Learning Library

← Back to Library

Managers Stalling the AI Revolution

Key Points

  • Individual contributors overwhelmingly want AI tools that can double or triple their productivity, but managers often block access due to budget and security concerns.
  • Managers need to champion AI adoption by explaining to leadership and IT that AI software is a strategic expense, not a minor convenience, and that its cost is still far lower than hiring additional staff.
  • The price of AI tools (e.g., $200–$400 per employee per month) is higher than traditional software but represents a cost‑effective productivity multiplier that will only become more valuable as tools evolve.
  • If organizations don’t confront legacy processes and budgeting inertia now, they risk falling behind competitors who will invest in AI‑driven productivity enhancements despite rising software costs.
  • Anticipated future AI solutions could cost $1,000–$2,000 per employee per month, making early adoption and cultural readiness essential for maintaining a competitive edge.

Full Transcript

# Managers Stalling the AI Revolution **Source:** [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm_v70xhas8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm_v70xhas8) **Duration:** 00:10:05 ## Summary - Individual contributors overwhelmingly want AI tools that can double or triple their productivity, but managers often block access due to budget and security concerns. - Managers need to champion AI adoption by explaining to leadership and IT that AI software is a strategic expense, not a minor convenience, and that its cost is still far lower than hiring additional staff. - The price of AI tools (e.g., $200–$400 per employee per month) is higher than traditional software but represents a cost‑effective productivity multiplier that will only become more valuable as tools evolve. - If organizations don’t confront legacy processes and budgeting inertia now, they risk falling behind competitors who will invest in AI‑driven productivity enhancements despite rising software costs. - Anticipated future AI solutions could cost $1,000–$2,000 per employee per month, making early adoption and cultural readiness essential for maintaining a competitive edge. ## Sections - [00:00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm_v70xhas8&t=0s) **Managers Blocking AI Adoption** - The speaker argues that overcautious managers are denying staff access to affordable AI tools—citing security and budget excuses—thereby stifling potential productivity boosts that could double or triple performance. - [00:03:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm_v70xhas8&t=214s) **Beyond the Mechanical Horse** - The speaker argues that AI-driven software no longer fits traditional software categories or budgeting models, urging a new conceptual and financial framework. - [00:06:46](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vm_v70xhas8&t=406s) **Evolving AI Investment Expectations** - Senior leaders must recognize that modern AI tools far exceed basic chatbots and require substantial investment to amplify team impact. ## Full Transcript
0:00managers are screwing the AI revolution. 0:02And I say that as someone who has 0:04managed teams and I have great sympathy 0:06for the challenges that we're all 0:08experiencing right now, but it's true. 0:09It's true. And I'm going to I'm going to 0:11be really honest. I have talked to a lot 0:13of individual contributors and the 0:16universal complaint I hear near 0:18universal 99% 98% is that they want 0:22access to AI tools that will help them 0:25do their job better in a really 0:27significant way. Like we're talking in 0:28some cases for your best performers 0:30double or triple their productivity and 0:32they can't get it. And they can't get it 0:34because the managers are not budgeting 0:36for it. And managers will tell me well 0:38we can't go to it. It is giving 0:40difficulties about security going back 0:42up to department heads. Like my boss is 0:44just not going to like go for 400 bucks 0:46a month per employee. They've never seen 0:48that. Managers, senior managers, 0:50directors, you guys carry the flag on 0:53this. You have to be the ones that 0:55explain clearly to your bosses, to the 0:59IT department, why we don't live in a 1:03traditional software world anymore. We 1:05do not live in a world where getting 1:07access to a regular sort of software 1:10product is a minor help and a minor 1:13inconvenience if you don't get it right. 1:15It's not a big deal either way. Maybe it 1:17costs 25 bucks a seed for the year. 1:19Maybe it costs a h 100red bucks a seed 1:20for the year and you forget about it. 1:22No, we live in a world where people who 1:25are extraordinary at AI can effectively 1:28double or triple their productivity if 1:31they have access to the right tools. You 1:32can literally buy the productivity off 1:35the shelf. And yes, it is more expensive 1:38than traditional software. It is two or 1:40three hund bucks a month. And you may be 1:42thinking to yourself as a manager, I'll 1:43kick this down the road. I'll get it 1:45next fiscal year. I've got news for you. 1:48It's not going to get cheaper. And the 1:50reason why is we are now baselining 1:52against people compensation. So you 1:55think 300 400 bucks a month is 1:57expensive. Sure it's expensive. Is it as 2:00expensive as a person doing that job? 2:02No. No it is not. It is vastly cheaper. 