Bart GerardiSenior Manager, Software EngineeringOrlando, FL, United States
There is much discussion within the community about the different ways that project managers can utilize AI in their day-to-day work. What's the one part of the PM job that you'd never trust to AI? Saving Changes...
AI is great for options and recommendations, pending review. Even if AI could come up with the best decision for a given context, I'd still want a person making the ultimate decision - for accountability, if nothing else.
2) My ability to do my job.
It's feasible that someone with a basic understanding of project management could use AI to find answers for how to deal with challenges that come up. In a sense, it's not that different from using Google to search how to do something or reading an article about it, but like with decision-making, you need a foundation and sometimes you have to be able to figure things out without the internet. AI should just be one tool of many that you use to do your job and learn how to do it better. Saving Changes...
Anything where AI has the final word. I don't mind if it takes me 99% the way towards something, if I am accountable for the outcomes, I'll want to review the outputs before they are released.
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
Final Decision making. I believe this has always to be done by PMs. Saving Changes...
Bart GerardiSenior Manager, Software EngineeringOrlando, FL, United States
I agree with @Rami, @Kiron and @Aaron. Right now, I'm also distrustful of AI making decisions. I think I'd be comfortable with AI coming up with options (AI is good at this, and may even think of a few that humans overlook), and perhaps making a recommendation. But I wouldn't want it just going ahead and choosing its recommendation, even if its often right Saving Changes...
George FreemanThought Leader | Author | Architect| Florida, United States
To “trust” something is to say that it is “safe and reliable.”
So-called AI frameworks have no intelligence; instead, they have base/foundational knowledge given to them by humans. This knowledge is then enriched from other repositories and sources and then provided a series of confidence-based scores. When these scores are below arbitrary thresholds they are then reviewed by metadata/content managers who make decisions on what should be enriched into the base knowledge.
Although the knowledge grows, it is guided and hence naturally prone to bias. So, “safe and reliable” becomes an opinion.
So, anything generated through so-called AI engines is “knowledge for consideration” by the only intellect in the room, yourself. Saving Changes...
Thomas WalentaGlobal Project Economy ExpertHackenheim, Germany
Think there are no limits. Over time.
AI or algorithms already make final decisions.
(read 'Weapons of Math Destruction' by Cathy O'Neil).
PMs will not even recognize where AI takes over. Saving Changes...
Luis BrancoCEO| Business Insight, Consultores de Gestão, LdªCarcavelos, Lisboa, Portugal
Dear Bart
The topic that brought us reflection and debate is very interesting.
For me, any query I make or any work I do is just another opinion (based on data, of course)
I read something that left me thinking: "A person wanted to go from A to B. He turned on the GPS. The GPS indicated a path where the person should cross a river. What happened? The person entered the river with the vehicle"
There will be people who blindly do what AI programs tell them
And when were these people a crowd... a public opinion (project stakeholders)?
...
1 reply by Kiron Bondale
Nov 24, 2023 7:19 AM
Kiron Bondale
...
The interesting behavior is that some people are more likely to trust information because it was provided by a machine or tool than by another human being. One would hope that PMs use better judgment...
Dear Bart
The topic that brought us reflection and debate is very interesting.
For me, any query I make or any work I do is just another opinion (based on data, of course)
I read something that left me thinking: "A person wanted to go from A to B. He turned on the GPS. The GPS indicated a path where the person should cross a river. What happened? The person entered the river with the vehicle"
There will be people who blindly do what AI programs tell them
And when were these people a crowd... a public opinion (project stakeholders)?
The interesting behavior is that some people are more likely to trust information because it was provided by a machine or tool than by another human being. One would hope that PMs use better judgment...
Kiron Saving Changes...
George FreemanThought Leader | Author | Architect| Florida, United States
Interpretive analytics, e.g., using pattern recognition, samplings, aggregations, and the like to resolve knowledge and executing scoring-based algorithms to obtain results/decisions from said knowledge and enrichable baselines, has been standard fair in software engineering for decades.
Unfortunately, processes of these types are now cast in the spectrum of AI-enabled technologies when they are, in actuality, just evolved algorithmic approaches. After a sanity-check review, consumers (e.g., project managers) can typically place a relatively high degree of trust in outcomes from these types of approaches.
However, loosely coupled machine learning processes and tools are another breed and, in my opinion, are not to be trusted as they take on the bias of their metadata managers. With that said, all algorithmic approaches are prone to biased interpretive views/outputs.
In our daily lives, we are surrounded by algorithmic decision-making. The difference is that those systems are taken through quality controls that we, as project managers, are more than familiar with, and even then, they sometimes fail. However, loosely coupled machine learning processes typically lack those types of controls. Knowing that, would you trust them? Saving Changes...
Markus KopkoAI Enabler for Project & Program Mgmt | Founder PMotion.ai / The PM
AI Coach| PMotion.aiHamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Dear Bart,
Drawing from my extensive experience in project and program management, I firmly believe that while AI can significantly enhance our capabilities in various aspects of project management, a fundamental element of our role should remain solely within the human domain: the management of stakeholder relationships.
Stakeholder management is a nuanced, multifaceted aspect of project management, deeply rooted in emotional intelligence, empathy, and the ability to navigate complex interpersonal dynamics. It involves understanding diverse perspectives, managing expectations, negotiating, and, often, dealing with conflicts or sensitive issues. These are inherently human skills that AI, in its current form, cannot replicate.
AI excels in handling data, providing insights, optimizing processes, and even assisting with risk management by predicting potential issues based on historical data. However, . This human touch builds trust, fosters collaboration, and ultimately drives the success of a project.
Thus, while I advocate for leveraging AI to augment our efficiency and effectiveness in many areas of project management, I strongly emphasize the irreplaceable value of human insight and connection in stakeholder management. This is the part of the PM job that, in my professional opinion, should always remain distinctly human.
"This planet has - or rather had - a problem, which was this: most of the people living on it were unhappy for pretty much of the time. Many solutions were suggested for this problem, but most of these were largely concerned with the movements of small green pieces of paper, which is odd because on the whole it wasn't the small green pieces of paper that were unhappy."
Community Champion
