AI: Job Thief or Miracle Worker? My Contrary Opinion

The AI revolution has led to a war of extremes, with two opposing armies clashing over the future of work. On one side, we have the doomsday prophets, painting a bleak future where AI snatches every last job from human hands. On the other, the starry-eyed optimists promise a utopia where AI solves all our work woes. But what if both sides are way off the mark?

My contrary opinion: AI will definitely change the nature of work - but not in the way that either group predicts.

We'll likely see an acceleration of the self-service trend, with AI enabling consumers to handle more complex tasks independently, much like how online bookings transformed the travel industry. And, we’ll see fewer human interactions per unit of work produced (even if co-workers continue to interact with each other at the same rate).

Yet, there's a twist: high-end, personalized human services may persist for the wealthy, as exemplified by exclusive travel agencies. This hints at a broader trend where AI's impact could widen socioeconomic divides. Over time, even services we currently view as inherently human, such as healthcare, may be partially or fully automated.

The result? A workplace transformed not by wholesale job elimination or a problem-free utopia, but by a nuanced reshaping of how we work, who we interact with, and the value placed on human touch in various sectors.

AI isn't the first technological wave to crash onto the shores of our work lives, and it certainly won't be the last. To understand where we're headed, let's take a quick trip into past technological revolutions.

?

From Human Muscle to Keyboards: we’ve been here before

I’ll start with a few examples from history. Before the Industrial Revolution, there were two facts about the way we worked. First, work was decentralized. Everyone – adults and children – worked, usually at home or close to home. There was no “commute”. Some merchants and traders travelled, but the majority of workers did not.

Second, tasks required varying degrees of muscle power – so being physically strong and fit was a great asset. Think of the blacksmith hammering out horseshoes and other iron goods – a physically weak blacksmith couldn’t do the job.

After the Industrial Revolution – everything changed. Work became concentrated in cities, as these were where the big machines – housed in a new workplace concept, the factory – were located. Muscle power became less important, as even children could operate the new machines – and often did. People didn’t live in the factories – they usually lived in homes located at least some distance away, and the commute was born. Work was radically changed from that point on.

Fast forward to the start of the Computer Age, when computers came into widespread use. Before that time, there were many (usually) women working as secretaries and stenographers, to handle the mountains of paper that businesses increasingly needed to handle. These were low level white collar jobs, which were replaced by computers.

As Lucy Kellaway wrote for the BBC, back in 2013: “Today the computer is the office. Its dominant metaphor is taken from office work - it's got a desktop, files, folders, documents, a litterbin. It all seems to have happened so fast”. She goes on to discuss the job losses among secretaries and others.

Indeed, at the start of the Computer Age, there were widespread fears about job losses. Older workers worried about losing new skills. Workers generally worried about losing power within the workforce (all of which should be familiar to us today, as AI becomes widespread).

Like the Industrial Revolution, computers radically changed work again – and not just for office workers. They became ubiquitous, found in everything from shops to factories, hospitals to sports stadiums. They both empowered workers and took away jobs. Perhaps most significantly, workers with computer skills saw rapid increases in wages – while those without those skills had either flat or depressed wages. Computers certainly changed work dynamics – but they don’t seem to have led to an overall increase in productivity.

Various reasons are given for this apparent lag. First, productivity gains are seen in some areas, such as manufacturing, where automation has caused significant gains in per-worker output. Second, computers have led to an increase in service provision. While it has been argued that productivity is hard to measure in services, it is certainly true that we have many more services available to us today than 30 years ago. Think of social media, ride hailing apps, widespread availability of all kinds of digital media, and more.

What computers haven’t managed to do is to replace humans completely. We still have many office workers operating those computers. Other types of services – like healthcare – still require many humans. We don’t have robot taxis, doctors or nurses, or teachers. Even cleaning robots can only handle the simplest tasks. Furthermore, wealthier individuals still have a great deal of human staff – assistants, cleaning and maintenance staff, childcare staff and so forth. Many “wealth managers” – financial advisers to the rich – tout their “human touch”, combined with rigorous data analysis.

An increasingly popular view is that AI will rapidly accelerate the ability of one skilled employee to do the work of many. The “hybrid” model will increase the productivity of one person, as the human and the AI work together, producing more than the human could alone. Therefore, within each profession, two types of workers will benefit the most: those who can work productively with AI tools, and those who are good at human (and hence client) relationships.

Despite computers' limitations in fully replacing human workers, AI promises to shake things up in a whole new way. But before we embrace our new robot overlords, let's consider a more complex view of our AI-assisted future.

?

AI and Humans: The Ultimate Power Couple in the Workplace

Multiple studies have shown that humans who can effectively use AI tools – particularly those who can effectively integrate them into their own work processes – have increased productivity. AI tool use alone was much less effective. So, the first point seems to be coming true.

But what about the second point? Arguments have been made that human relationships will remain important in business – which makes sense. Even if AI tools end up doing a lot of analyzing and filtering, at some point, there will be a human making the final decision. And humans like to talk to other humans. We like getting advice from a trusted, knowledgeable human – even if we could find the same advice online.

However, humans are expensive. We used to go to travel agencies to book our vacations and business trips – now we do it ourselves online. But one area where travel agencies are still thriving is for big, “bucket list” vacations – luxury travel to locations that are off the beaten path, adventure holidays and the like.

Fischer Travel, for example, is a very expensive, exclusive, members-only agency known for arranging some of the world's most luxurious experiences. They charge a $150,000 initial membership fee and a $25,000 annual renewal fee. Their website is very bare bones – a pretty homepage, two password protected links, and a signup link (which asks you to state who referred you to them). Clearly, the clients who can afford their services aren’t doing a lot of Internet research by themselves.

What about a budget trip to Antarctica? Well, an off season “budget” trip will still set you back $5000-10,000. You can get these prices through a tour operator – but then you’re stuck with what they offer. ?If you go through a travel agency like Scott Dunn or Black Tomato to create a customized trip, you’re looking at $15,000-36,000 or more.

Of course, you can always travel to less expensive destinations – but then, you can easily set up such a trip yourself, online. Like I said, humans are expensive.

?

What AI Will Really Do to Employment

Here is my take on what AI will do to jobs in the near future. First, like computers, the widespread use of AI will lead to increased wages for employees with the necessary skills to fully integrate AI tools into their work processes. It will reduce employment to some extent in white collar jobs, but AI is more likely to depress wages for white collar workers who cannot effectively work with these tools.

Second, AI will lead to increased output with fewer required human interactions. This doesn’t mean that individual workers will interact with their colleagues less – in fact, they may interact with them more, since they’ll have more time to do, as AI takes away the routine work. However, it is likely that per unit of output, there will be fewer human to human interactions.

This also means that for most of us, we will continue to do more work that was once handled by a human – like making our own customized vacations – but with better results. We are also likely to interact with fewer people in retail and other commercial environments, once AI stops giving us ice cream with bacon on top, or hundreds of chicken McNuggets.

Eventually, even services that we assume require a human – like healthcare – are likely to be partially or completed replaced by AI.

Unless of course, you’re rich.

Like I said, humans are expensive.

?

Excited to learn more about integrating AI into your business processes? Keep an eye out for my upcoming book, "The AI Process Playbook for Business", coming out on December 10. DM me for more details and to get 50% off!

?

References:

Lucy Kellaway: https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-23509153

AI tool use and integration gives the best results: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/13/18/3758

Fischer Travel: https://www.fischertravel.com/

https://www.trip.com/guide/info/trip-to-antarctica-cost.html

AI at McDonald’s: https://www.axios.com/2024/06/17/mcdonalds-ai-drive-thru-orders