2:05There is a lot of headroom there for 2:07model makers to build more effective 2:09tools that will go from two or 3xing 2:11your employees productivity to 5 or 2:1310xing it and they will charge more. 2:15Soon you're going to be looking at 2:16software costs maybe by 2026, by 2027 2:19that are running a,000, $2,000 a month 2:21per employee. And IT departments aren't 2:23ready for that. Leadership isn't ready 2:25for that. But it is critical that we 2:28have the conversations now because 2:30otherwise there are going to be a few 2:32companies that figure that out. Figure 2:34out that their own aged legacy processes 2:38are getting in the way of actually 2:40helping their employees to do better at 2:42their work. and they'll kick the 2:43processes aside, which is what you 2:45should do, and they will figure out a 2:46way to get it done. This is the same 2:49incentive set problem that frustrates 2:52existing employees when they see new 2:54hires coming in at a higher comp band, 2:57which is a notorious problem across the 2:59industry. People care more about getting 3:02the new hire in the door than about 3:03keeping the legacy hire because the 3:05incentive is to make sure that that new 3:07hire in that moment walks in and fills 3:09that role. Whereas the incentive for the 3:12existing employee is just can they come 3:13in tomorrow. It just isn't the same. We 3:16have the same problem with software. The 3:18incentive is can we just keep our 3:20existing process? Can we just have them 3:22come in tomorrow? Can we just have them 3:23do the work? And people are thinking of 3:25it like a mechanical horse. So in the 3:28old days when we had the car, we did not 3:30know what cars were capable of, right? 3:32We thought that cars were capable of 3:34things that horses were capable of. It 3:35was the mechanical horse. It was 3:36literally called that. That was our 3:38mental model. We have the same problem 3:41now with software. It is the mechanical 3:43horse problem. And we think of AI 3:46software as if it is software. It is 3:48not. We need to have a new category for 3:50it. And I realize that this makes me 3:53sound annoyingly like an onhype on trend 3:56AI agent. I don't know influencer. It's 3:59not. The point is not to say agent for 4:02the sake of agent. The point is not to 4:03invent a category because we need a 4:05category because we need to hype things. 4:07The point is just that the old category 4:08doesn't fit anymore. Traditional 4:10software just isn't priced like this. 4:12Traditional software doesn't deliver 4:14productivity gains like this. And so if 4:16you were going through traditional 4:18software budgeting and planning 4:20processes, it's not going to work, is 4:22it? You're going to go through and like 4:24every other department head is going to 4:25sit there and be like, "Yeah, yeah, 4:26yeah. We're doing our regular basic like 4:28100 bucks a month or 200 bucks a month 4:30total for our employees for software and 4:33professional development." And then 4:34we're done, right? Moving on. And you're 4:36going to sit there as the forward 4:37thinking guy where wherever you are, 4:39right? Or gal or whatever in whatever 4:40department you happen to be. Maybe 4:42you're in product, maybe you're in 4:43engineering, and you're going to be 4:44like, "Well, we're going to be budgeting 4:452,000 bucks a month per employee." No, 4:48that doesn't include professional 4:49development. We actually going to budget 4:50another 2,000 bucks a month to make sure 4:52they get the AI courses they need to 4:54supercharge them. And that's what we're 4:56going to do. Doesn't that sound great? 4:57And you're going to get laughed out of 4:58the room because nobody else at your 5:00level in your business is doing that. 5:02And so this becomes a problem of the 5:04commons. Basically, everyone is 5:06incentivized to look in the budgeting 5:09process for leadership. And so, nobody 5:11is incentivized to be bold and say, "I 5:13could deliver extraordinary value if you 5:16can shift my budgeting." But that is 5:17what we need. And employees are going to 5:19vote with their feet here because the 5:22really good ones are going to move to 5:24roles and to businesses that get this 5:26and they will not stay with you. They 5:28won't they won't stay with you. best 5:30employees at AI will go to the companies 5:34that understand this. This is not just a 5:36matter of Mark Zuckerberg broke the 5:38market with $100 million compensation. 