Why does technical success with artificial intelligence (AI) in supply chain management (SCM) not always translate into economic value for manufacturing firms? This study examines the question through a structured integrative review of 36 core publications from 2010 to 10 August 2026, selected through eight anchor reviews, citation tracking, and targeted searches including reinforcement learning. Reported outcomes are classified into six performance levels (T1-T6), separately from five evidence levels. Representative publication levels are distributed as follows: Level 1, two; Level 2, seven; Level 3, 24; Level 4, three (one of which is a review- synthesized range); and Level 5, none. Among 25 non-review studies, 19 receive 34 overlapping performance-level assignments, while six inform adoption or implementation conditions. Five publications report financial outcomes, comprising two model- based cost evaluations, two interview or case-based benefit reports, and one annualized projection. None within the selected set meets all four Level 5 requirements: objective financial effects, an adequate actual operating period, total cost of ownership, and comparison with an alternative. Publication-level classifications do not establish the evidence level of every claim. The analysis links five conversion gaps and six cause areas to six value-realization gates (G0-G5) for investment, operational integration, validation, scaling, and continuation or termination. A hypothetical predictive-maintenance scenario specifies responsible departments, data, review documents, and realistic constraints. Gate-specific applications to generative, agentic, and reinforcement-learning AI are also presented. The framework is a literature-based managerial proposal, not a field-validated intervention; the results do not estimate industry-wide effects or failure rates.