{"id":5883,"date":"2024-08-09T16:15:01","date_gmt":"2024-08-09T16:15:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.horsesforsources.com\/?p=5883"},"modified":"2024-09-11T11:48:30","modified_gmt":"2024-09-11T11:48:30","slug":"genai-can-make-you-dumber_080924","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.horsesforsources.com\/genai-can-make-you-dumber_080924\/","title":{"rendered":"The great GenAI paradox: It can make you dumber"},"content":{"rendered":"
In the endless march toward cost savings and efficiency, enterprises have increasingly turned to generative AI (GenAI) to optimize every facet of their operations. In theory, this should lead to unprecedented productivity levels, freeing up time and resources for innovation and growth.<\/p>\n
However, the reality of GenAI integration into the workplace reveals a paradox: while the initial productivity gains are evident, they often come with hidden costs that can offset the benefits by creating new challenges. The highest cost that must be addressed is when people become over-reliant on GenAI to develop solutions and suffer a decline in their learning capabilities.<\/p>\n
Multiple research studies over the past couple of years clearly indicate that GenAI can automate many tasks, significantly boosting productivity in the short term; for example, 35% of leading executives across driving GenAI initiatives have already witnessed productivity and efficiency increases<\/a>.\u00a0However, reliance on these AI tools might inadvertently devalue or erode human creativity and heuristic skills as people become too comfortable relying on them, rather than developing their own solutions.<\/p>\n When individuals rely on AI to perform cognitive tasks such as data analysis, writing, or decision-making, they may sacrifice the opportunity to develop and hone these critical skills. For instance, a study from the University of Pennsylvania in a high school context found that GPT-4 improved short-term student performance in math (48% for GPT Base and 127% for GPT Tutor). However, reliance on it led to worse outcomes when access was removed, with a 17% performance drop compared to those who never had access. This dependency can erode the workforce’s intrinsic problem-solving abilities and creative thinking, which are vital for driving long-term innovation and competitive advantage.<\/p>\n On the flip side, one can argue that GenAI tools simply help us do things smarter, so we just become worse at the old way<\/em> of doing things. The results from this University of Pennsylvania study could indicate that GenAI only diminishes our cognitive skills somewhat if we don’t refocus our brains on using our freed-up time and creativity effectively.\u00a0 For example, there is evidence<\/a> that shows people become fitter using e-bikes than regular bikes, as they enjoy<\/em> the experience more and end up cycling for longer, ultimately burning more calories and becoming physically fitter.<\/span>\u00a0 Or in some cases people who never used to cycle now engage in the activity as it’s so much more enjoyable and efficient.<\/p>\n AI\u2019s ability to generate content and ideas could also discourage individuals from producing original work, leading to a loss of creative skills. In creative fields such as art, writing, and design, the overuse of AI-generated outputs can result in a decline in the unique human touch that characterizes these disciplines. As people become more dependent on AI for creative tasks, the skill sets required for these activities may diminish, stunting the richness and diversity of human creativity.<\/p>\n In a worst-case scenario, over-reliance could make enterprises vulnerable to disruptions or threats; if employees are accustomed to handling complex tasks, a failure or limitation in the AI system could leave them ill-equipped to manage these challenges independently. The initial productivity gains from AI could thus be offset by a decline in human capability, leading to a net negative impact on the organization\u2019s long-term innovation and adaptability.<\/p>\n An HFS study<\/a> found that more than half of the 550 executives sampled (52%) recognize an obsession with productivity as problematic. When asked about the potential risks of this hyper-focus on productivity, 44% indicated that the overemphasis leads to employee dissatisfaction, burnout, and declining morale:<\/p>\nGenAI will improve you if you use it to focus on smarter ways of achieving positive outcomes<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n
AI’s potential impact on creativity is profound<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n
Employee experience also takes a hit when organizations hyper-focus on productivity outcomes<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n