{"id":378,"date":"2021-06-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2021-06-16T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tac.debuzzify.com\/?p=378"},"modified":"2023-06-27T23:52:51","modified_gmt":"2023-06-27T23:52:51","slug":"ai-might-destroy-c-level-jobs-before-front-liners","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.the-analytics.club\/ai-might-destroy-c-level-jobs-before-front-liners\/","title":{"rendered":"AI Might Destroy C-Level Jobs Before Front-Liners."},"content":{"rendered":"\n

AI has no obligation to obey the corporate hierarchy.<\/i><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I asked my friend, who is aspiring to be a pilot, \u201cDon\u2019t you think AI will soon replace pilots?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He shot back with another question. He asked, \u201cWould you talk to a recording if your flight is caught in a storm?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My answer was a clear NO. I want to speak to some human I can trust \u2014 somebody who takes responsibility. Not to a machine that is good at generalizing things. Well, isn\u2019t that what we call Machine Learning?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

You’d be surprised to know what jobs will be lost to AI. I did after thinking about it a little deeper. <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n

Regardless of all the advancements in AI, some professions need an emotional connection. I don\u2019t think AI could replace these roles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At least not for a few more decades.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are so attached to the corporate hierarchy. Thus we naturally think that\u2019s the order in which AI will destroy jobs. Of course, the power to influence others rises along with the ranks. So, we believe people on the top will hold while others can\u2019t.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In reality, some high-ranked job roles<\/a> are relatively straightforward to replace. Whereas some frontline works are meant to stay. To know them better, we need to understand other dimensions of the problem.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some professions need an emotional connection with their clients.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Our current technology is capable of taking care of sick people. Robots are already taking care of covid patients in Singapore.<\/a> That\u2019s a remarkable success in handling transmittable deceased.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cIsolation and the potential loss of loving connection is coded by the human brain into a primal panic response.\u201d
\u2014 Sue Johnson, Hold Me Tight<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

But in all other cases, how helpful a robot nurse is compared to a real nurse? If reading temperatures and dispensing medicine are the only things a nurse does, a robot is incredible. But empathy<\/b> is a rich skill that we\u2019ve developed through thousands of years of evolution. There is nothing better than receiving love from another human being.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trust<\/b> is a critical element of some jobs. Take the case of my pilot friend. At around 30,000 feet above the ground, If I knew there was no one responsible for my life, I wouldn\u2019t be happy. I hope no one ever wishes to contribute to the death count in the newspaper.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yes, machines are good at predicting and controlling, which is impossible for a human brain. What\u2019s more important than accuracy is who takes responsibility for the prediction errors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In many other cases, attractiveness<\/b> drives the emotional connection. Imagine a restaurant where robots serve the food, like China\u2019s Robot Restaurant Complex<\/a>. This fact is enough to make headlines and draw attention. However, could it replace humble, helpful, and attractive waiters and waitresses?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Robot cheerleaders won\u2019t cheer up the players.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What we get wrong about the front-line workers<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

We think the front line will disappear soon because of their lack of influence<\/b>. Although it\u2019s true at an individual level, front-line workers have unions. They will resist technological replacement for their jobs. At least they prolong their existence in the industry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Front-line workers aren\u2019t necessarily dealing with tasks that don\u2019t require high intellectual skills<\/b>. In many industries, front-line workers are a critical resource. It is especially true for knowledge-based companies such as consulting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In any organization, the replacement cost<\/b> for such workers is sky-high. Because of their ability to handle unforeseeable events training another person to the same level is uneconomic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These facts may not be convincing to our claim. But clearly, their impact will delay the transformation from human hands to machines. Unfortunately, some roles, regardless of their ranks, don’t fit the bill.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Roles with repetitive tasks, systematic decision-making roles, and even some creative ones will vanish.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

This might not surprise you. Almost all the repetitive tasks that don\u2019t need an emotional connection will go.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Think about clerks in small offices. They don\u2019t have unions to protect them, their work is not very intellectual, and their replacement isn\u2019t expensive. Cashiers and drivers will all fall into this bucket that is waiting to be dumped by AI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Professions that make decisions based on preset calculations won\u2019t stand a chance, either. Accounting software has already killed loads of accountant jobs. This may extend to include CFOs as well. Except when they are needed for creative financing decisions. But that may become the responsibility of the CEO then.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Surprisingly, even some creative roles will go extinct. When I was a child, there were only two photographers in my town. Today, every one of us takes pictures that are a thousand times better than the two photographers. AI has already started to write poems, compose music and even enter painting competitions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Creativity is no excuse for AI job killers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The C-suite is not safe heaven.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Interestingly, some C-level executives fit perfectly these criteria. In addition to making analytical decisions, AI could also solve problems such as conflicts of interest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I\u2019m sure AI would make better financial decisions than most CFOs and better operations decisions than COOs. Because such decisions are based on calculated risks, computers are better alternatives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Human intervention is only needed for reviewing before execution. Of course, trust is an essential element of why every company\u2019s board of directors. Like in the case of my pilot friend, this can not be replaced by machines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s not about making accurate business decisions but who takes responsibility for the incorrect ones.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For this matter, two scenarios are more likely to happen:<\/p>\n\n\n\n