AI As Corporate Ozempic - Boosting Efficiency or Eroding Skills?

I recently heard Scott Galloway (Prof. G to his fans) describe AI as "corporate Ozempic" in a podcast. This analogy is both insightful and concerning. Like Ozempic, AI can help corporations operate more leanly and efficiently. However, just as Ozempic can lead to muscle loss, AI risks reducing our corporate "muscle" - our human skills and capabilities.

The phenomenon of "deskilling" is a significant concern as AI becomes more prevalent in the workplace. Recent studies highlight this paradox:

1. Wharton and BCG research shows AI-enabled consultants completing 12.2% more tasks, working 25.1% faster, and producing 40% higher quality results.
2. However, a Harvard Business School study found job recruiters using AI became "lazy, careless, and less skilled in their own judgment."

This deskilling effect isn't limited to AI. Consider how GPS has impacted our navigational abilities. Studies show excessive reliance on GPS apps can lead to reduced activity in the hippocampus, the brain region responsible for spatial memory and navigation.

Companies - Beware Too Much AI "Ozempic"

For companies eyeing AI as a cost-cutting measure, beware: The apparent savings may come at a steep, hidden cost to your workforce's critical thinking and problem-solving skills. While AI can streamline processes and boost short-term productivity, it risks creating a dependency that erodes human expertise over time. This is particularly crucial for innovation-driven sectors where creative problem-solving and adaptability are paramount.

Consider the long-term implications: As employees become overly reliant on AI for tasks that once required deep analysis or creative thinking, their ability to tackle novel challenges or think outside the box may diminish. This could lead to a workforce that excels at using AI tools but struggles when faced with unprecedented situations that require human ingenuity.

Moreover, in rapidly evolving industries, the ability to question assumptions, identify emerging trends, and make intuitive leaps is often what drives breakthrough innovations. If employees become too dependent on AI-generated insights, they may lose the skills needed to challenge these outputs or identify their limitations.

There's also the risk of homogenization of thought. If multiple companies in an industry rely on similar AI tools, they may all receive similar recommendations, potentially stifling the diversity of approaches that often leads to disruptive innovations.

Instead of viewing AI purely as a cost-cutting tool, companies should consider it as a complement to human skills. The goal should be to use AI to free up human cognitive resources for higher-order thinking, not to replace critical thought processes entirely. This approach requires intentional strategies for skill development and preservation alongside AI implementation.

By maintaining a balance between AI efficiency and human expertise, companies can position themselves to reap the benefits of AI while retaining the creative, adaptive workforce necessary for long-term success and innovation leadership.

Tech Transfer Offices and AI

Tech transfer offices (TTOs) face unique challenges and opportunities in the AI era. While AI tools can significantly boost productivity in patent searches, prior art analysis, or market assessment, over-reliance on these technologies could erode crucial human expertise. TTOs might find AI accelerating their ability to process invention disclosures or identify potential licensees. However, the nuanced understanding required to spot truly groundbreaking innovations or recognize unexpected commercial applications often relies on human intuition and cross-disciplinary knowledge. AI might excel at pattern recognition, but it may miss the subtle, often serendipitous connections that lead to transformative discoveries.

Moreover, the relationship-building aspect of technology transfer - crucial for successful industry partnerships - requires human soft skills that AI cannot replicate. TTOs must therefore strike a delicate balance: leveraging AI to streamline processes while ensuring their staff continues to develop the deep, multifaceted expertise that drives innovation and successful commercialization.

Keeping the Benefits of AI While Avoiding Deskilling

So, how can we harness AI's benefits while preserving our cognitive "muscle"? Here's a structured approach:

1. Start with human brainstorming: Define problems and outline initial ideas before turning to AI.
2. Use AI to augment, not replace: Leverage AI to expand on human-generated ideas or challenge assumptions.
3. Synthesize with human judgment: Critically evaluate AI-generated inputs and integrate them thoughtfully.

By balancing AI assistance with active cognitive engagement, we can enhance our capabilities without sacrificing the uniquely human skills that drive innovation and problem-solving.

As we navigate this AI-driven future, let's ensure we're not trading long-term cognitive fitness for short-term productivity gains. After all, in the corporate world as in health, sustainable improvement requires more than just a quick fix.

What are your thoughts on balancing AI use with skill preservation in your field? Share your experiences in the comments!

References:

1. Scott Galloway podcast: https://deepcast.fm/episode/6109/no-mercy-no-malice-corporate-ozempic
2. VentureBeat article: https://venturebeat.com/ai/ai-assistants-boost-productivity-but-paradoxically-risk-human-deskilling/
3. Fabrizio Dell'Acqua: https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/how-generative-ai-can-boost-highly-skilled-workers-productivity