The takeaway is that people, and especially executives, with personal positive AI experiences are not necessarily well positioned to decide on behalf of their organization whether AI has been a success. No matter how good it feels on a personal level. The same applies to people who use ChatGPT individually for work: it may feel great to have AI write and summarize reports for you, but is the organization actually becoming better as a result? That may not be your concern personally, but it certainly is the concern of management. I’ll return to that later.
An enormous problem is that in most organizations, people no longer evaluate whether AI is actually successful, or even can be. After all, it’s “the future.” AI is indeed here to stay, but it would still be nice to think carefully about what we should actually do with it. Or at the very least, define beforehand what you expect it to achieve and measure whether it actually does. Because “it felt good” simply isn’t enough. More on that later.
We should use it to replace all those 0-token near-free existing automations, because it’s the future. We just need to connect personal agents to MCPs using admin credentials (or even an admin token vending machine MCP, since LLMs know all the cloud and enterprise APIs already)
We should use it to replace all those 0-token near-free existing automations, because it’s the future. We just need to connect personal agents to MCPs using admin credentials (or even an admin token vending machine MCP, since LLMs know all the cloud and enterprise APIs already)
AI dividends paying out in 3…2…TABLE NOT FOUND