logo
Why Human Skills Beat Qualifications In The Age Of AI

Why Human Skills Beat Qualifications In The Age Of AI

Forbes2 days ago

Artificial intelligence has the potential to revolutionize how we work, making mundane tasks more efficient and slashing the cost of many back-office jobs. But there's a dark side associated with this efficiency and progress - the loss of those people skills that set one individual apart from another, those human qualities that engage others with your business and how you do things. These are often the essence of your business brand and the 'glue' that gets employees and customers to stick.
A woman addressing staff in a private meeting
Think about the pre-Internet days when we might use a paper map to navigate a car journey. After a few trips, the human brain would begin to understand where the roads were and build a mental picture of the route. With generative AI tools such as ChatGPT and Gemini, that work is done for us so we lose the muscle memory of building up that picture. It's the same in the workplace - when employees are producing the same output for a task because they're all using the same tool, there is no differentiation and no reason to see your business as unique.
This is why it's an important shift that more and more companies are looking at skills over traditional qualifications. According to a global survey by hiring platform Indeed, 67% of jobseekers and 51% of hiring managers believe that skills and on-the-job experience carry more weight than someone's qualifications or job titles. Skills-based hiring prioritizes these personal qualities such as communication and engagement skills over whether someone attended a certain university, for example, or they might favour someone who had acquired transferable experience volunteering while their peers were at university.
Of course there will be industries where an academic qualification is essential, but our knowledge-based economy will need people who can set themselves apart with human qualities. The World Economic Forum's 2025 Future of Work report spells this out - alongside digital skills and data literacy, creative thinking, resilience, flexibility and agility are rising in importance. From a recruitment perspective, this means not setting up processes that rule people out based on non-essential criteria. In practice, this could mean removing the requirement for a degree or reducing the number of years' experience needed (and in some countries, it's unlawful to ask for these anyway). Look for ways that candidates can demonstrate qualities such as resilience and adaptability through the questions you ask or assessments you set.
Why is this important? While AI can reduce the cost of doing business, this should not be the ultimate goal. Take customer support - a role that is increasingly being taken over by chatbots or other AI tools. Although these bots can handle basic questions and troubleshooting, customers with more complex issues will always value the more nuanced input and critical thinking of a human employee. Or if your business is in the creative industry and responsible for producing written communications, the team that can create something innovative and different from others is the one that will stand out in selection over one that has asked a generative AI tool to write its pitch. From a brand perspective, focusing on skills-based hiring and human qualities over algorithms could be more valuable in the long term.
Of course, qualifications offer a measurement or benchmark by which we can compare people. But there are other approaches we can use in the recruitment process that can gauge if people have achieved in different ways. Perhaps they have excelled in a sport and are effective within a team, for example, or their previous experience and career trajectory in their career shows them to be a successful client advocate, even when they don't have the same level of qualification as another candidate. As with AI, we cannot rely on qualifications alone to secure the right path forward for the business - it's about the whole person, the whole 'problem' we're trying to solve for customers, and the multiple qualities that make an effective team that will deliver on targets.
Ultimately, leaders need to build a business that is adaptable and resilient in a fast-changing market. Although AI tools can support employees to get up to speed quickly with some aspects of their role (it can generate drafts for those who struggle with blank page, or help people to communicate in other languages for example), they cannot replace someone who can create an engaging first impression, alternative way to solve a problem, or put themselves in someone else's shoes. As markets change, quick-thinking and empathetic humans can adapt quickly, contributing to sustainable business growth in the long term.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Big Tech's AI Endgame Is Coming Into Focus
Big Tech's AI Endgame Is Coming Into Focus

Yahoo

time30 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Big Tech's AI Endgame Is Coming Into Focus

