Nate Lanxon (NLW)

To what extent is a company thinking about just trying to do the same stuff, but a little bit faster, a little bit cheaper, a little bit better, versus really uncovering new opportunities?

Just understanding where an organization thinks in that way can make a huge difference when it comes to employees.

I've actually been recently experimenting with POW, P-A-W, productivity, automation, and opportunity that really covers the spectrum of get your employees doing their jobs better with co-pilots, automate tasks that can be automated, because almost any task that can be automated, people are usually pretty happy to hand off, but also think in terms of opportunity.

So that's another big one that I see.

The one small point that I thought was really worth honing in on a little bit more is the discussion of the expectations of what to do

with time saved from work.

Now, you had framed it in terms of, are people going to be worried that if they save a bunch of time, their role is not going to be seen as valuable?

Another version that I see is people not wanting to just have their work expectations doubled overnight because these tools can happen.

And this is actually pretty critical because especially as you see media articles and things like that talking about ROI gaps in AI, a lot of that

at core to the extent that there are real issues there has to do with the difficulty of translating individual productivity gains on an employee by employee level up to the organization level and having conversations internally about what the changed expectations around how much output you're trying to do or you're trying to have and just basically how to use that extra time I think is hugely significant and really not something that I see a lot of organizations discussing.

One thing that you didn't mention that is tricky because I don't even know where it would fit in and across this framework is the tool quality problem.

So one of the big challenges is that organizations often face is in many cases, the tools that they have access to at home after hours with their personal Gmail's are simply straight up and unequivocally better than the tools they have access to at work.

Is this a problem that can be solved in any way by different cultures or different managerial styles?

Or are we really just stuck hoping that Microsoft gets its stuff together to keep up to capability?

I mean, they've added anthropic coding models.

It's certainly clear that they're trying to keep up with that.

But this is one thing that I think leads to a lot of shadow IT and shadow AI use.

It's just the simple gap between the tools that are available to people.

The other piece of this, I guess, that is a spot where in that interim period people could hone in is governance, right?

If you have clearly articulated policies around where people can and cannot use external tools and for what, some of this can be taken down because the concern that most people have isn't that they're using, they prefer Claude over Copilot for writing emails.