Technology be adopted to evolve businesses: Infosys co-founder Kris Gopalakrishnan
Technology, a disruptor in almost every sector, was also an important driving factor for upgradation, he added.
Though it could be a challenge for the start-ups to bring in the money required for the upgradation, it has become an indispensable change that has to be adopted, Mr. Gopalakrishnan stated.
'But the out of box thinking like roping interns and experienced retirees to get the technologies incorporated into the businesses could be considered. Building a network with the colleges can help address the demand,' he suggested.
Commenting that the academics and industries have not worked together as an ecosystem, he said that except for hiring students through placements, a dialogue between the two large sectors was missing.
He asked the education institutions to adopt the idea of Indian Institute of Technology to allocate vacant space for the industries to set up their units at the institution.
By that way, both the students and the company could benefit from each other.
'As close to 25 lakh engineering graduates come out of colleges every year and with the recent dip of employment in Information Technology sector innovative ways are required to fill the gap in education and employment,' he added.
The Karnataka government, to upskill both students and teachers to adapt to the changing needs of the market, has planned to conduct a mass workshop to train teachers on Artificial Intelligence (AI), he pointed out.
'Though students are being updated on the latest technologies, teaching faculties, following their employment, stops learning,' Mr. Gopalakrishnan said.
Adopting new systems like dedicating a semester to internships for students and allowing a sabbatical for teachers to improve their industrial knowledge could give leverage in the knowledge acquisition and hiring process, he suggested.
With rapid intrusion of AI into the sectors, there was a fear afloat that it would replace humans, but the same fear prevailed when computers were first introduced into banking sectors in 1980s, he noted.
Rejecting the fears, he said once the sector grows, employment will eventually grow.
Speaking on the academic challenges in inculcating business interest in students, he said in Kerala and Gujarat, the State governments have allocated a separate fund to encourage students to develop and start a business as part of their curriculum.
It would not only motivate the students but would also help them think of businesses as an alternative option to job seeking, he noted.
'Only by running a business, we can learn about business,' he said.
The CII (Madurai zone) had hosted an exclusive interactive session for the Start-ups, MSMEs and incubation centres. CII (Madurai zone) chairman Ashwin Desai and others spoke.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Tata Technologies, Sun Pharma & more: Top stocks on brokers' radar for July 17, 2025
JP Morgan maintained its underweight rating on Tata Technologies with the target price cut to Rs 570 from Rs 580 earlier. Analysts said the company's April-June numbers were a mixed one with a beat on revenues while margins were missed. They said deal closures and ramp-ups improved gradually from April to June. They expect the same to continue in July-Sept quarter as clients see the need to restart R&D spends after a period of pause. Goldman Sachs maintained its buy rating on Ola Electric Mobility and hiked the stock's target price to Rs 63 from Rs 60 earlier. Analysts said that the management gave a flattish guidance for FY26 revenues and 5% auto earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) margin. They also acknowledged management's efforts in trying to pivot the business towards positive EBITDA and free cash flow breakeven. They expect that the market may need more visibility on volume growth and market share execution. JM Financial initiated its coverage of Kalyan Jewellers with a buy recommendation with the target price at Rs 700. Analysts feel there's a huge unorganised market providing large growth opportunities for the companies in the sector. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like These Are The Most Beautiful Women In The World Undo They feel moats built earlier by companies will drive future growth. Kalyan Jewellers works on an asset-light mode of store expansion. Citigroup maintained its neutral rating on HCL Technologies with the target price cut to Rs 1,650 from Rs 1,690 earlier. Analysts said the tech major's April-June earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) at about 7% was below expectations. The company's deal pipeline is weak and the overall quarterly result was decent on revenue but light on margins. Analysts said they maintained their cautious view on the sector. Morgan Stanley maintained its overweight rating on Sun Pharmaceuticals with the target price at Rs 1,960. Analysts feel the US launch and settlement for Leqselvi is a positive for the company. The launch, expected in the second half of FY26, happened earlier, supporting the overweight thesis. Project Leqselvi's expected sales at $61 million for FY26 and $83 million for FY27. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Does AI make you stupid?
