Tagged with: #future-of-work

Workers with genuine AI capabilities command premiums of 28-56%; those targeting AI-exposed roles without substantive skill development face a 29% earnings penalty. The same roles, opposite outcomes, and the difference lies in the quality of capability investment, not access to tools. This article examines why this bifurcation extends to the Boardroom itself, where the IoD now positions AI competence as a core NED responsibility. For Boards, the strategic question becomes: is your workforce developing verification and judgement, or just collecting certifications — and can you tell the difference?

AI’s primary value isn’t replacing people, it’s releasing the intellectual capital trapped in undifferentiated work. Yet in many Boardrooms, workforce reduction remains the default success metric for AI initiatives. This article makes the case for the redeployment dividend: redirecting freed human capacity toward outcome-impacting work, complex judgement, and innovation that AI cannot replicate. For Boards, the strategic question shifts from “how many roles disappear?” to “what valuable work aren’t we doing because our best people are buried in tasks they don’t need to do?”

World models mark AI’s shift toward true predictive power, allowing systems to simulate future scenarios and help businesses move from reacting to events to anticipating them. Drawing on emerging research, including Yann LeCun’s work on simulation-based intelligence, this article highlights the practical gains industries like aviation and finance are seeing in operational efficiency through these future-looking tools. For Boards, world models present a tantalising future: the opportunity to turn future insight into present advantage.

Agentic AI has become this year’s poster child, dethroning generative AI as the technology everyone wants to discuss. Yet fundamental misunderstandings about what agentic systems actually do create barriers to successful adoption. This article demystifies the hype by revealing the core truth: agentic AI is generative AI in a loop, where the machine drives iteration instead of a human, making the strategic question not about technology sophistication but where to consciously transfer decision-making agency from people to systems, and at what scale.

As I discussed in my article on building and managing AI-capable teams, organisations face a critical challenge in acquiring the right talent for AI transformation. This reminds me of the early days of cloud adoption, when I advised enterprises on their migration strategies. Back then, I witnessed the same scramble for scarce talent, which led me to advocate strongly for upskilling existing teams rather than relying solely on external hiring.

In the wake of the meteoric rise of generative AI, it’s easy to get swept up in the hype and believe that this single branch of artificial intelligence (AI) is the whole story. Platforms like ChatGPT have undeniably captured the public imagination, marking the first mass consumerisation of AI technology. However, focusing solely on generative AI risks overshadowing the diverse and equally transformative types of AI that have been quietly but powerfully driving business innovation.

As artificial intelligence (AI) advances into the workplace rapidly, one of the most pressing questions on everyone’s mind is, “If machines can do our jobs faster, more accurately, and at a lower cost, what happens to us?” It’s true that AI is beginning to redefine the very essence of work, raising concerns about the potential displacement of knowledge workers. However, I’d like to propose an alternative perspective—one where those same workers earn the same or more whilst working far fewer hours.