The following is from Gallup News.
Seventy-two percent of Fortune 500 Chief Human Resource Officers (CHROs) foresee AI replacing jobs in their organization in the next three years.
According to Gallup’s recent survey of 135 leaders in Gallup’s CHRO Roundtable, human resource leaders are also hopeful about the utility of AI, with 65% saying it can be used to improve the performance of most roles in their organization.
Why Leaders Want It
What types of improvement are leaders thinking of?
Their top answers include:
- Increased efficiency
- Increased effectiveness
- Greater speed
- Better decision-making
- More opportunities for workers to focus on strategic thinking
Meanwhile, findings from recent Gallup surveys of U.S. employees point to a workforce that is not prepared for the coming AI transition:
- Few are digging in to AI. Only one in 10 employees report they currently use AI at least weekly, while two in 10 use it less frequently. Seven in 10 say they never use it.
- Most don’t feel prepared for AI. Relatedly, more than half of employees (53%) say they don’t feel prepared to work with AI, robotics or other advanced technologies. Twenty-six percent say they are “not at all prepared.”
- Most remain complacent about replacement. Even as tools like ChatGPT have accelerated AI conversations in the boardroom, few workers — just 14% this year — think it’s “somewhat” or “very” likely their job could be eliminated in the next five years due to new technology, automation, robots or AI. That’s little different from the 13% who said the same in 2019.
- Most are also skeptical of AI’s potential. In contrast to CHROs’ optimism about AI’s contribution to the workplace, most workers are skeptical AI can be used to improve how work gets done. Just three in 10 agree it can be beneficial.
Link to article here.
The Lemonade Mermaid Store
Unique gifts for Land or Sea Mermaids, Mer-pets and Little Mermaids!
Left: Our signature Fish Scales design tote bag in Citrus
AI has great potential when used to make deterministic decisions. In other words, as long as data can be interpreted with 100% reliability, AI can be very helpful. On the other hand, when there is any “gray area”, and thoughtful rationality and judgement are needed, there is great danger in blindly accepting the algorithmic pronouncements of a machine.
David has a valid point, however. He does not seem to realize the changes in Artificial intelligence we have accomplished already in the last 20 years. TTS (Text to Speech) is a unidirectional function of most computers, but the likes of SIRI and others have accomplished a lot of STT. This incorporation, along with learning algorithms allows IVRs to respond faster then an agent can. (IF given the right compute backend.) AI is the same and Different. The 100% reliability that David discusses is never in ANY deterministic decision. We all make decisions based on Probabilities. Machine determination of probabilities is in it’s infant stage today. But as it gains history (Experience) in evaluating information, it will become ore accurate. And there in lies the dehumanizing factor. If machines prove to be just as capable of prejudice as humans are, there wlll be failures in the HR spectrum. IF not, then not.