Ask someone in the marketing and PR space this was unnerving.
"Impact on junior positions is way more dramatic. This is an account coordinator position at a public relations firm. And we’re going to put it through the same process in Claude as the senior position. And let’s just see what the difference is between a junior position and a senior position in terms of its exposure to AI:
When we look at the account coordinator position, 82% of this role can be consumed by AI. 13% moderately augmentable, 5% human-centric. The impact of AI on junior position employees can’t be overstated. A company does not need this role to be filled by a human. It would be fiscally irresponsible to pay someone - this role pays $51,000 a year - it would be fiscally irresponsible to pay a human to sit in this seat and do these tasks."
So many good thoughts here Chris. This one for me takes the cake when we think about the future of work critically:
“Once you get to level 3, that’s when the game changes, when you go from being an individual contributor to becoming a manager, and what you are managing is a machine.”
This is the macro shift. From managing people to managing agents.
True. But ICs who direct people but done have 5-10 direct reports are not the same thing. I think many folks who have learned to manage people well but aren’t close to work or output will not be well suited for managing agents. Agents don’t need annual reviews, weekly check ins or small talk. They don’t need their humans to invest emotionally in them. The best people managers make this their job. They probably also get a lot of satisfaction in growing and mentoring people as well. Now picture swapping all of these relationships, team building and people-person building skills with robots. Good people managers will hate this.
ICs who know how to get output done regardless of what they are given to do it will lean in. When your output is leading people—you need to lead people, not agents
The irony is that it might be the perfect place for poor people managers like me. People like me who either micromanage people, which drives humans crazy, but machines don't mind, or people who foam at the mouth with a ton of requirements and then just, like a seagull, fly away after shitting everywhere, are actually how agents work best.
I say for roles like these: caring for other humans, caring for animals, growing our food, caring for our life-sustaining natural resources on the planet (fresh water, clean air, environmental systems, etc.), human creativity in culture and art, medical professionals, service industry professionals, educators, travel & tourism professionals (the humans taking care of you when you travel), and a host of other professions that cannot be replaced by machines.
Humans are valuable. As the business world ramps up efficiency with AI, and roles and positions are reduced to AI productivity, we need to remember that real people's lives are being affected. As you said, there is a line between what is viewed as "progress" and revolution, when people who have become expendable can no longer meet daily survival.
Ask someone in the marketing and PR space this was unnerving.
"Impact on junior positions is way more dramatic. This is an account coordinator position at a public relations firm. And we’re going to put it through the same process in Claude as the senior position. And let’s just see what the difference is between a junior position and a senior position in terms of its exposure to AI:
When we look at the account coordinator position, 82% of this role can be consumed by AI. 13% moderately augmentable, 5% human-centric. The impact of AI on junior position employees can’t be overstated. A company does not need this role to be filled by a human. It would be fiscally irresponsible to pay someone - this role pays $51,000 a year - it would be fiscally irresponsible to pay a human to sit in this seat and do these tasks."
As someone
So many good thoughts here Chris. This one for me takes the cake when we think about the future of work critically:
“Once you get to level 3, that’s when the game changes, when you go from being an individual contributor to becoming a manager, and what you are managing is a machine.”
This is the macro shift. From managing people to managing agents.
And as we all know especially from the agency world, there are a lot of ICs who do not make good managers.
True. But ICs who direct people but done have 5-10 direct reports are not the same thing. I think many folks who have learned to manage people well but aren’t close to work or output will not be well suited for managing agents. Agents don’t need annual reviews, weekly check ins or small talk. They don’t need their humans to invest emotionally in them. The best people managers make this their job. They probably also get a lot of satisfaction in growing and mentoring people as well. Now picture swapping all of these relationships, team building and people-person building skills with robots. Good people managers will hate this.
ICs who know how to get output done regardless of what they are given to do it will lean in. When your output is leading people—you need to lead people, not agents
The irony is that it might be the perfect place for poor people managers like me. People like me who either micromanage people, which drives humans crazy, but machines don't mind, or people who foam at the mouth with a ton of requirements and then just, like a seagull, fly away after shitting everywhere, are actually how agents work best.
Absolutely
You asked: "What is worth paying a human for?"
I say for roles like these: caring for other humans, caring for animals, growing our food, caring for our life-sustaining natural resources on the planet (fresh water, clean air, environmental systems, etc.), human creativity in culture and art, medical professionals, service industry professionals, educators, travel & tourism professionals (the humans taking care of you when you travel), and a host of other professions that cannot be replaced by machines.
Humans are valuable. As the business world ramps up efficiency with AI, and roles and positions are reduced to AI productivity, we need to remember that real people's lives are being affected. As you said, there is a line between what is viewed as "progress" and revolution, when people who have become expendable can no longer meet daily survival.