Going back in time a few decades, we will remember how people
would justify an error made on the computer. One could blame the computer for
some things but the truth be known, the computer makes no real decisions and
only carries out what has been inputted by the operator or programming default.
The fact is whoever said such a thing today is a “moron” as artificial
intelligence has caught up with the emotional intelligence of today and linked
some means to the decision making at the top.
However, this artificial intelligence has limitations and
this needs to be addressed by the human element in the business world. Admittedly,
things have changed in the computer world. Machines are learning and learning quickly
how to analyze and come up with some reasonable decisions for the executives to
consider when solving major or even smaller problems. Mind you, it does not
give the absolute answer.
Knowledge has taken another leap in technology and the
industry is hopping on board with its new capabilities. What has changed in the
analytical world that is so impressive where machines can now offer you a
solution to a problem? Solutions that still need to be understood by human in
order for them to make sense and applicable to the situation at hand.
First, let us make one thing clear. The advance of machine’s
capabilities to create good results is only as good as the effort made by
executives to allow such a process to take place and enable this to happen. With
a rapid generational shift within the workplace happening as we speak there is
new life and ideas abound. Because of this dynamic, there is a prioritized
process we must follow.
We must allow senior leaders to maintain the human touch but
with careful integrated steps to allow the machine to function but to be there
for any ambiguity that may occur during such problem solving techniques. Letting
go is not easy. It breaks traditions, customs and practices that have stood for
years. Letting go of some of this control to machines is the first step but it
is important to retain this control as it is the most important part of this
decision-making process.
In other words they should tolerate ambiguity created by the
machines limited ability to solve a problem and then allow questions to be asked
of the results with the human mind at the helm and control. The tolerating of ambiguity
challenges new ideas, different strategies and often rebuilds the capacity to
renew itself in organizational structure and management or operational
effectiveness.
Needless to say this is counter clockwise of over a century
of organizational management development techniques and needs to be balanced. The
bottom line is the role of the senior leader will evolve as the process takes
place. Senior executives must find and set the software parameters needed to
determine, for instance, which data gets prioritized and which gets flagged for
escalation.
In other words this “machine”
needs filters. This is where the human
touch is necessary to stay within organizational limits and with these “filters”
the machines have a better way to analyze desired results or outcomes.
In a world where artificial intelligence supports all manner
of day-to-day management decisions, the need to “let go” will be more
significant and may lead to some discomfort for senior leaders. “Uncomfortable
as this new world may be, the costs of the status quo are large and growing. “Information
hoarders will slow the pace of their organizations and forsake the power of
artificial intelligence while competitors exploit it.”
If senior leaders successfully energizes the insights of these
machines and decentralize decision-making authority up and down the line, what
will be left for top management to do is most important in this development
stage and change.
This is where the human touch becomes important and start
asking the right kind of questions from the organizational think tank or people
working there. Accepting and penetrating this world of analytical complexity is
difficult. What’s required, for executives, is the ability to remain in a state
of unknowing while constantly filtering and evaluating the available
information and its sources, tolerating tension and ambiguity, and delaying
decisive action until clarity emerges.
Humans have and will continue to have a strong comparative
advantage when it comes to inspiring the troops, empathizing with customers,
developing talent, and the like. No computer will ever manage by walking around.
Sometimes, machines will provide invaluable input or insight but translating
this insight into messages that resonate with organizations will require a
human touch.
Reference:
http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/leading_in_the_21st_century/manager_and_machine?cid=mckq50-eml-alt-mkq-mck-oth-1409
No comments:
Post a Comment