Clever AI Humanizer vs WriteHuman

Much feared as a threat to jobs, generative AI can nonetheless help knowledge workers be more productive, if their employers embrace it as a tool.

Some of the work that generative AI can perform – including drafting documents, summarizing reports, writing computer code and analyzing information – seems at odds with the skills of human counterparts. But the most common activities performed by people are typically routine activities that could be delegated to a computerized assistant, freeing workers to perform more valuable tasks. Generative AI can indeed revolutionize what knowledge workers do, but it requires that they accept it as an assistant and continue to exercise human judgment.

There are many instances in which a human performs a rote task, such as analyzing a prospect for a lawsuit for a lawyer, or coming up with a slightly different variation of a marketing proposal. These could be replaced by generative AI, which could speed up the process. Time saved by delegating rote work to AI could be redeployed on higher-value activities, such as talking with customers or experimenting.

At the same time, there are risks associated with increased reliance on AI. It can make up information and replicate biases, and present faulty logic as a confident conclusion. If employees believe what the AI produces, errors may proliferate. Employers need to rethink the value of human judgment and oversight. Decisions with the potential to cause serious harm should not be made by AI.

Another concern is that generative AI destroys opportunities for junior workers. They are likely to get less experience, since AI can take over some of the tasks that these new workers used to perform. Employers need to rethink how to reshape junior positions so that they involve teaching young workers to become critical thinkers. In other words, an employer must invest time in ensuring that someone reviewing an AI-generated report has the smarts to identify any errors.

Moreover, there is a danger that the technology will enhance the work of some knowledge workers more than others. Those with the expertise to understand the material generated by the AI can use it to augment their own performance. But employees without such mastery will have a harder time detecting errors. Employers should offer training and let employees have a say in the implementation of these new technologies.

Generative AI will reshape the work of knowledge workers. Whether it empowers them or victimizes them will depend on the choices made by employers in the near future. When used with training and appropriate oversight, it has the potential to increase dramatically the productivity of knowledge workers, by taking over the tedious parts of their job and leaving them with more interesting tasks. But it can also lead to a race to the bottom, with employers seeking to lower costs by adopting technology and then reducing headcount.

Generative A.I. Will Lead to Improved Knowledge Work, As Long As People Remain In Control

Generative A.I. is capable of performing knowledge work by performing document generation, research, coding, and other activities requiring advanced logic. Fears surrounding A.I.s capability to perform knowledge work and replace employees have some basis, but they misrepresent the degree to which employees would still be in control. In the world where A.I.s are used for knowledge work, employees would have the responsibility of verifying the outputs and answers. A.I.s would act primarily as assistants to knowledge workers.

Knowledge work is made up of a great deal of repetitive tasks. A.I.s would be able to perform these repetitive tasks to give knowledge workers more time to perform higher order work such as meeting clients and helping to develop and validate solutions to business issues.

The spread of A.I.s to the workplace will require a significant adjustment period. A.I.s can form and present arguments that may be incorrect and rely on and spread biases. Employees need to verify A.I. output. Management will need to establish and clearly communicate policies regarding the verification of A.I. output. A.I.s should not be relied upon to make decisions that impact employees' health and finances.

Some worry AI will eliminate entry-level jobs. Young workers learn by performing tasks that AI is designed to do. Companies can increase their organizational efficiency by removing lower-level jobs. However, they may be harming their ability to develop future employees. Instead, companies can enhance the skills of their employees by teaching them how to interpret and analyze AI results, and how to formulate effective questions. Junior employees should not just accept AI results. Employees should be trained to evaluate AI results.

An individual’s ability to use AI in an appropriate and effective manner is ultimately dependent on the person’s background knowledge and expertise. This may exacerbate existing workplace inequalities. Employees should be trained on how to use AI in the workplace and should be allowed to have a say on how to integrate AI in the workplace. This may also improve the fairness of using AI in the workplace.

Knowledge workers can use AI to do lower-level tasks and be free to consider more complex questions, enabling them to do higher-order thinking. However, if companies use AI in a manner to solely decrease their labor costs, this may result in employees doing less-reliable work to reach a final result. This may also further constrain alternative career paths.