But these benchmarks have limits. The complexity and diversity of business AI use cases are rapidly outgrowing the information reflected in standard benchmarking. As models approach saturation—where many achieve near-max scores—the value of standard benchmarks further diminishes.
Standard benchmarking doesn't account for:
• Context And Nuance: A model can perform well on a math Olympiad dataset and still fail to retrieve relevant insights from an enterprise knowledge base.
• Alignment With Company Values: Standard benchmarks don't measure brand voice, regulatory compliance or cultural appropriateness.
• Usability And Robustness: Metrics typically don't capture how users experience outputs—or how models perform under ambiguous or adversarial inputs.
High scores on public leaderboards don't guarantee business success. Standard benchmarks are most valuable for filtering potential candidates in initial model selection; however, these metrics should be complemented by human evaluation to select the best model for your unique use cases.
The Role Of Human Evaluation
Human evaluation fills the gaps left by automated benchmarking. Through structured assessments, human reviewers—especially domain experts—can judge model outputs on critical dimensions that standard tests miss. Developing custom benchmarks tailored to your business' unique requirements can further enhance the accuracy of your model evaluation process.
• Coherence: Are outputs logical, complete and contextually appropriate?
• Bias And Fairness: Does the model treat different demographics equitably?
• Task suitability: Can the model handle the complexity of business-specific tasks?
Common human evaluation approaches include side-by-side comparisons (ranking two model outputs), rating scales for specific quality metrics (such as helpfulness or accuracy) and real-world task testing, where models are evaluated on actual business workflows.
By embedding human judgment into model evaluation—and aligning it with custom benchmarks—companies gain a richer, more practical understanding of how an AI system will perform after deployment.
Practical Approaches To Human Evaluation
For organizations looking to implement human evaluation efficiently, several best practices can help:
• Design structured review processes. Use standardized rubrics to assess outputs across key dimensions like accuracy, safety and tone.
• Involve domain experts. Engage reviewers who understand your industry-specific language, compliance requirements and customer expectations.
• Adopt hybrid evaluation models. Combine quantitative benchmark filtering with qualitative human review to balance scalability and depth.
• Prioritize real-world tasks. Build custom test sets that mirror the scenarios your users will encounter, rather than relying solely on abstract prompts.
• Leverage evaluation platforms. Deploy tooling that supports A/B testing, red teaming and rubric-based scoring to scale human evaluation across models.
For example, a healthcare company evaluating AI for medical documentation might prioritize output accuracy, sensitivity to patient data privacy and alignment with clinical terminology—factors best judged by humans, not benchmarks alone.
When Human Evaluation Is Mission-Critical
Human evaluation is particularly vital in high-risk, high-compliance scenarios such as:
• Financial decision support
• Legal summarization
• Customer service in regulated industries
• Healthcare documentation
These are domains where even subtle model failures can trigger outsized operational, financial, legal or reputational risks.
Rethinking AI Evaluation
In an environment where AI models are powerful but complex, human evaluation is no longer optional—it's essential.
Business leaders must recognize that while public benchmarks help narrow model options, they are not definitive answers. A robust model selection strategy, complemented with human evaluation and enterprise-specific benchmarks, ensures that AI models meet business needs, align with brand and regulatory standards and deliver sustainable value.
As AI adoption deepens, companies that integrate human-centred evaluation into their selection and monitoring processes will be better equipped to unlock AI's full potential while mitigating risks others may overlook.
When choosing the right AI model for your enterprise, don't just ask how well it scores. Ask how well it works for your people, your customers and your mission. Human insight is the bridge between technical promise and real-world performance.
Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?