Chris YeagerSystems Analyst - Public Safety| City of Murfreesboro
One the key aspects of expertise is industry knowledge and how it is utilized in the field. With the onset of AI being broadly used across industries, there are concerns that expertise will be less important than efficiency and cost. How will organizations incorporate AI in their PM certifications and training without a reduction in industry knowledge and expertise? Saving Changes...
Chris YeagerSystems Analyst - Public Safety| City of Murfreesboro
Apr 08, 2024 4:15 AM
Replying to Bhasker Srivastava
...
Here's how AI can be integrated into PM certifications and training:
1. AI-Powered Learning Platforms
Utilizing AI algorithms to personalize learning paths based on individual strengths and weaknesses.
Providing real-time feedback and suggestions for improvement.
2. Virtual AI Assistants for PM Professionals
Implementing virtual AI assistants to help PM practitioners with tasks like scheduling, resource allocation, and risk management.
Offering insights and recommendations based on data analysis performed by AI algorithms.
3. AI-Driven Predictive Analytics
Teaching PM professionals how to leverage AI-driven predictive analytics for better project forecasting and risk assessment.
Training on interpreting AI-generated insights to make informed decisions and adjustments during project execution.
4. Simulation and Scenario Analysis
Incorporating AI-powered simulation tools for realistic scenario analysis in training programs.
Allowing PM students to simulate different project scenarios and learn from the outcomes predicted by AI models.
5. Enhanced Data Management
Training on AI tools for enhanced data management, including data collection, analysis, and interpretation.
Integrating AI techniques for data-driven decision-making throughout the project lifecycle.
6. Continuous Learning and Adaptation
Emphasizing the importance of continuous learning and adaptation to AI advancements in PM practices.
Providing up-to-date training materials and resources to keep PM professionals informed about the latest AI technologies relevant to their field.
7. Ethical AI Considerations
Including modules on ethical AI considerations in PM training to ensure responsible use of AI tools in project management.
Addressing potential biases in AI algorithms and promoting transparency and fairness in decision-making processes.
By integrating AI into PM certifications and training, professionals can stay ahead of the curve, improve project outcomes, and adapt to the increasingly digital landscape of project management.
Solid summary, Bhasker. Those are all appropriate ways for AI to be utilized to instill and improve professional expertise in program management. However, these all have two things in common: they require stringent oversight and they do not replace the work of a human being. Several industries are already struggling with this issue and being hard pressed to distinguish between the work of a person and a machine. There was a commercial during the Super Bowl in the USA for Microsoft's new Copilot AI program. It showed several different people in different professional contexts saying, "They told me I couldn't do it," or something similar. They then flashed forward to each of them using Copilot to do the work for them as a song plays with the words, "Watch me now" repeating. This is the lie of AI. They didn't build something, create something, design something, code something. AI did that work and they are appropriating it as their own, with the stamp of approval from Microsoft. Saving Changes...
Chris YeagerSystems Analyst - Public Safety| City of Murfreesboro
Apr 08, 2024 1:04 AM
Replying to Francisco Herrera
...
AI will improve and mature over time and calibrate to minimize these situations. I believe that the best thing is to start using it on a small scale to obtain the desired results and avoid the consequences you mentioned.
I agree, Francisco. Wading into the water slowly with AI would be better, but it seems the world is diving in without checking the water first. We will have to wait and see how it fares in the coming years. Saving Changes...
Chris YeagerSystems Analyst - Public Safety| City of Murfreesboro
Apr 02, 2024 5:00 PM
Replying to Keith Novak
...
I think spotting the fake expert will become more important as AI permeates industries.
People have been plagiarizing forever, and they get caught with some regularity, in part due to the search tools of today. Like with plagiarizing a paper, using AI for an answer with minimal actual knowledge of the subject is easy to spot once you start asking difficult questions. There are already tools used to identify AI generated material with mixed results but I am sure they will improve.
I can spot a lot of AI content and may or may not read it since I know the person presenting it is cutting and pasting. Lawyers get caught using AI when it cites cases that don't exist and someone tries to look them up. For those who expect genuine quality rather than fast and cheap but seriously flawed, real experts may be elevated in their positions for being able to spot the fakes by asking the right questions to determine whether the person presenting it actually understands the subject, and whether their methods should be trusted..
I agree, Keith. Spotting the fakes is important, but is it possible? Many experts in the field of AI have said spotting the differences is nearly impossible if someone knows how to use the AI well. While I believe AI work can be spotted in some instances, as the use of AI progresses, and the design of AI improves, this will become more and more difficult. As Bhasker mentioned in point 7 of his post, ethical considerations are necessary to the proper training and certification process.