AS ANYBODY WHO has ever taken a standardised test will know, racing to answer an expansive essay question in 20 minutes or less takes serious brain power. Having unfettered access to artificial intelligence (AI) would certainly lighten the mental load. But as a recent study by researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) suggests, that help may come at a cost. Over the course of a series of essay-writing sessions, students working with as well as without ChatGPT were hooked up to electroencephalograms (EEGs) to measure their brain activity as they toiled. Across the board, the AI users exhibited markedly lower neural activity in parts of the brain associated with creative functions and attention. Students who wrote with the chatbot's help also found it much harder to provide an accurate quote from the paper that they had just produced. The findings are part of a growing body of work on the potentially detrimental effects of AI use for creativity and learning. This work points to important questions about whether the impressive short-term gains afforded by generative AI may incur a hidden long-term debt. The MIT study augments the findings of two other high-profile studies on the relationship between AI use and critical thinking. The first, by researchers at Microsoft Research, surveyed 319 knowledge workers who used generative AI at least once a week. The respondents described undertaking more than 900 tasks, from summarising lengthy documents to designing a marketing campaign, with the help of AI. According to participants' self-assessments, only 555 of these tasks required critical thinking, such as having to review an AI output closely before passing it to a client, or revising a prompt after the AI generated an inadequate result on the first go. The rest of the tasks were deemed essentially mindless. Overall, a majority of workers reported needing either less or much less cognitive effort to complete tasks with generative-AI tools such as ChatGPT, Google Gemini or Microsoft's own Copilot AI assistant, compared with doing those tasks without AI. Another study, by Michael Gerlich, a professor at SBS Swiss Business School, asked 666 individuals in Britain how often they used AI and how much they trusted it, before posing them questions based on a widely used critical-thinking assessment. Participants who made more use of AI scored lower across the board. Dr Gerlich says that after the study was published he was contacted by hundreds of high-school and university teachers dealing with growing AI adoption among their students who, he says, 'felt that it addresses exactly what they currently experience". Whether AI will leave people's brains flabby and weak in the long term remains an open question. Researchers for all three studies have stressed that further work is needed to establish a definitive causal link between elevated AI use and weakened brains. In Dr Gerlich's study, for example, it is possible that people with greater critical-thinking prowess are just less likely to lean on AI. The MIT study, meanwhile, had a tiny sample size (54 participants in all) and focused on a single narrow task. Moreover, generative-AI tools explicitly seek to lighten people's mental loads, as many other technologies do. As long ago as the 5th century BC, Socrates was quoted as grumbling that writing is not 'a potion for remembering, but for reminding". Calculators spare cashiers from computing a bill. Navigation apps remove the need for map-reading. And yet few would argue that people are less capable as a result. There is little evidence to suggest that allowing machines to do users' mental bidding alters the brain's inherent capacity for thinking, says Evan Risko, a professor of psychology at the University of Waterloo who, along with a colleague, Sam Gilbert, coined the term 'cognitive offloading" to describe how people shrug off difficult or tedious mental tasks to external aids. The worry is that, as Dr Risko puts it, generative AI allows one to 'offload a much more complex set of processes". Offloading some mental arithmetic, which has only a narrow set of applications, is not the same as offloading a thought process like writing or problem-solving. And once the brain has developed a taste for offloading, it can be a hard habit to kick. The tendency to seek the least effortful way to solve a problem, known as 'cognitive miserliness", could create what Dr Gerlich describes as a feedback loop. As AI-reliant individuals find it harder to think critically, their brains may become more miserly, which will lead to further offloading. One participant in Dr Gerlich's study, a heavy user of generative AI, lamented 'I rely so much on AI that I don't think I'd know how to solve certain problems without it." Many companies are looking forward to the possible productivity gains from greater adoption of ai. But there could be a sting in the tail. 