If Google has its way, there will be no search bars, no search terms, no searching (at least not by humans). The very tool that has defined the company—and perhaps the entire internet—for nearly three decades could soon be overtaken by a chatbot. Last month, at its annual software conference, Google launched 'AI Mode,' the most drastic overhaul to its search engine in the company's history. The feature is different from the AI summaries that already show up in Google's search results, which appear above the usual list of links to outside websites. Instead, AI Mode functionally replaces Google Search with something akin to ChatGPT. You ask a question and the AI spits out an answer. Instead of sifting through a list of blue links, you can just ask a follow-up. Google has begun rolling out AI Mode to users in the United States as a tab below the search bar (before 'Images,' 'Shopping,' and the like). The company said it will soon introduce a number of more advanced, experimental capabilities to AI Mode, at which point the feature could be able to write a research report in minutes, 'see' through your smartphone's camera to assist with physical tasks such as a DIY crafts project, help book restaurant reservations, make payments. Whether AI Mode can become as advanced and as seamless as Google promises remains far from certain, but the firm appears to be aiming for something like an everything app: a single tool that will be able to do just about everything a person could possibly want to do online. Seemingly every major tech company is after the same goal. OpenAI markets ChatGPT, for instance, as able to write code and summarize documents, help shop, produce graphics, and naturally, search the web. Elon Musk is notoriously obsessed with the idea of turning X into an everything app. Meta says you can use its AI 'for everything you need'; Amazon calls its new, generative AI–powered Alexa+ 'an assistant available to help any time you want'; Microsoft bills its AI Copilot as a companion 'for all you do'; and Apple has marketed Apple Intelligence and a revamped Siri as tools that will revolutionize how people use their iPhones (which encompass, for many users, everything). Even Airbnb, once focused simply on vacation rentals, is redesigning itself as a place where 'you can sell and do almost anything,' as its CEO, Brian Chesky, recently said. In a sense, everything apps are the logical conclusion of Silicon Valley's race to build artificial 'general' intelligence, or AGI. A bot smart enough to do anything obviously would be used to power a product that can, in effect, do anything. But such apps would also represent the culmination of the tech industry's aim to entrench its products in people's daily lives. Already, Google has features for shopping, navigation, data storage, work software, payment, travel—plus an array of smartphones, tablets, smart-home gadgets, and more. Apple has a similarly all-encompassing suite of offerings, and Meta's three major apps (Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp) each have billions of users. Perhaps the only thing more powerful than these sprawling tech ecosystems is boiling them all down to a single product. That these tech companies can even realistically have such colossal ambitions to build everything apps is a result of their existing dominance. The industry has spent years collecting information about our relationships, work, hobbies, and interests—all of which is becoming grist for powerful AI tools. A key feature of these everything apps is that they promise to be individually tailored, drawing on extensive personal data to provide, in theory, a more seamless experience. Your past search history, and eventually your emails, can inform AI Mode's responses: When I typed line up into AI Mode, I got the 'line up' for the day's New York Mets game (the Mets are my favorite baseball team). When I typed the same phrase into traditional Google Search, I got a definition. In other words, the rise of AI-powered everything apps is a version of the bargain that tech companies have proposed in the past with social media and other tools: our services for your data. Meta's AI assistant can draw on information from users' Facebook and Instagram accounts. Apple describes its AI as a 'personal intelligence' able to glean from texts, emails, and notes on your device. And ChatGPT has a new 'memory' feature that allows the chatbot to reference all previous conversations. If the technology goes as planned, it leads to a future in which Google, or any other Big Tech company, knows you are moving from Texas to Chicago and, of its own accord, offers to order the winter jacket you don't own to be delivered to your new apartment, already selected from your favorite brand, in your favorite color. Or it could, after reading emails musing about an Italian vacation, suggest an in-budget itinerary for Venice that best fits your preferences. There are, of course, plenty of reasons to think that AI models will not be capable and reliable enough to power a true everything app. The Mets lineup that Google automatically generated for me wasn't entirely accurate. Chatbots still invent information and mess up basic math; concerns over AI's environmental harms and alleged infringement of intellectual-property rights could substantially slow the technology's development. Only a year ago, Google released AI Overviews, a search feature that told users to eat rocks and use glue to stick cheese to pizza. On the same day that Google released AI Mode, it also introduced an experimental AI shopping tool that can be easily used to make erotic images of teenagers, as I reported with my colleague Lila Shroff. (When we shared our reporting with the company, Google emphasized the protections it has in place and told us it would 'continue to improve the experience.') Maybe AI Mode will order something two sizes too large and ship to the wrong address, or maybe it'll serve you recommendations for Venice Beach. [Read: Google's new AI puts breasts on minors—and J.D. Vance] Despite these embarrassments, Google and its major AI competitors show no signs of slowing down. The promised convenience of everything apps is, after all, alluring: The more products of any one company you use, and the better integrated those products are, the more personalized and universal its everything app can be. Google even has a second contender in the race—its Gemini model, which, at the same conference, the company said will become a 'universal AI assistant.' Whether through Search or Gemini the company seems eager to integrate as many of its products and as much of its user data as possible. On the surface, AI and the everything app seem set to dramatically change how people interact with technology—consolidating and streamlining search, social media, officeware, and more into a chatbot. But a bunch of everything apps vying for customers feels less like a race for innovation and more like empires warring over territory. Tech companies are running the same data-hungry playbook with their everything apps as they did in the markets that made them so dominant in the first place. Even OpenAI, which has evolved from a little-known nonprofit to a Silicon Valley behemoth, appears so eager to accumulate user data that it reportedly plans to launch a social-media network. The technology of the future looks awfully reliant on that of the past. Article originally published at The Atlantic

