top of page
Search
Writer's pictureStephanie Melodia

Beyond the gimmick: What opportunities does AI really present?

As I prepare to speak at the Big Data & AI Expo in Amsterdam, I've enjoyed deep diving into the world of AI, and the more I learn about it, the more optimistic I get, to be honest.


As someone in the tech sector who’s been invited to speak on the topic, I've had the opportunity to read more about it and interview subject matter experts, and here are the key positives I've learnt:


  • AI is not coming for your job; it's coming for the boring parts of it.

  • "Robots taking over” enables us to be more “human” in our endeavours.

  • Productivity gains - when viewed as a business capability and properly integrated - are massive.


Fear 1: Is AI coming for my job?


The more exciting question to pose here is: how will we, as humans, be redefined in the workplace of the future?


  • If you're in a creative profession…


…Your current job title will transform into the name of the tool, not the name of your profession. The best example of this is the computer.


Did you know “a computer” used to be a job title? The first known written reference for “computer” dates back to 1613, and it meant "one who computes" - relating to a person performing mathematical calculations, before calculators became available. This important job was typically fulfilled by women, too. (Another way we’ve been overlooked, tbh).


I predict the same will happen with job titles like artworker, writer, and possibly even marketer. No longer will these terms be used in your email signature or on your business card, but the name of the tool. In this sense, AI takes over the grunt work of your job, freeing you up to be more original, strategic, and creative. So, if we take the artworker job title, for example, a creative professional will use an artworking tool and their role will transform into that of a tastemaker, a creative director, a quality controller. We set the direction for a brand strategy or ad campaign at the start, utilise AI for efficiencies in production, quality control in the middle, course-correct or revise if needed, and then sense-check at the end.


Perhaps with the time freed up in between, creative professionals will be able to visit an exhibition or attend a gig to help get their creative juices flowing. (Perhaps. I'm more sceptical about the time-savings promised, in the same way email and Slack was also meant to free up our time and kind of did the opposite. But it's a possibility!)


  • If you're mid to senior white collar worker…


…Your role will focus even more so on the "human" qualities of what makes you great at your job.


In a talk I gave at Soho House on 'Creativity in the Era of AI: Future-proof Your Career,' the key message I shared was this:


PLAY GAMES YOU CAN WIN.


As we look at what makes AI so great - processing vast amounts of data, rapidly synthesising, and then generating something relevant off the back of that input - we need to look at which games we can play that we'll win - and that means not competing in this same arena. It means doing what WE'RE great at. Fostering connection, managing relationships, bringing teams together, perhaps even architecting structures to properly integrate AI solutions… This is how mid to senior white collar workers can triumph in the next decade.


  • If you're a junior white collar worker…


...At first I was a bit worried about what the productivity gains of AI mean for fresh talent entering the market. We often learn by doing, and that means getting stuck into the grunt work. But if AI takes this away, what's the value-add role that younger staff can take on in an organisation?


Findings from a September 2024 BIS report on 'Generative AI and labour productivity: a field experiment on coding' by Leonardo Gambacorta, Han Qiu, Shuo Shan and Daniel M Rees indicate that the use of gen AI increased code output by more than 50%, with productivity gains statistically significant among entry-level or junior staff.


Outside of that, Gen Z and Alphas are the first generations born into the Internet Age. They have a digitally native advantage, and a whole new way of thinking of things. As proponents of The Great Resignation, maybe they'll usher in the utopian world where no human works, capitalism is eradicated, and the robots can feed us grapes as we lounge on our cloud-like chaise-lounges. Just putting it out there.


  • If you're a blue collar worker…


The same can be said of white collar to blue collar workers although to a lesser degree, as robotics are positioned to replace portions of physical labour.


  • And if you're a pink collar worker…


You're probably safest, with AI really coming into play here as an efficiency co-pilot. The biggest fight for pink collar workers - I believe - is fairer remuneration.


Fear 2: Are the robots taking over?


As long as they're properly managed, the counter-question then becomes: would that be such a bad thing? To reiterate: AI is coming for the boring parts of our job, freeing us up to be more “human” in our endeavours. That means focusing on relationship-building, strategising, fostering connections, architecting, QC-ing, and having more space for creative thinking.


Fear 3: Is AI all about cost-efficiencies?


No, there's an opportunity for AI to be used as a tool for value-add, not just for cost-cutting.


As James Manyika of Google put it in an FT article: "You don’t win by cutting costs; you win by creating more valuable outputs."


What this links to is the proper implementation of AI within an organisation, firstly viewed as a business capability under the responsibility of the leadership team; not the IT department. As Nathan Bell of Kearney put it:


"Organisational innovations are required - although less spoken about - to harness the power of AI. AI’s value is most understood by business teams—not IT"


(Read Nathan Bell's post here for more).


NOTE: Let's not do a merry-go-round repeating the dot com boom again. Value-add doesn't mean sticking "AI" into your pitch deck to multiply your company valuation.


Whilst AI can be incredibly helpful, I do find the idea of a 1-person unicorn gross, to be honest. Pure profit generated for further up the chain instead of trickle-down economics. I'm as capitalist as they come but this is where I draw the line.


-


Don’t get me wrong; I’m not deluded by naive optimism here. There are very valid concerns with AI - namely related to the environment first and foremost, followed by DEI and ethics. But - to go full circle on the positivity front - this also means there are opportunities here too…


Innovators would do well to solve problems in the following areas:


  • Environment


In a July 2024 report by the Association of Data Scientists, the calculated energy consumption for a 7B model to serve 1M users amounts to 55 MWh - which is the equivalent to powering 25,000 households…


Investors realise this is hugely problematic and therefore thankfully pushed to the top of the agenda, with VC investment in AI chip manufacturing startups in the first half of this year exceeding the past 3 years combined.


(Eco-conscious tech entrepreneurs: wanna make bank? This is your opportunity).


  • DEI


Our unconscious biases are exacerbated by a tool that inputs, synthesises, and regenerates based on historical data - i.e. flawed from the get-go - not to mention the labour inequities between genders, races, abilities, socioeconomic statuses…


  • Ethics


Much like a gun is harmless until it's in the wrong hands, the same can be said of AI. There'll always be bad actors unfortunately, so tight governance is an absolute must as we enter the brave new world…


-


What do you think? A secondary positive with AI - like any new technology - is how much we're encouraged to embrace an "always learning" mindset. I've had the pleasure of reading various reports and pieces of journalism on the matter, listening to podcasts, and interviewing subject matter experts like Jon McLoone of Wolfram Research, or entrepreneurs like Cien Solon, for example. But none of that means I'm an expert myself; far from it. That's why I'd love to hear from you too. Do you agree or disagree with any of this? Do you have any more insight to expand on the above? Get in touch.



Comments


bottom of page