AI was supposed to free us for management work, but it has made us all editors
AI’s shortcomings are pulling senior practitioners into tactical work, with consequences for the management role, the economics of the function, and how the next generation learns.
The promise of AI is that it frees up practitioners to focus on management tasks. The reality is turning out to be somewhat different, according to a paper published in the Journal of Public Relations Research.
It’s a small, exploratory study and the interviews took place two years ago, so treat it as part of the ongoing discussion within practice about the second-order effects of AI rather than settled science. Nonetheless, qualitative research of this kind is important for understanding the lived experience of practitioners and uncovering insights for practice.
The paper cites a report I co-wrote with Andrew Bruce Smith about AI tools, published by the CIPR in 2023.
Senior practitioners are more hands-on than ever
AI was expected to eliminate the tactical work that practitioners typically move away from as they become more senior. That transition isn’t happening. Senior communicators are hands-on with the tools.
The study identifies a need for practitioners at every level to act as AI copy editors: fact-checking and editing the output from tools.
Work is moving up the chain of command
In my view, this challenges another promise of AI: improved economics for both agencies and in-house teams.
Content that was previously produced by entry-level or junior practitioners is now created at near-zero cost using AI. But the instructions to create and review that content need a manager with domain expertise and experience.
The result is that AI is pushing work to more expensive, senior practitioners. It’s a counterintuitive problem that undermines the efficiency case for AI.
If a document that took three hours’ work now takes 30 minutes of prompting and an hour of review, the time taken has fallen but the cost per hour has risen.
I wrote last week about the pressure within communications teams to use AI to cut budgets. My recommendation for showing where the value lies is to keep a simple record of every task that AI has assisted with, along with any new work that it has made possible.
Governance is the management opportunity
Much of the new work identified by the study is editing. Without governance, policy and training, that burden defaults to the most senior person in the team.
Agencies and in-house functions must set clear guidance on when tools can be used, and on data, verification and disclosure. This is also where the higher-level management opportunity lies: owning an organisational risk is a key route to management recognition.
AI has broken the apprenticeship route into practice
The impact of AI on entry-level roles is a significant concern that I’ve previously discussed.
Writing content is fundamental to building knowledge and expertise in a communications role. We learn judgement by drafting, being corrected, and rewriting. Over time we understand how to land a message with different stakeholders.
AI has broken this model. Junior practitioners are expected to verify content in areas where they have no knowledge. They’re expected to edit before they have learnt to write. We urgently need to redesign for this problem by reimagining and training for the entry-level role in the age of AI.
Further reading
This article was originally posted on my Substack. The Wadds Inc. newsletter is read by almost 6,000 communications and public relations practitioners. We take a slower, critical perspective on the research, evidence and developments shaping the field.