'Long-term critical-thinking decay would likely result in reduced competitiveness," says Barbara Larson, a professor of management at Northeastern University. Prolonged AI use could also make employees less creative. In a study at the University of Toronto, 460 participants were instructed to propose imaginative uses for a series of everyday objects, such as a car tyre or a pair of trousers. Those who had been exposed to ideas generated by AI tended to produce answers deemed less creative and diverse than a control group who worked unaided. When it came to the trousers, for instance, the chatbot proposed stuffing a pair with hay to make half of a scarecrow—in effect suggesting trousers be reused as trousers. An unaided participant, by contrast, proposed sticking nuts in the pockets to make a novelty bird feeder. There are ways to keep the brain fit. Dr Larson suggests that the smartest way to get ahead with AI is to limit its role to that of 'an enthusiastic but somewhat naive assistant". Dr Gerlich recommends that, rather than asking a chatbot to generate the final desired output, one should prompt it at each step on the path to the solution. Instead of asking it 'Where should I go for a sunny holiday?", for instance, one could start by asking where it rains the least, and proceed from there. Members of the Microsoft team have also been testing AI assistants that interrupt users with 'provocations" to prompt deeper thought. In a similar vein, a team from Emory and Stanford Universities have proposed rewiring chatbots to serve as 'thinking assistants" that ask users probing questions, rather than simply providing answers. One imagines that Socrates might heartily approve. Get with the program Such strategies might not be all that useful in practice, even in the unlikely event that model-builders tweaked their interfaces to make chatbots clunkier, or slower. They could even come at a cost. A study by Abilene Christian University in Texas found that AI assistants which repeatedly jumped in with provocations degraded the performance of weaker coders on a simple programming task. Other potential measures to keep people's brains active are more straightforward, if also rather more bossy. Overeager users of generative AI could be required to come up with their own answer to a query, or simply wait a few minutes, before they're allowed to access the AI. Such 'cognitive forcing" may lead users to perform better, according to Zana Buçinca, a researcher at Microsoft who studies these techniques, but will be less popular. 'People do not like to be pushed to engage," she says. Demand for workarounds would therefore probably be high. In a demographically representative survey conducted in 16 countries by Oliver Wyman, a consultancy, 47% of respondents said they would use generative-AI tools even if their employer forbade it. The technology is so young that, for many tasks, the human brain remains the sharpest tool in the toolkit. But in time both the consumers of generative ai and its regulators will have to assess whether its wider benefits outweigh any cognitive costs. If stronger evidence emerges that ai makes people stupid, will they care?
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Best of BS Opinion: Skilling, scaling, and reclaiming innovations
There's something oddly sacred about midnight snacking. That stolen moment when the world has quieted down and your fridge becomes your temple. Half a pizza slice, a couple of salami slices, some leftover noodles, maybe a spoonful of peanut butter straight from the jar. It's not just food, it's a ritual of piecing together what the day left unfinished. Today's writeups feel a lot like it, unconnected at first, but ultimately comforting in their messiness. They speak to a nation trying to make sense of its scattered ingredients, ideas, ambitions, gaps, and goals, under the flickering light of change. Let's dive in. Take the Union finance minister's renewed push for global capability centres (GCCs). On paper, it's a promising late-night snack, a Budget idea reheated with tax breaks and support for small-town talent hubs. But as our first editorial notes, India's business environment still needs prep: power outages, regulatory half-measures, and a skilling system that doesn't quite match industry appetite. Without fixing the kitchen, no amount of garnish will make the dish work. If that sounds familiar, our second editorial's deep dive into the lagging AI regulation offers a similar flavour. While the European Union has plated up a full-course meal with its AI Act, India is still figuring out the recipe. The country's Digital Personal Data Protection Act, though a start, doesn't quite address the global buffet of challenges: Data scraping, model misuse, or even the basic seasoning of transparency. As Big Tech feasts unchecked, India risks showing up at the innovation dinner party with an empty tiffin. Then there's our urban sprawl. Amit Kapoor writes how our cities, instead of cooking up dynamism, are just boiling over. With traffic jams, heat islands, and scattered planning, India's metros resemble overstuffed thalis — crowded, but offering little nourishment. To regain productivity, Balakrishnan calls for a smarter recipe: integrated governance, resilient design, and real data-driven plans. Meanwhile, Naushad Forbes turns the spotlight to R&D, where India has long survived on snacks even as others have enjoyed feasts. The new Rs 1 trillion RDI scheme could change that, but only if funds go directly to firms that can digest them, those with hungry, growing R&D teams and the stamina for mid-stage research. Without focus, we risk spreading the chutney too thin. And finally, Vivek Banerji's Insight Edge: Crafting Breakthroughs in a World of Information Overload, reviewed by Ajit Balakrishnan, is like the healthy snack you didn't know you needed. The author argues that in this data-glutted world, insight, not information, is the real nourishment. Forget endless dashboards. What we need is curiosity, empathy, and a refusal to pretend we always know the answer. Sounds a lot like the way we rummage the fridge, hoping to find meaning — or at least cold pizza. Stay tuned!