...
1 reply by Keith Novak
Apr 13, 2024 12:52 PM
Keith Novak
...
I think a real expert can spot a lot of fakes. There are a lot of assumptions wrapped up in the statement that AI experts say it may be impossible to spot them. An expert in AI might not be able to spot a fake medical study that would be obvious to a research scientist particularly under cross-examination.
A good example is the fraudulent medical studies which came out during the pandemic about everything from miracle cures to the dangers of vaccines. Many that were taken very seriously by non-experts were later retracted due to deeply flawed methods or outright lies. I noticed patterns reading some of them myself where the abstract itself used so much advanced mathematics terminology to present a perception of authority through complexity, and discourage people from decoding the gibberish. Someone skilled using AI can employ a variety of logical fallacies such as appeal to authority and argument through verbosity, that don't convince experts in the underlying field.
Reading an AI produced artifact, it might be very difficult to spot the fake, but that is why scientific papers are reviewed by authorities in the subject. Back in the 1980s, scientists claimed they created cold fusion, and while very few people in the world would be knowledgeable enough to review their work, the few who could were unsuccessful at reproducing the results.
Saving Changes...
George FreemanThought Leader | Author | Architect| Florida, United States
Apr 08, 2024 4:15 AM
Replying to Bhasker Srivastava
...
Here's how AI can be integrated into PM certifications and training:
1. AI-Powered Learning Platforms
Utilizing AI algorithms to personalize learning paths based on individual strengths and weaknesses.
Providing real-time feedback and suggestions for improvement.
2. Virtual AI Assistants for PM Professionals
Implementing virtual AI assistants to help PM practitioners with tasks like scheduling, resource allocation, and risk management.
Offering insights and recommendations based on data analysis performed by AI algorithms.
3. AI-Driven Predictive Analytics
Teaching PM professionals how to leverage AI-driven predictive analytics for better project forecasting and risk assessment.
Training on interpreting AI-generated insights to make informed decisions and adjustments during project execution.
4. Simulation and Scenario Analysis
Incorporating AI-powered simulation tools for realistic scenario analysis in training programs.
Allowing PM students to simulate different project scenarios and learn from the outcomes predicted by AI models.
5. Enhanced Data Management
Training on AI tools for enhanced data management, including data collection, analysis, and interpretation.
Integrating AI techniques for data-driven decision-making throughout the project lifecycle.
6. Continuous Learning and Adaptation
Emphasizing the importance of continuous learning and adaptation to AI advancements in PM practices.
Providing up-to-date training materials and resources to keep PM professionals informed about the latest AI technologies relevant to their field.
7. Ethical AI Considerations
Including modules on ethical AI considerations in PM training to ensure responsible use of AI tools in project management.
Addressing potential biases in AI algorithms and promoting transparency and fairness in decision-making processes.
By integrating AI into PM certifications and training, professionals can stay ahead of the curve, improve project outcomes, and adapt to the increasingly digital landscape of project management.
Bhasker,
As much as I appreciate your engagement on this subject, your reply matches the “pattern and substance” of content produced by GenAI. When you use this type of content in whole or in part in a post, it is appropriate to disclaim that fact.
I agree with Chris that those are valid points, but please recognize that those points are only a few keystrokes away from us (as well). If the points add value to the discussion, just state, “Here’s what ChatGPT has to say on this subject,” or something like that.
Please recognize that this is an informed assumption on my part and that we appreciate your engagement!
I take a critic’s position on AI-generated content and tools as I recognize that it has as much opportunity to improve society as it can damage it. The direction it takes will hinge on education and transparency, which, from my barometer, is scarcely available.
I recognize that AI-generated content and tooling can supercharge plagiarists and bad actors, but my greater concern is the societal consequences of “Epistemic Erosion.” Specifically, the [1] dilution of knowledge and the [2] obfuscation of, or ability to determine truth.
Unless transparency-formed guard rails are “put into place,” this erosion will/could be gradual, dismissable, and controllable.
Hopefully, my perception of this risk is malformed. But even a chance of it being true justifies a critic’s voice.
George
I take a critic’s position on AI-generated content and tools as I recognize that it has as much opportunity to improve society as it can damage it. The direction it takes will hinge on education and transparency, which, from my barometer, is scarcely available.
I recognize that AI-generated content and tooling can supercharge plagiarists and bad actors, but my greater concern is the societal consequences of “Epistemic Erosion.” Specifically, the [1] dilution of knowledge and the [2] obfuscation of, or ability to determine truth.
