Ross Barnes

So the engineering team, whenever they ship a feature or a product, they always do a business case of what it's going to do for the business, but also heavily regulated legal have to sign off on it.

So they've got a team that is the beginning of the AI adoption.

They've got a team that is one-to-one.

So they can handle the amount of features coming down the pipe.

So it's not too bad.

End of month one of AI adoption, 10x more features are coming out of the engineering team.

Same legal team.

bottleneck but because you're as you use ai more and more your efficiency and output compounds end of month two 100x feature shit now that legal team who has refused to adopt ai is sitting on all these business cases that the ceo can see would drive business benefit

And that team there are incredibly frustrated and overworked.

And this team here are incredibly frustrated.

Do you see what I mean?

And you're shifting the bottleneck and compounding the bottleneck into another part of your organization.

So the key thing is not making that engineering team better.

It is educating that legal team that they need to do something because this is going to get worse when it's the thousand X.

You're absolutely right.

And that is why the humanity in AI adoption is so important because you've got two diametrically opposed teams, but they are driven by one pure human emotion or human entropy, which is ego.

You've got a legal team that has the ego that we are the legal team.

AI will not be able to do what we do.

You've got the engineering team's ego with we must be the best at using AI because we're the technologists.

If they came together, then they both win.