Issue #6: Getting Real About Gen AI and Skills

Editor's note: As I was putting together this issue about a reality check on some of our most hyped FoW trends, I kept hearing the iconic phrase "time to stop being polite, and start getting real" in my head. Inspired, I went to Bing Image Creator w/ DALL-E 3 and typed in "Doc and Marty in MTV's the Real World." The above image was the best of many frightening images, and AI's race and gender bias produced something fairly representative of the typical Real World cast's diversity (or lack thereof) .

In the 1960s, Stanford computer scientist and futurist Roy Amara famously stated, "We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run." Gartner's Hype Cycle for new technologies echoes Amara's Law on the overestimation part with its "Peak of Inflated Expectations," although it's somewhat more pessimistic on long-run prospects... the "Plateau of Productivity" doesn't make it back to meet the earlier enthusiasm.

The theories are helpful to keep in mind to temper expectations. However, the hard part for practitioners hoping to take advantage of new tech is (a) developing a strong point of view on where something at an early stage will end up (the next big thing or a punchline), and (b) balancing responsible austerity with the need to create excitement and paint a compelling picture to get anything new off the gorund.

Two of the topics/tech most likely to suck all the air out of the room for a talent-oriented group—whether at a conference of hundreds to thousands or an intimate dinner of a few—are generative AI and skills. I speak from recent experience on both these fronts. And past issues of this newsletter are further proof, with both topics taking up the bulk of the space.

I'm bullish on the potential for generative AI and skills to be transformative... if we act responsibly (what are potential pitfalls and adverse impacts) and purposefully (what's the business problem they're helping us solve) in leveraging them, and we don't screw it up.

However, I also thought it was also a good time to share a couple pieces that pour a bit of cold water on gen AI and on skills. If you're a skeptic, I think you'll find a lot of the questions and concerns you've raised highlighted here. And if you're a true believer, these are some of the things that you should be thinking long and hard about, even as you advocate and activate to speed ahead.

1. A good roundup of stories that make you wonder, "Is the gen AI bubble about to burst?" (as LinkedIn editor Tanya Dua puts its). Just because gen AI can be used as a swiss army knife, should it — economically, environmentally, and societally speaking? Or will its best application be more limited and focused than the broad dreaming and experimentaiton that companies and customers are doing today? And what about privacy, bias, and IP rights? ?? Link to article from the LinkedIn News Tech Stack newsletter
2. Some critical thinking on "The Skills HR tech confusion" from industry thought leader Josh Bersin . Bersin asks some important first principles questions for those putting "skills-based" or "skills-first" on their agenda (and I don't see many companies that aren't): (1) Why - what business challenges are you trying to solve? (a fitting question for any tech, really); (2) What - what's your definition of skills? Does experience and application come into play? Proficiency?; (3) How - how do you get a skills-oriented effort off the ground? How will you apply skills once you do? Bersin shares his perspective on these from his many client and ecosystem conversations and own experimentation. He also warns against vendor positioning of skills solutions as the panacea, while presenting his ideas on a path forward to a "dynamic organization." Whether or not you agree with his world view, it's interesting and insightful stuff, and worth a listen / read. ?? Spotify link to Bersin's recent episode on skills. Also see an earlier episode and related article on which this builds.
3. Finally, something less tech and more trend, but no less likely to suck the air out of the room: remote work thought leader and Stanford prof Nick Bloom tries to put the final nail in the coffin of the 5-day per week RTO (return to office). Using some compelling rationale supplemented by data and examples, he makes the case in a NYT op-ed that "The Five Day Office Week is Dead." It's fitting that this is coming out on the cusp of Halloween though, because I have a feeling (informed in part by KPMG's recent CEO survey showing that 64% anticipate a full RTO within 3 years) that the RTO zombies will rise once again... ?? Op-Ed link

Since I evoked it earlier, I'll leave you with the intro to the best season of the Real World (for obvious reasons... #locationlocationlocation).