Unless transparency-formed guard rails are “put into place,” this erosion will/could be gradual, dismissable, and controllable.
Hopefully, my perception of this risk is malformed. But even a chance of it being true justifies a critic’s voice.
...
1 reply by George Freeman
Apr 12, 2024 2:05 PM
George Freeman
...
Bhasker,
I’m unclear to your thoughts related to this reply as you copied/pasted my comments that I provided to Chris.
Please clarify.
Saving Changes...
George FreemanThought Leader | Author | Architect| Florida, United States
Apr 12, 2024 3:13 AM
Replying to Bhasker Srivastava
...
I take a critic’s position on AI-generated content and tools as I recognize that it has as much opportunity to improve society as it can damage it. The direction it takes will hinge on education and transparency, which, from my barometer, is scarcely available.
I recognize that AI-generated content and tooling can supercharge plagiarists and bad actors, but my greater concern is the societal consequences of “Epistemic Erosion.” Specifically, the [1] dilution of knowledge and the [2] obfuscation of, or ability to determine truth.
Unless transparency-formed guard rails are “put into place,” this erosion will/could be gradual, dismissable, and controllable.
Hopefully, my perception of this risk is malformed. But even a chance of it being true justifies a critic’s voice.
Bhasker,
I’m unclear to your thoughts related to this reply as you copied/pasted my comments that I provided to Chris.
I agree, Keith. Spotting the fakes is important, but is it possible? Many experts in the field of AI have said spotting the differences is nearly impossible if someone knows how to use the AI well. While I believe AI work can be spotted in some instances, as the use of AI progresses, and the design of AI improves, this will become more and more difficult. As Bhasker mentioned in point 7 of his post, ethical considerations are necessary to the proper training and certification process.
I think a real expert can spot a lot of fakes. There are a lot of assumptions wrapped up in the statement that AI experts say it may be impossible to spot them. An expert in AI might not be able to spot a fake medical study that would be obvious to a research scientist particularly under cross-examination.
A good example is the fraudulent medical studies which came out during the pandemic about everything from miracle cures to the dangers of vaccines. Many that were taken very seriously by non-experts were later retracted due to deeply flawed methods or outright lies. I noticed patterns reading some of them myself where the abstract itself used so much advanced mathematics terminology to present a perception of authority through complexity, and discourage people from decoding the gibberish. Someone skilled using AI can employ a variety of logical fallacies such as appeal to authority and argument through verbosity, that don't convince experts in the underlying field.
Reading an AI produced artifact, it might be very difficult to spot the fake, but that is why scientific papers are reviewed by authorities in the subject. Back in the 1980s, scientists claimed they created cold fusion, and while very few people in the world would be knowledgeable enough to review their work, the few who could were unsuccessful at reproducing the results.
...
1 reply by Chris Yeager
Apr 13, 2024 11:00 PM
Chris Yeager
...
Hello Keith,
I agree that an expert in a profession might be able to spot fakes, but therein lies the issue. Expertise has already been eroded over the course of the last 4 years due to several socio-political events. The introduction of AI no adds another means of erosion. People who are not experts at project management are looking to hire those who are experts. AI can be leveraged by non-experts to make a show of expertise to those who do not know better. This is why I am concerned how it is being utilized and implemented in training and certification.
Saving Changes...
Chris YeagerSystems Analyst - Public Safety| City of Murfreesboro
Apr 13, 2024 12:52 PM
Replying to Keith Novak
...
I think a real expert can spot a lot of fakes. There are a lot of assumptions wrapped up in the statement that AI experts say it may be impossible to spot them. An expert in AI might not be able to spot a fake medical study that would be obvious to a research scientist particularly under cross-examination.
A good example is the fraudulent medical studies which came out during the pandemic about everything from miracle cures to the dangers of vaccines. Many that were taken very seriously by non-experts were later retracted due to deeply flawed methods or outright lies. I noticed patterns reading some of them myself where the abstract itself used so much advanced mathematics terminology to present a perception of authority through complexity, and discourage people from decoding the gibberish. Someone skilled using AI can employ a variety of logical fallacies such as appeal to authority and argument through verbosity, that don't convince experts in the underlying field.
Reading an AI produced artifact, it might be very difficult to spot the fake, but that is why scientific papers are reviewed by authorities in the subject. Back in the 1980s, scientists claimed they created cold fusion, and while very few people in the world would be knowledgeable enough to review their work, the few who could were unsuccessful at reproducing the results.
