What will NOT be replaced by AI? Post your questions for project management expert Dave Garrett by 11am ET 6 Aug 2024

AI can indeed support and enhance human intuition in project management by analyzing vast amounts of data to identify patterns and trends that humans might miss. This can provide project managers with valuable insights to inform their intuitive decision-making. For example, AI could analyze historical project data to highlight potential risks or opportunities that align with a manager's gut feelings.
Regarding creativity, AI can serve as a powerful brainstorming partner, generating novel ideas and solutions that can spark human creativity. Project managers can use AI-generated suggestions as a starting point, then apply their unique human creativity to refine and adapt those ideas to the specific context of their project.
In terms of emotions, advanced AI systems are becoming increasingly capable of recognizing and responding to human emotions. In project management, this could mean AI tools that can analyze team sentiment through communication patterns, helping project managers better understand and address team dynamics. The AI could provide suggestions for improving team morale or flag potential conflicts before they escalate.
However, it's important to note that while AI can support these human qualities, it cannot fully replace the depth and nuance of human empathy, intuition, and creativity. The human touch remains crucial in:
Building genuine relationships with team members and stakeholders
Making ethical decisions that consider complex human factors
Providing authentic leadership and inspiration
Navigating highly ambiguous or unprecedented situations
Balancing competing priorities and stakeholder needs
AI can be a powerful tool to augment human capabilities in project management, but the most effective approach is likely a collaboration between human managers and AI systems, each leveraging their unique strengths.

First Question:
As AI takes over routine tasks, how should project managers refocus their efforts to add maximum value in areas that require human judgment and creativity?
Second Question:
What role do you see for human intuition and experience in navigating complex, ambiguous project situations that AI might struggle to interpret correctly?

Hi Dave,

Will AI still use project management frameworks and techniques when there are no human stakeholders?

Great (and very detailed) question, George! I’ll offer some thoughts but please tell me what you think in return. I generally think a lot of these are things AI can help with, but it’s like school/training - you get out of it what you put in.

Regarding the anchor skills you mention:

[1-A] Ability to leverage expert knowledge and express it through “ways of working, “leadership/power skills,” and “business acumen.”

GenAI can help augment a Project Professional’s skills in both of these areas. Typically, you would use it as a real time coach, filling gaps in your knowledge and asking questions about your approach “real-time” as you need the advice.

[2-A] Capacity to use critical thinking and reasoning skills to navigate a project to objective success.

GenAI can enhance your reasoning skills, but absolutely cannot replace them.

Reasoning is a key challenge for GenAI. It’s lacking today and each new version of every model/GPT promises improvement in that area. In fact, it’s the most anticipated feature in the forthcoming ChatGPT v5. Users of GenAI compensate for the tool’s lack of ability to reason through prompting techniques, like “Chain of Thought”, which break a question down into smaller chunks (as we do with a WBS) to make the smaller chunks more approachable.

[3-A] Ability to source, challenge, and refine knowledge to benefit a project.

GenAI has the ability to really supercharge your information gathering abilities, through simple conversation. The information it provides will likely represent the lowest common denominator view of how others would answer your question. So, you get back a lot of information that is up to you to vet.

[4-A] Adeptness at getting to the truth of a matter or concern.

Truth often comes down to finding a credible source. This source cannot be the tool itself, but some models do a better job of this than others. So, it’s your job to pick a tool that accurately identifies sources and to actually review the source information to ensure it was relayed correctly. I often use Perplexity.ai if I’m concerned with sourcing. Gemini if the information is “of the moment”.

Your question about the long-term implications of “an AI-centered life” are interesting as well. I think of it less as an “AI centered life” - more as an “AI-augmented life”. We’ve all gotten to the point where we no longer remember phone numbers or addresses due to everyday use of tech. I guess you could argue that we live “phone-centered" lives, but I like to think it allows us to focus on high-order thinking and issues. Clearing the “rote” data out of your brain makes space for more interesting information.

Thinking about your individual questions.

[1-B] Dilution of and base leveling of human knowledge—AI is the expert.

I think there’s a danger here. Those who are lazy enough to not apply critical thinking to answers offered by GenAI are going to be misled. They will gravitate to the “generic middle ground” that GenAI represents. AI is not the expert. YOU are the expert, who synthesizes disparate sources of information based on the totality of your personal knowledge and experience into something meaningful and right for the specific situation you are facing.

Think of it as similar to applying what we have in the PMBoK. That information represents “good practices for most projects most of the time.” Then it’s up to you to tailor them to your specific situation. You are the accountable HUMAN deciding if or how to apply all of the information you have access to.

[2-B] Proxying critical thinking and reasoning skills to one’s chosen AI adviser.

