{"id":64039,"date":"2025-06-22T23:12:08","date_gmt":"2025-06-23T04:12:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/trainingmag.com\/?p=64039"},"modified":"2025-06-22T23:12:15","modified_gmt":"2025-06-23T04:12:15","slug":"ai-is-a-great-tool-but-it-wont-replace-humans","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/trainingmag.com\/ai-is-a-great-tool-but-it-wont-replace-humans\/","title":{"rendered":"AI Is a Great Tool\u2014But It Won\u2019t Replace Humans"},"content":{"rendered":"

Much is being written about artificial intelligence (AI)\u2014including the fears, challenges, threats, opportunities, advantages, and disadvantages. In a Harvard Business Review <\/em>article<\/a>, Karim Lakhani describes how critical it is for leaders to develop a learning mindset. He compares how the Internet has evolved to what we should expect from AI. This is what Lakhani says to managers, leaders, and workers: \u201cAI is not going to replace humans, but humans with AI are going to replace humans without AI \u2026\u201d He advises that everyone, not just tech workers, should seize the opportunity to experiment with AI, since that\u2019s the future of workspaces.<\/p>\n

In a recent online issue<\/a> of Training <\/em>magazine, I argued for a leadership skill that\u2019s unlikely to be replaced by AI: how to make space for grief and to give people their grace during these uncertain times. Most leaders are not prepared or skilled to support grieving people, though grief is everywhere. The \u201cGreat Recession\u201d of 2008 caused the loss of millions of jobs, shuttered hundreds of businesses and companies, and nearly collapsed the banking system. More recently, COVID-19 was devastating to workplaces. Before the pandemic, often neglected in the recitation of economic facts and data was the human cost associated with economically tough times.<\/p>\n

Talking about loss in the workplace is still not the norm even though many aspects of life involve a loss or can trigger a sense of loss. Gary Greenberg in a New York Times <\/em>opinion piece<\/a> describes how \u201cdeath is not the only occasion for grief. We can mourn the loss of anything to which we have become attached: a pet, a job, a home, a way of life.\u201d Grief can manifest in many ways (sadness, irritability, impulsivity, etc.) and all affect workplace productivity, growth, and satisfaction. Greenberg notes grief seems to have become a permanent aspect of daily life, with war, climate change, politics, and other calamities keeping people in a constant state of unease.<\/p>\n

Grief in the Workplace<\/h2>\n

But we still have to go to work. Organizations typically have policies allowing employees a few days to deal with the death of loved ones, according to a sliding scale of love: so many days for a spouse, a child, a parent, a friend. Bereavement policies are more like funeral leave depending on how long it takes to attend and return. Organizations like to quantify bereavement\u2014though grief is impossible to quantify because there is no exact timeline. Policies usually don\u2019t cover other kinds of losses such as pets. But quantifying grief doesn\u2019t make it better and can make it feel worse because grief doesn\u2019t have a timeline or finish life. Organizations focus on productivity and efficiency, and grief is problematic because it disrupts this focus. A journal article<\/a> by Diane Bergeron concludes, \u201cMore than any other setting, the workplace exercises significant pressure on grieving individuals to be silent about and hide their grief.\u201d<\/p>\n

Since few leaders understand or have training to equip them to deal with loss and grief or other life events that manifest grief responses\u2014serious illness; divorce; or the death of a spouse, partner, friend, or even pet\u2014it is essential to learn how to transform grief into compassion and empathy. Interestingly, loss is even associated with many positive life events that are celebratory such as promotions and weddings. These positive events often are accompanied by a grieving process for the way life used to be and how relationships change. Future leaders need to learn in college how to be fully present for the bereaved without feeling as though they need to provide answers or advice.<\/p>\n

Being Human Is Job Security<\/h2>\n

David Brooks wrote in an article<\/a> in the New York Times <\/em>titled, \u201cIn the Age of A.I., Major in Being Human.\u201d Writes Brooks, \u201cI am reminded of what I have that A.I. doesn\u2019t: humanity. Our emotional and creative capabilities, the unique humaneness that we possess, distinguish us from A.I.\u201d He continued to explain how A.I. probably will give us tools to help us outsource much of our current mental work. \u201cBut A.I. will force us humans to double down on those talents and skills that only humans possess. The most important thing about A.I. may be that it shows us what it can\u2019t do and so reveals who we are and what we have to offer.\u201d<\/p>\n

Daniel Goleman, one of the leading authorities on Emotional Intelligence (EI or EQ), shared his observations in a recent article<\/a> that reinforces the conclusions by Brooks. While increasingly more jobs will be replaced by AI, Goleman believes \u201cthe good news for us is we are quite likely to remain better than AI at human skills such as emotional intelligence\u2014and that advantage is likely to stay\u2026What AI is not so good at can be called \u2018heart skills\u2019, or more technically, \u2018durable human skills\u2019\u2014basically human abilities largely in the emotional intelligence domain.\u201d<\/p>\n

Sahil Bloom, author of the book, \u201cThe Five Types of Wealth<\/a>,\u201d makes a similar point. <\/em>In a newsletter, Bloom talked about how the emphasis is on what will change in the future. He said that is the wrong question. He said to ask, \u201cWhat is not<\/em> going to change?\u201d He compiled his list of what he calls \u201ctimeless human truths that will not change in the future.\u201d<\/p>\n

According to Bloom, these truths will not be replaced by AI:<\/p>\n