Rapid advances in artificial intelligence have shown a power to supplement certain jobs, if not overtake them entirely
AI could take jobs, he said, but it wasn’t just employees who would be left out of work.
Today, rapid advances in AI have brought the promises of efficiency, but have also shown a power to at least supplement certain jobs, if not overtake them entirely. The concern runs across countless industries, with trade and knowledge workers alike fearing replacement. C-suite employees may also have reason to be concerned.
The results showed an AI model consistently outperformed humans, maximizing profit and growth while minimizing risks, according to the study’s authors. But AI struggled to adapt to rare, unpredictable events, such as a global pandemic, as it often focused too much on short-term success. Its faults, however, were similar to those of human participants; it just seemed to fail more quickly.
The study said AI cannot be ignored in the C-suite and that the risks posed by having AI in such a position are not dissimilar from the risks that humans bring.
“Despite its impressive performance, AI cannot assume the full responsibility of a CEO in markets that serve humans,” the authors said. “Instead, it can significantly improve the strategic planning process and help prevent costly mistakes.”
There is evidence that AI excels at working with data, drawing inferences and predicting success, but there is a question surrounding whether AI has the ability to actually steer a company, taking on the portion of the CEO duties that have less to do with numbers and more to do with intangible skills, such as leadership.
“AI doesn’t have all those complexities of emotion that make leaders great.” Daniel Tsai, a teacher at Toronto Metropolitan University who specializes in AI and business, said. “Lateral thinking, creativity, the desire and impulse for innovation, entrepreneurship; those human traits are rather difficult to replicate, at least at this point in time in history, in AI.”
Tsai offers a more aspirational view of the CEO position, one that motivates employees and fosters innovation.
He references the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI), a decades-old assessment tool that looks at different ways of thinking in individuals. It divides the brain into four quadrants: the rational self, the safekeeping self, the experimental self and the feeling self. AI is equipped with some of these concepts in the former categories, such as analysis and organization, but it has yet to prove it can be curious, expressive or passionate.
“The ideal CEO profile under the HBDI uses whole-brain thinking,” he said. “They’re able to go and use any of the quadrants to solve a problem. That’s the missing component here. I don’t see AI at this stage having that type of range of skill.”
“We’re really missing the human emotion that makes CEOs great,” he said.
“Humans are driven by humans and AI can’t do that,” he said. “You need to feel authenticity and truth and reliability, and I don’t think people have that in AI. I don’t think people trust it. There’s no emotional sentiment here.”
“With all this discussion about AI being superintelligent, it can surpass us in certain categories,” Tsai said, “But can it be a better human than a human? I don’t think so.”