I think as we move forward, we will increasingly think of AI as an additional team member. Not as “The thinker”, but as one perspective, considered among others. You can see the beginnings of this in the recent OpenAI demos of their advanced speech interface ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uM8jhcqDP0 ). Who knows how far that will go, but from my perspective, GenAI will always represent the homogeneous “Crowd”. You and your team will benefit from that perspective in combination with the DIVERSE perspectives each HUMAN brings to the table. The best answers will emerge from this level of collaboration.

Remember, AI does NOT have:

The ability to explain its decisions or answers in any level of detail.

Common sense that comes from living in the world and interacting with others – a lifetime of “context” to draw from – essentially intuition.

The power of “caring” about outcomes that focuses the mind on the right parts of an answer.

[3-B] The inability to distinguish between one’s core knowledge and that instantaneously derived through AI

Many refer to GenAI as a “Second brain”. I think it has the potential to be an extension of your brain, especially as you use it more, and it better understands your strengths and weaknesses. We are already seeing brain interfaces being tested ( https://futurism.com/neoscope/synchron-brain-computer-interface-control-vr-headset ). So, who knows where that line will ultimately be drawn. It seems unlikely that line will become blurry in our lifetimes, but who knows?

 

[4-B] Indifference to the pursuit, interrogation, and discovery of objective truth.

 

I think we are passionate about the truth to the degree we perceive it affects our lives and the lives of those that matter to us. Hopefully that extends to our projects, which depend on truth-based decision making.

 

Here in the US, we are seeing a lot of indifference to the truth as part of our current election cycle. We now have too much information out there and “tribes” can create entire universes of information, bubbles that individuals can “live” within. Most people have lives to live and little time to deeply explore issues. You could see this same phenomena playing out at lower levels – kind of an extension of what we now call “group-think”. It’s incumbent upon each and every one of us to search for truth, especially truth that affects important decisions.

 

I imagine this problem will be a cyclical one as it has been in the past. Prior to mass communication, misinformation communicated through an oral tradition, ruled. The printing press made misinformation worse. Everyone was better informed AND misinformed. Eventually trusted media brands took hold and sourcing “Truth” became easier. I think it’s likely that technology will run through a similar cycle again that will make “truth” easier to come by.

 

What do you think?

Thank you for the response Dave!

I agree that AI can empower the PM through knowledge and thus increase the opportunity to deliver value beyond that which is related to pure execution.

My concern for our profession relates to the unintended side effects of the “project management software industry” seeking competitive value in their market. That is, the natural progression of software is to reduce or illuminate the headcount necessary to perform given operations, which, under AI-based tooling, may be expedited and counter the benefit of “empowering the PM” since there could be fewer PMs left to empower.

George

Pls advise how to select the better AI tools for project management as there are so many tools in world wide currently, is there any criteria as reference? so suggested one integrated tools/one platform for user, that would be great if possible. tks

Regarding your last question - What are the ethical considerations in project management that require human judgment over AI decision-making?

Absolutely. We have talked a lot about AI ethics in the PMI community.

 

To be honest, I think there is a lot of value and applicability in our code of ethics when it comes to AI ( https://www.pmi.org/about/ethics/code ).

 

Especially our aspirational standards:

 

As practitioners in the global project management community:

 

2.2.1 We make decisions and take actions based on the best interests of society, public safety, and the environment.

 

2.2.2 We accept only those assignments that are consistent with our background, experience, skills, and qualifications.

 

2.2.3 We fulfill the commitments that we undertake – we do what we say we will do.

 

2.2.4 When we make errors or omissions, we take ownership and make corrections promptly. When we discover errors or omissions caused by others, we communicate them to the appropriate body as soon they are discovered. We accept accountability for any issues resulting from our errors or omissions and any resulting consequences.

 

2.2.5 We protect proprietary or confidential information that has been entrusted to us.

 

2.2.6 We uphold this Code and hold each other accountable to it

 

Beyond these points, what do you think we need to put into place to address “Ethics in AI”?

Thanks George! I think that's why we are seeing so many PMs focus on augmenting their skills.

In our PMI research, we talk about Automation, Assistance, & Augmentation. Most of the automation happens through some form of machine learning-based technology - things like rebalancing resources, automatically suggesting or assigning tasks. Assistance happens a lot through tools like MS Co-pilot. Then augmentation - making the knowledge work you really need to focus on, is typically enabled by generative AI. Tools like PMI Infinity.

In the past automation was king. Technology created leverage for businesses by replacing people. Generative AI helps you become better at your job. Unlike automation tools, It needs you to correct it's output - but at the same time opens your eyes to new possibilities.

Dave,

Some believe that AI Responses are void of bias/conflict and are, hence, the archetype companion for assistance in resolving ethical concerns.

What say you?

George