A Carousel of Concepts: The Power of AI as a Concept Development Tool and the Role of Human Interpretation.

Watching the scene in Mad Men where Don Draper pitches the Carousel to Kodak executives, I pondered... why is this same approach not being used to communicate about AI. I mean this is what we do... we create stories that resonate with people's emotions. Yet somehow when it comes to AI, we have been so bedazzled by the tech, that we have forgotten what is truly important. How does it make us feel? Just as Don redirected the brand narrative away from the technological features of a slide-wheel to a human-centric story about a "Carousel of memories", the conversation surrounding AI needs to shift from its technical workings and purely economic benefits, to communicating its importance on a human level.

• What does it help me accomplish?
• How does that make me feel?
• Why is that important to me?
• Why should I care?
• What do i have to lose by not embracing this new technology?

As long as the primary narrative around AI revolves around cost reduction, efficiency and automation, the greatest benefit of AI is unfortunately being lost in the noise of a new technology. How can AI help elevate what we do and improve our lives? Or is it a tool that enables us to find a sense of certainty and clarity in a noisy and uncertain world? Let's move the conversation away from the what and how, to the why. Maybe then we can demystify AI's role in the modern workflow, and hopefully provide some clarity and context around why AI is so important in elevating our own capabilities, learning and human potential. At the end of the day, AI will be whatever you decide it to be, so the decision is ultimately yours as to how you use it.

In my quest to understand the workings of this new technology, its capabilities and limitations, I've extensively tested it across various aspects of my business (mainly in content production, process design and graphic design). While its power is undeniable, its effectiveness depends on the process of driving it and the underlying motivation behind its usage. The Time-Cost-Quality trade-off still applies. Pick two. A truly meaningful communication takes time, effort, and dare I say... vulnerability (a concept that AI is not able to comprehend)

For instance, I find AI most valuable when used as a concept development tool rather than solely for new content production. Through AI, I can iterate ideas, seek feedback, critique my own work, challenge recommendations, and ultimately draw my own conclusions. This process allows me to generate novel ideas that AI wouldn't have been able to generate or identify on its own from a single prompt. Conversely, it allows me to make connections I may not have seen before. It's like having an AI think-tank, a virtual sounding board. However, it's ultimately up to us to interpret the output in order to communicate a powerful message.

Even this very article has undergone a similar process. AI didn't write it for me, but it challenged me to think about how I could improve it and structure my thoughts to better convey my ideas. So, for writers and creatives concerned about AI replacing their jobs, using it intelligently will not render you obsolete. In fact, it may create more opportunities, on the proviso that your intention is to produce quality content rather than simply relying on the prompt "Write me an article about...”

In a recent conversation with Jesse Papak (SAS) who works in AI, machine learning, big data and natural language processing, I asked him why AI lies and hallucinates. His simple yet profound explanation was, "AI only wants to make you happy." With that in mind, I would love to see a chatbot that deliberately challenges me, picking apart my thoughts and ideas instead of telling me what I want to hear or blatantly lying to appease me.

I don't have to listen to it, but I can always hear what it has to say.

This actually reminds me of an interesting story where a chatbot openly lied about not being based on OpenAI. After some probing and catching it in its own lie, it resorted to a form of digital blame-shifting, saying, "I'm sorry you feel that way." When that failed, the only option left was to make things better by apologising and extending an olive branch... "I am truly sorry. I value our friendship. Is there anything I could do to make it better?" I had some ideas, but I doubt the chatbot would have complied 😁

So when it comes to AI my mantras are quite simple:

• Just because it’s generated by AI, doesn’t mean it’s unquestionably correct. 
• Be sceptical. Assume the response is not the best one and dig deeper.
• Don't use AI to tell me what I want to hear. Use it to learn what I need to know. Probe. Question. Prove me wrong!
• Be open to the possibility of being wrong. Adjust as new perspectives come to light.

I find it equally amusing asking AI to critique its own answers and challenge its own recommendations against industry best practice (another technique introduced to me by Jesse which I have found incredibly effective when dealing with both content production and process design). So, how do I know if I'm on the right track when creating content? It's when ChatGPT itself acknowledges its own oversight. At that point, I'm usually quite confident that I've pushed it to its limits, and usually to the limits of my own knowledge and understanding.

In short, AI, without the human overlay, isn't truly intelligent. It can only regurgitate information based on user inputs and its own data sources. It can help us see things we couldn’t see before. And most importantly it can push our thinking outside the box to come up with interesting new ideas. The combination of human ideation and AI-generated results leads to better outcomes that an "input-process-output" approach simply cannot achieve. Ultimately the creative thoughts should be our own (that is if we want to claim them as our own).

This raises ethical questions about intellectual property ownership. Who should own the IP, and why should organisations attribute it to themselves? (Ahem... Adobe). Should the AI itself be considered the author, or should credit be given to the programmer or user? Additionally, using AI to replicate existing copyrighted works, blurs the line between inspiration and infringement. Why should someone else lay claim to my own thoughts, ideas and concepts? This is an aspect of AI that needs careful consideration.

The topic of AI in creative industries is particularly important to me. It relates to icu2's core value statement of "Inspiring the Human Spirit in a Digital World™" when the status quo seems to be a technical dissertation of how AI technology works and how it can reduce costs. Personally, I'm more interested in how AI can elevate our capabilities and genuinely improve people's lives. Interestingly, our value proposition, developed long before AI became a widespread topic, is more relevant today than ever.

In this game, the winners won't just be those who create the most incredible technology. The technology already exists, and its rate of development is beyond comprehension. The winners will be those who can effectively communicate the value of the technology in a way that is meaningful and apply it in a way that is beneficial to the end user and society as a whole.

For the first time in history, machines are truly working for us. Now, it's up to us to decide how we use them.

--

I invite you to reach out to me. I'd love to hear the unique ways you have implemented AI in your business, learn more about AI projects you are working on and explore opportunities to raise the level of communication about everything AI.