The Inevitable Generative AI Revolution

When talking about Generative AI, there are two types of organizations. The one that is accepting Generative AI and integrating in its own processes and daily operations and the one that is not. Both they will succeed at using the new technology. The difference? One will know it, the other will not.

This is the Generative AI dilemma. You are using Generative AI even if you are trying to avoid it. You are an organization, a company, a no profit; you are in the middle of a fundamental change (a paradigm shift) like it happened for computers and for the internet. You can not escape it, you must sit, shut up and listening to what progress is loudly shouting.

In reality, this abstract view is too simplistic. There is one more type of organization that needs to be quoted and sits in the middle of the No-AI organization and the Yes-AI organization. It’s the Maybe-AI organization.

As far as I know, and based on my experience at Microsoft, these organizations cover most of the organizations on the planet. Does this mean there is no trust in AI? No, that will be untrue to say and unrealistic. AI is actually revolutionizing our lives, and those who say otherwise simply haven’t realized it yet. Think about what’s happening with Microsoft Copilot (the AI chatbot developed by Microsoft) for organizations and with ChatGPT, Bard, Claude, Poe and other Generative AI apps in the consumer world. It would be senseless to not consider and value the whole popularity that these tools reached in the last 12/15 months. It would be foolish to think that they hadn’t an impact on our lives, on our way of working both if we are currently using them to perform some task or if we are not.

Technological progress represents a fundamental transformation in the way we live, work, and interact. The transformation is frequently propelled by major tech companies that make significant investments in research and development to expand the realm of possibilities. These companies, driven by a combination of market competition, profit motives, and a desire to innovate, often end up shaping the technological landscape. Their economic interests are not just in the immediate returns from new technologies, but also in the long-term reshaping of markets and consumer behavior.

Media, both specialized and general, shapes the perception and understanding of technological advancements by the public, both specific and general (what do you think about AI? What’s your opinion? ). The attention from international and national media helps in disseminating information about new technologies, their potential uses, and implications. This coverage can range from enthusiastic endorsements to critical examinations of the impacts of technology on society, economy, and ethics.

Paradigm shift driven by technological progress is multifaceted. It is fueled by the economic interests of big tech companies, shaped by media coverage, and has significant implications for productivity and societal progress. While it may not be universally welcomed, it is a reality that cannot be ignored in planning strategies for businesses and organizations. The rapid pace of technological change demands adaptation and consideration of both its benefits and challenges.

Speaking in very simple terms, I believe that a paradigm shift like this, which has strong economic interests from big tech, considerable attention from both international and national media, specialized and general alike, and with clear positive effects in terms of productivity and progress, it is practically impossible to ignore, avoid, or pretend it doesn’t exist. As I mentioned in an article last week, technological progress is simply that - progress. It might not be to everyone’s liking, but that doesn’t mean we can ignore it and continue living our lives or planning our organizations’ strategies as if it doesn’t exist. It simply does not work like that, unless you want to spend your life as a hermit, in which case it would make rational sense, and you would be completely justified.

Back to the organizations and considering the recent discussion on the impossibility of ignoring such technological changes, I feel compelled to directly relate my reasoning to each of the three distinct types of organizations.

The Yes-AI organization is the one that is accepting the paradigm shift no matter what. It’s progress, it’s technology, it wants it all. A take it all approach is somewhat interesting but somewhat risky. Such an attitude rarely belongs to big enterprises but to small and medium organizations or to organizations that still didn’t find a clear strategic path and are looking for some follow to ride the hype and develop a new product or service. Just to be clear, here I’m not referring to the use of AI to increase productivity (the M365 Copilot case by example) but to the efforts to integrate AI as a core part of the product/service the organization sells. Regarding to the productivity part, big organizations, enterprise like, could also be slower than other since they need first solve all their compliance doubts.

The Maybe-AI organization is typically the big enterprise that is open to new technologies and paradigm shift, but applies a cautious approach. Big enterprises mean valuable products that account for valuable revenues. What should be done for the sack of the company goal should be done and so riding the technological progress, but cautiously, understanding what should be done and what should be avoided. This is true both in terms of integration of technology in products that for productivity. The compliance aspect is also fundamental. If you do, it must comply.

There is an interesting piece from The Economist regarding this:

The No-AI organization is the one that does not want to be involved in the technological progress, in that case in the Generative AI revolution. Generative AI exists, but the organization does not want to integrate it in its processes or to increase the productivity of its employees, at least for now. It’s not interested to innovative proposals and the organization blocks all access to the Generative AI tools for employees. There are two problems here:

• Even if the company does not want to use Generative AI, its employees will use AI. They are humans, after all.

• Even if the company blocks all the Generative AI related websites, there always will be the new one website that will be not blocked. Even if all the Generative AI website would be blocked, employees will use AI for personal reasons, sometimes using personal (and Generative AI) tools to perform work tasks, exposing the organization to Generative AI.

Fact: you can not be a No-AI organization. If you try to close yourself to Generative AI, Generative AI will knock on your door. It’s a dilemma. You are opposing yourself, but in vain.

Today's rapidly evolving world does not allow us to dismiss or overlook the significant paradigm shift driven by big tech and amplified by media coverage, as summarized. This technological progress, while not universally embraced, is an undeniable force shaping our personal lives, organizational strategies, and societal norms. Choosing to ignore this reality is akin to voluntarily living in a bygone era, disconnected from the pulse of modern advancement. As we move forward, it is crucial to acknowledge, adapt to, and integrate these changes, recognizing their role in driving productivity and progress. Ultimately, embracing this shift is not just about staying relevant; it’s about actively taking part in shaping our future in an increasingly tech-driven world.