Hello Keith,
I agree that an expert in a profession might be able to spot fakes, but therein lies the issue. Expertise has already been eroded over the course of the last 4 years due to several socio-political events. The introduction of AI no adds another means of erosion. People who are not experts at project management are looking to hire those who are experts. AI can be leveraged by non-experts to make a show of expertise to those who do not know better. This is why I am concerned how it is being utilized and implemented in training and certification.
...
1 reply by Keith Novak
Apr 15, 2024 6:07 PM
Keith Novak
...
Hi Chris
I think that the erosion of expertise is a big reason why spotting fakes is a skill that will set some PMs apart.
There is solid psychology behind why people tend to believe things that validate their own opinions rather than knowing the truth. The internet and more specifically social media is full of spurious information to reinforce that and influencers on every topic imaginable that are happy to support anyone's opinions. (See Poe's Law)
AI generated information creates even more questionable information with great detail and the appearance of authority but learning who to believe has always been an important skill of the PM. We shouldn't just be working with digital artifacts created by others to make informed decisions, but rather the artifacts and the authors. When hiring an expert, there is an interview process. The more in-person the interview, the less likely they are reading the response of AI. Having a knowledgeable person help interview the applicants can help spot questionable answers.
In my work with aircraft projects, there is no way to become an expert in every system, so I find it important to learn who to trust for accurate information on different subjects. Some people are never willing to admit what they don't know, and it becomes obvious that for every seemingly straightforward question, they launch into long rambling answers that don't address the original ask. Others when questioned, can immediately respond with accurate paraphrasing and concise logical answers. Likewise some people ask questions in meetings to be heard and appear smart but their questions and responses to the presenters' questions proves their knowledge is lacking. Others always ask very smart incisive questions and their follow-up questions are also spot on. Recongnizing those "tells" like a poker player becomes an important power skill. It is one reason that I try to attend the most important meetings in-person so that I can better read the body language of both the presenters, and the reactions of others.
It's similar to how PhD applicants must defend their thesis. Since the credential reflects their deep understanding of the subject, not just their ability to write one lengthy paper, answering questions on the spot helps reveal their true knowledge level
Keith
Saving Changes...
Zay NaungProject Manager| AandA Real Estate and Law FirmMyanmar, 06, Myanmar
Hi PMs!
I am just curious that whether it is possible to generate mock questions (PMP,CAPM,ACP,etc) for us to practice more in near future by using GenAI tools? What kind of prompts shall we be using then?
Hello Keith,
I agree that an expert in a profession might be able to spot fakes, but therein lies the issue. Expertise has already been eroded over the course of the last 4 years due to several socio-political events. The introduction of AI no adds another means of erosion. People who are not experts at project management are looking to hire those who are experts. AI can be leveraged by non-experts to make a show of expertise to those who do not know better. This is why I am concerned how it is being utilized and implemented in training and certification.
Hi Chris
I think that the erosion of expertise is a big reason why spotting fakes is a skill that will set some PMs apart.
There is solid psychology behind why people tend to believe things that validate their own opinions rather than knowing the truth. The internet and more specifically social media is full of spurious information to reinforce that and influencers on every topic imaginable that are happy to support anyone's opinions. (See Poe's Law)
AI generated information creates even more questionable information with great detail and the appearance of authority but learning who to believe has always been an important skill of the PM. We shouldn't just be working with digital artifacts created by others to make informed decisions, but rather the artifacts and the authors. When hiring an expert, there is an interview process. The more in-person the interview, the less likely they are reading the response of AI. Having a knowledgeable person help interview the applicants can help spot questionable answers.
In my work with aircraft projects, there is no way to become an expert in every system, so I find it important to learn who to trust for accurate information on different subjects. Some people are never willing to admit what they don't know, and it becomes obvious that for every seemingly straightforward question, they launch into long rambling answers that don't address the original ask. Others when questioned, can immediately respond with accurate paraphrasing and concise logical answers. Likewise some people ask questions in meetings to be heard and appear smart but their questions and responses to the presenters' questions proves their knowledge is lacking. Others always ask very smart incisive questions and their follow-up questions are also spot on. Recongnizing those "tells" like a poker player becomes an important power skill. It is one reason that I try to attend the most important meetings in-person so that I can better read the body language of both the presenters, and the reactions of others.
It's similar to how PhD applicants must defend their thesis. Since the credential reflects their deep understanding of the subject, not just their ability to write one lengthy paper, answering questions on the spot helps reveal their true knowledge level
Keith Saving Changes...
