Is your generative AI approach stifling employee innovation?

Thanks to the consumer-led experimentation of platforms like ChatGPT, Dall-E and OpenAI, the emergence of generative artificial intelligence (AI) has seen resistance to its incorporation into our daily and working lives all but dissipate.

The consumerisation of these technologies means that businesses can’t simply “sit it out while the dust settles” and allow the technology to mature. Their employees want it and their competitors are implementing it as we speak, which means that AI-driven toolsets will be part and parcel of many businesses soon if they aren’t already deployed.

The reason is simple, at least on the employee side. The allure of boundless opportunities and innovative solutions beckons employees, with incredible efficiencies to be found. Just as the dawn of search engines severed our reliance on microfiche and encyclopedias for research, this will have a similar effect on creativity, productivity and efficiency.

For instance, tools already exist to listen to your meetings and instantly capture the transcript, key points, next steps and key actions to undertake. We’ve all been in meetings, and this is by far the most menial task that results from having them – but Generative AI can now do all that heavy lifting, saving those who use it hours a week in manual work.

In short: the benefits of efficiency and creativity are clear and potentially limitless.

But amid all the pomp surrounding the emergence of generative AI, a shadow looms — the potential for employers to seize all AI-derived benefits, inadvertently discouraging further innovation from their employees.

Imagine the situation where an employee, through the deployment of AI innovations, reduces their daily workload by 20%. However, this capacity is immediately consumed by an overly zealous team leader without consideration of further efficiency opportunities the employee may find if given some level of the new productivity capacity.

To this point, the OECD Employment Outlook 2023: Artificial Intelligence and the Labour Market report revealed that, while AI does lead to greater job satisfaction, it may in some cases lead to increasing intensity of work. To cite the report: “AI applications may automate the ‘easy’ set of a worker’s tasks leaving them with the same amount of work, but without the ‘break’ afforded by the easy problems”.

Meanwhile, the research director of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers told media this year that workers in her union said they felt like “guinea pigs” as employers hastily deployed AI-powered tools into the workplace. She said the implementation of AI tools has often led to additional residual tasks that require human focus, such as picking up additional logistics tasks that a machine can’t do, which adds more time and pressure to a daily workflow.

Aiden Heke. Source: Supplied

Furthermore, there remains a risk that employees will perceive employers as asking them to use AI toolsets with the long-term view that doing so will reduce the business’ need for human employment. With that may come a chill effect: why adopt these toolsets if I’m only going to lose my job because of it?

This fear is not entirely unfounded. According to researchers from the University of Sydney Business School, most companies are likely to employ a ‘digital human’ (a combination of AI and an avatar that can interact with people in real-time, using realistic human speech and facial expressions) within a decade. Although they do state that they don’t believe these digital humans will replace humans anytime soon, will the employment of a digital human mean an actual human isn’t hired for this specific role?

And research isn’t hard to find when it comes to the idea that AI could replace roles; to wit, Goldman Sachs released a report this year that reveals that AI could replace the equivalent of 300 million full-time jobs.

To foster true AI-driven progress, these toolsets must be implemented equitably, where their benefits are shared fairly between the employer and the employee.

As staff embark on generative AI-fuelled innovation, organisations should offer incentives, recognition, and ample opportunities for growth. Many of these exist today and can be repurposed, including preferential development opportunities or variable working hours.

For instance, does AI provide the path to a sustainable four-day working week? I highlighted earlier the hypothetical reduction of 20% of an employee’s daily workload. Well, this could be the reward – having that 20% reduction in workload become a 20% reduction in time spent on the clock.

As the CEO of the CSIRO, Dr Larry Marshall, stated in the foreword of a research paper titled Artificial intelligence: Solving problems, growing the economy and improving our quality of life: “the success of our industries of the future will be determined by whether AI is simply used to cut costs, or whether we take full advantage of this powerful technology to grow new opportunities and create new value”.

That statement was made in 2019 and we’re now at the precipice of determining what we make of AI. Hopefully, organisations tip the scales towards finding efficiencies to create new value and also for the betterment of their people.

Aiden Heke is the CEO of Decision Inc. Australia.