2 Comments
User's avatar
Patrick's avatar

The ability and authority to challenge GenAI output is the crux of the systemic flaw I have been researching. This is different to automation bias; there a person is over-relying on the output because other pressures prevent proper analysis. You are describing exactly what I have called Judgement Displacement.

I like the idea of role-playing for juniors to learn what they need. (You could have GenAI design the training to incorporate the most important, useful, and common tasks. :)

A large multi-national corporate I visited recently have begun training their interns as leaders of virtual teams: several GenAI members are given complementary roles — fundamentally checking each other's work — while the human is responsible for the oversight and final product.

Claudine Cassar's avatar

Thank you for this — particularly for naming the distinction so clearly. And I also really like the virtual-team model you observed. Positioning the intern as the leader of a small GenAI “team” whose members are deliberately given complementary (and therefore cross-checking) roles is a clever way of forcing the human to stay in the oversight seat.