Are we thinking about the impact the right way?

Doom and gloom everywhere

Everyone seems to be confidently predicting the future at the moment, and it is all about AI taking away jobs. You can pick any industry and alarmist headlines seem to be everywhere you look.

But I am not sure that this is the whole story.

I wonder, are we really thinking about this correctly? Where is the ambition? Where is the positivity?

Why the emphasis on entry-level jobs?

Just consider what we call entry-level jobs for a moment. Typically, they are filled by smart but untrained people

The roles usually combine a mixture of targeted training and learning, combined with basic tasks that provide the repetition necessary to embed the learning. And some boring and basic stuff, because someone has to.

The people are at a stage where they are relatively low cost, but high potential.

And yes, no doubt one or other type of AI will replace some of the tasks that are done today by entry-level workers.

But are knowledge worker jobs going to be totally removed by AI in the way assembly line roles were altered or eliminated by robots and automation?

Yes, AI can be amazing

AI capabilities seem to grow every day, so what AI can do, or what you can do with its help, is increasingly remarkable. In terms of increasing productivity, ensuring repeatability and enhancing the output capacity of individuals and teams around the world, it just gets better.

But of course, there are still some open questions:

• How accurate are LLMs really? Do the guardrails work consistently? And how much human oversight is necessary, and what does this look like?
• In a time when reducing energy use is imperative, the enormous energy demands of the data centres behind the new generation of AI products is daunting – how many other new technologies have come with talk of dedicated nuclear power stations?
• How much will it cost? The cost to customers, and associated profitability for operators, is far from resolved.

But why give up on people?

This simple narrative of loss begins and ends with “fewer junior roles = inevitable job losses”.

Predicting the future is notoriously difficult. I generally misremember the story of “The Great Horse Manure Crisis of 1894” as being about there not being enough dung collectors in the future, though the story was supposedly that in 50 years London would be submerged under metres of horse manure which would slow development of the city. But note the date: 8 years after Karl Benz was demonstrating his first automobile in Mannheim. So even if the Horse Manure story was a real thing, which it wasn’t, readers worried about the manure mountain were missing a different future emerging around them.

In the same way, just focusing on things done by people today that can be done by AI tomorrow, and therefore turning it into a cost-down opportunity are I think missing the point about what else will become possible.

Doesn’t AI elevate every role?

What if AI isn’t about shrinking the entry-level pipeline, but about elevating it?

If junior or entry-level staff can now produce better, higher-value outputs with AI, then the inner accountant is happy, because they are providing greater value for money, and their organisations are pleased to get more valuable outputs and keep their talent pipeline alive.

It is not like organisations can’t find more higher value things to do, in fact, having enough time to get everything done is a universal concern.

Let’s lift the game

Instead of removing entry-level roles, why not enhance them? Use the capacity the AI provides to lift the quality and impact of their outputs instead. So, juniors start to output at a mid-level, mid-levels to produce at a senior level, and executives can focus on vision, strategy, and leadership. Which they should be doing anyway.

Yes, it creates pressure, on every level, and of course on the people supervising and mentoring the entry-level teams, but it also builds capability.

Experience still matters

Of course, experience still matters, in spotting errors, exercising judgment and guiding and mentoring junior staff. Which is where human capability shines.

So maybe ‘AI plus experienced people’ is introducing a better environment for training and growth, instead of just a way to save a bit of money?

Be ambitious

In conclusion, this new wave of AI isn’t the end of entry-level jobs, though it might remove or replace some tasks.

It is however the beginning of the next generation of higher-value workforce.

The real question isn’t “How many jobs will we lose? but “How much better can we make our people, and our organisations?”

Productivity comes from making work smarter and connecting people in ways that makes work more effective. More fulfilling work means more productive organisations.  AI is part of that future.

About the Author - Adam Ryall is CEO and founder of Gluestep