5:40No, this is actually I mean for one, 5:43people left Meta after that. People 5:45walked away from the $und00 million 5:47compensation, right? They went back to 5:48their old jobs cuz they didn't like 5:49Meta. So no, it's not about the money. 5:51It's about your ability as a business to 5:56generate a culture change that enables 5:59your best people to feel like they can 6:02thrive with AI. Because if you look at 6:03it from the point of view of an 6:04individual contributor, it has never 6:07been more challenging to figure out a 6:09career path. You have to figure out how 6:11are you going to supercharge your AI 6:12skills? How are you going to deliver in 6:14your current role? How do you set up 6:15your resume so it looks good in a world 6:17where roles are changing and mixing and 6:19merging all the time? And to do that, 6:21you desperately need access to AI 6:24tooling so that you can show your next 6:26role or your existing role when you get 6:27a promotion that you know how to use it. 6:29And by and large, our businesses are not 6:32setting employees up for success on 6:34that. And I do think that comes back to 6:36senior managers and directors. We have 6:39to have more advocacy for our teams. 6:43They need that for their own careers. 6:46They need that to deliver for the 6:47business. And if you look at it from a 6:49managerial perspective, you need that in 6:52order to grow your own career. Your 6:54teams need to be that successful. We are 6:56going to live in a world more and more 6:58where leadership at the best companies 7:00is going to expect you not to grow your 7:02headcount. Instead, expect you to prove 7:04that you have done everything with AI 7:06that you possibly can to expand the 7:08impact of your team as it is today. And 7:11what we need is not just that 7:13expectation, but a corresponding 7:15investment in the team, a corresponding 7:17willingness to say if we want to grow 7:20that impact, it's not just a 20 buck a 7:22month chat GPT subscription anymore. 7:24That was 2023. Sorry, they now do so 7:26much more. And I think that is one of 7:28the hardest things to convey to 7:30leadership is that even though the name 7:31is still chat GPT, we have gone in two 7:34years from a little chatbot to a agent 7:38capable of doing hours of work. And 7:41that's not the same thing at all. It's 7:42not remotely the same thing. It is a 7:44weird world that we live in that we name 7:46it the same thing. We call it AI. Do you 7:48does your team have AI? Right? It should 7:50be 20 bucks a month. It's AI, right? Get 7:52the co-pilot. It's AI. AI is not AI. 7:55These are not onetoone comparisons. This 7:57does not work this way. And so it is on 8:00senior managers and directors to sit 8:02down with teams to explain in detail 8:06what they need. And so teams need to 8:08explain and voice to managers. These are 8:10the tools I need. And managers need to 8:11explain and voice really clearly and 8:13advocate for their teams for this use 8:15case, for product, for engineering, for 8:17marketing, for customer success. This is 8:18what my teams need to be extraordinarily 8:21productive in 2025. It will cost. It 8:23will cost more than traditional 8:24software, but you'd rather pay it than a 8:27lose your best people or b flo bloat 8:30your headcount budget because 8:32increasingly 8:33it is looking less in most cases like 8:37firing people unless they don't want to 8:39do AI and it's looking more like we're 8:41just not going to grow the team as fast 8:43because we have so much leverage from 8:44AI. Well, if your team is wanting to 8:47lean in, that's fantastic. They have the 8:49domain knowledge. They want to lean in. 8:51Let's get them the budget so that they 8:53can actually deliver for the business. 8:55And overwhelmingly I hear from people 8:57that that is not happening. I see that 8:59that is not happening. Very few 9:01businesses are sitting there and saying 9:02our software procurement has to change. 9:05Our budgeting has to change. But it 9:07does. It has to shift. It is not 9:10acceptable to expect your AI employees 9:13to do 2025 AI work on a 2023 budget. It 9:16doesn't work. Traditional software 9:18budgets are broken. So, if you are in 9:20that spot, send this video to your 9:22manager. Tell your manager, "Watch this. 9:25This is a problem for us. I can't get 9:27the budgeting I need to do my work." And 9:30if you're in leadership, this has got to 9:32be a call to action for you. You cannot 9:34look at traditional software budgeting 9:35the same way. This is not traditional 9:38software. I don't care if you call it 9:39agentic software. I don't care what the 9:41hype term is, but you've got to shift 9:43the way you budget for work and you've 9:45got to invest in your best employees so 9:48they can deliver this 2, three, four, 5x 9:50impact over the next couple years. So 9:52that is my challenge to you. We are we 9:53are not in old software land anymore. We 9:56are in new software land and there are 9:58new rules and there are new budgets and 10:00you have to invest in your team at a 10:02different level. Good luck.