By Alan Hewitt
Like just about everyone else these days, I recently wrote a blog piece about AI and its potential impact, both good and bad, on how we work and live our lives. You can find it here.
Writing that blog piece made me think about our ability as humans to embrace change and, hence, how companies and other organisations should face up to the challenge of almost constant evolution in the way they operate enabled and or driven by AI.
The following quotes (plus a metaphor) lead us in nicely to a consideration of the need for change and suggest why we might find it so difficult to do so:
“Everything must change for everything to remain the same”
― A quote by Tancredi, Prince Fabrizio Salina’s beloved nephew in the novel “The Leopard”, written by Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa
“Change happens when the pain of staying the same is greater than the pain of change.”
― Tony Robbins
And the metaphor of the boiling frog
The boiling frog phenomenon was first presented by the writer and philosopher Olivier Clark who used this story to demonstrate that a human being put in certain conditions, even if he is uncomfortable, will slowly get used to them and stay stuck, not being able to get out.
If a frog is placed in a pot of boiling water, it tries to jump out to save itself immediately. However, if we put the frog in water at ambient temperature and start heating the water slowly, the frog will start adjusting its body temperature to its new environment instead of jumping out. By the time the frog realizes how hot the water is, it’s too late.
How does this metaphor translate to our everyday lives?
The essence of the boiling frog syndrome is that when our living conditions deteriorate gradually, we adapt to the conditions instead of trying to rid ourselves of them, until we are no longer strong enough to escape.
This learned helplessness may occur in our relationships, general interactions or work-related situations.
We tend to hold onto the way things are now unless there is a compelling and obvious reason to change. As Tony Robins says, “Change happens when the pain of staying the same is greater than the pain of change.” On change projects that I’ve worked on in the past we referred to the need for a “Burning Platform”; the Burning Platform being the compelling reason that makes change the only option.
In the AI blog piece I wrote that AI in some form has been around for over 75 years and has become integrated into the way we work and live our lives today.
The changes to date have been quite subtle and were introduced over a long period of time. Hence we didn’t see any single major change but rather a series of quite subtle changes that were not threatening but were perceived as incremental improvements, if noticed at all. Maybe this gives us a clue as to how we should be looking at introducing AI technologies into the ways we work now and will work in the future.
Returning to Lampedusa’s quote, “Everything must change for everything to remain the same”, what always remained the same was about the outcome. Hence Lampedusa saw any proposed change that facilitated the desired outcome as a necessary evil or even a positive.
We have all seen lots of examples where people hang onto familiar ways of doing things because, well, that is how things have always been done. Here’s one example.
A few years ago I had some quite severe back problems and my physio suggested that I pay to go have an MRI scan on my lower back. He suggested this because, at the time, it could have taken months (or longer) to get a scan on the NHS and I was in the fortunate position of being able to pay. I went and had my scan at a private facility in London which my physio had described as being the Ryanair of scanning.
I asked him what he meant by that? Did he mean a cheap and basic service? He said no, they had the latest technology and had built business processes that enabled their two MRI scanners to keep running for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (By the way I discovered later that my private scan cost less than the scan that I had subsequently within the NHS).
I booked a scan for 48 hours later, had the scan and was given my scan results on a disc as I left. Within 24 hours I had a consultant’s report on my scan which identified the problem. I then went on to have surgery on my back which trimmed a ruptured disc. Unfortunately I still had some pain post-surgery. I then went for another scan in the hospital where I had the surgery and found a very different situation. The technicians had to turn on the lights in the scanning room and then start up the machine for me to start my scan (which took 15 minutes). I didn’t leave with a copy of my scan and the consultant’s report arrived just over a week later.
Now, why have I told you this story? Well, here we have a commercial model that seems to work very well, is clearly scalable, makes excellent use of the resources to hand but doesn’t seem, from my experience, to be replicated or even under consideration in the UK NHS.
Why is that? Is it a lack of funds to buy the latest equipment? Is it because working practices and contracts would need to change? The NHS is a massive organisation and I know from my time at IBM that making change rapidly in large organisations is difficult BUT in my layman’s opinion a change of this type would be of immense value to the NHS. The NHS doctors clearly know about the commercial model but it doesn’t seem to have been copied. Why is that? Is it an example of more reluctance to change?
Maybe we are now reaching a point of change in the NHS as the service comes under ever increasing pressure, but similarly all companies suffer this dilemma to a lesser or greater extent. The scenario that I have just set out is but one example of where a potentially good new way of working doesn’t appear to be adopted more widely. I am sure that we can all quote similar examples in many organizations, large and small.
AI will, increasingly, provide new opportunities to perform tasks and processes in better, more efficient ways. The challenge for companies and boards is to identify those opportunities and then have the courage and drive to implement them. Let me be clear, this shouldn’t be done in a reckless way and AI should not and must not be introduced in places where it will not add value. What is key is that all concerned are aware of what is possible and look, critically, at its value before taking the next step.
Like the poor frog, boards sometimes wait until the need for change is so painfully obvious that it may be too late to make a change. As with the gradual introduction and acceptance of AI technologies in our day-to-day lives, shouldn’t boards be proactive and look at ways to keep their companies evolving at a pace that is sustainable and acceptable to the work force.
I suggested in the previous piece that looking at ways AI could enhance rather than replace existing employees and working practices may be a good way to gradually introduce new technologies, making the immediate change more comfortable whilst also preparing the ground for the next step when AI can and should take on a larger role in performing various tasks.
I don’t want this to sound like a stealthy way of introducing AI but rather as a step-by-step way of gaining acceptance for change that will be acceptable to everyone invested in the status quo while at the same time preparing to change the status quo.
BUT this won’t happen by accident. Boards and senior executive teams need to be aware of and have an opinion on:
- The art of the possible, as it relates to AI and their company and industry
- The art of the feasible, as it relates to AI within their company
- What is desirable when looking at AI within their organisation
What do I mean by those three steps?
- The art of the possible, as it relates to AI and their company/industry
Understand what is currently available that is or could be of value within their organisation and how their industry is using AI and what is planned. - The art of the feasible, as it relates to AI within their company
Having an understanding of what is possible is one step but how feasible would it be to implement that in your company? Would it be of real business value but too disruptive to implement? Would it be of benefit but not meet current regulatory requirements? - What is desirable when looking at AI within their organisation
Finally, with a positive response from both of the above questions is it a desirable thing for your company to do? Is it in line with the group’s values and principles?
Boards and senior leadership teams must stay on top of at least Point 1 above, but in reality considering all three points on a regular and focused basis must become part of the way that leadership operates. It isn’t an option to ignore AI. Your competitors certainly won’t. Don’t miss out on the opportunities that AI will bring through ignorance of what is possible and feasible BUT also don’t rush into adopting new AI technologies just because AI is the next shiny new thing.
This isn’t easy. Looking for change will require new skills and whatever you end up doing almost certainly won’t be the way you operate today BUT adopting this relatively minor mindset change now will make you better informed and better prepared for more serious changes in the future.
And the changes are coming, ready or not.
If you would like to learn more about Boardlogic click here
Or schedule a demo with us here
Alan Hewitt