2024 Lexus GX 550 Road Trip Review: 1,000 Miles of Comfort and Annoying Driver Tech
2024 Lexus GX 550 Road Trip Review: 1,000 Miles of Comfort and Annoying Driver Tech

Edmunds

time31 minutes ago

  • Edmunds

2024 Lexus GX 550 Road Trip Review: 1,000 Miles of Comfort and Annoying Driver Tech

The rest of it Fuel economy was disappointing considering the amount of time spent on the highway. On this trip, we achieved the best average to date: 19.7 mpg. Remember, the GX is rated at 17 mpg combined (15 city/21 highway). The turning radius was amazing. I could flip a U-turn on most residential streets in my area. This must help a lot with maneuvering off-road, but I kept on pavement this time. That said, our team will be sure to bring the Overtail off-road over the course of our yearlong test. The pop-out cargo area window was a feature I didn't realize I needed until I had it. Three one-gallon jugs of water got pinned against the cargo hatch door when I wasn't looking. Had I not opened the window first for a peek, it could've been trouble when I opened the hatch door. I should add that at 6 feet tall, the window is a perfect height for me. I could see it being less useful for shorter humans. Finally, two oddities. First, I was in a drive-thru and the front proximity sensor chimed an alert, then stopped, then repeated five or six times. The distance shouldn't have triggered the sensor to begin with, and considering that the car was stationary during the freakout left me scratching my head. Second, there was a water drainage quirk. The GX roof drainage rail lines up in such a way that, when I opened the rear door and reached inside, a stream of cold morning dew dripped down the back of my neck. When I wasn't blocking its path, the water flowed right onto the carpet. That shouldn't happen.

New Mexico appeals court rejects lawsuit against oil and gas regulators
New Mexico appeals court rejects lawsuit against oil and gas regulators

Associated Press

time32 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

New Mexico appeals court rejects lawsuit against oil and gas regulators

SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — A New Mexico appeals court rejected a lawsuit alleging that the nation's No. 2 oil-producing state failed to meet constitutional provisions for protecting against oil and gas industry pollution, in an opinion Tuesday. Environmental advocates vowed to appeal the matter to the state's top court. A panel of three judges on the New Mexico Court of Appeals found that it was beyond the judiciary's authority to weigh whether the pollution controls are adequate, writing that they'll defer to the Legislature to balance the benefits of environmental regulation with natural resources development. The 2023 lawsuit from a coalition of environmental groups was the first to invoke the constitution's pollution-control clause, a 1971 amendment requiring that New Mexico prevent the contamination of air, water and other natural resources. 'While plaintiffs correctly observe that, as the 'Land of Enchantment,' the state's beauty is central to our identity, we cannot ignore the long history of permitting oil and gas extraction within our borders,' the panel wrote, invoking the state motto. 'If anything, the law, history, and tradition of our state demonstrates that resource extraction must be considered alongside, and must coexist with, pollution control legislation.' Gail Evans, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity and lead counsel on the case, said Tuesday's opinion would dismiss the case entirely if unchallenged and 'displays a fundamental misunderstanding of our constitution and constitutional rights.' She said plaintiffs intent to appeal to the state Supreme Court. 'Fifty years ago, New Mexico voted to amend the constitution and to provide protections from industry pollution and the court has found today that the amendment — the pollution control clause — is essentially meaningless, and that has to be wrong,' Evans said. The court challenge comes as New Mexico's state government rides a wave of record income from development in the Permian Basin, one of the world's most productive, oil-producing regions. Oil-related revenue collections underwrite a considerable amount of the state's budget, including public education. Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham's administration is policing the industry with regulations that target methane and other emissions. But the Center for Biological Diversity and other groups say these efforts are not enough and that the state is failing to enforce existing pollution-control measures. Attorneys for the Democratic-led Legislature and environmental regulators said the lawsuit threatened their constitutional authority. Appeals Judge Katherine Wray issued an additional concurring opinion, expressing further limitations of the pollution control clause.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store