5 Comments
User's avatar
David Cook's avatar

The missing element in the research is the incorporation of all humans innate strengths as found in Research like Gallup Clifton Strengths. All humans have the capacity to be great leaders if they lean into the things that are their natural traits and if they understand those talents in their subordinates. We need the research you have done but in order to fully utilize how to use our humanness in the age of AGI, we need to all be doing what we do best.

Expand full comment
Hannes Thaller's avatar

I completely agree with your perspective. In fact, that’s exactly how I’ve been approaching AI, using it to symbiotically enhance and augment my own abilities across nearly every area of work. It’s incredibly rewarding to finally accomplish things you always knew you could do, but where invisible blockers got in the way.

I’ve formalized this approach in a framework called The Mirror Manifesto. The idea is to pair each person with a long-term, personalized AI partner that complements their weaknesses. It helps correct mistakes while enabling you to naturally learn and grow over time.

If you’re interested, here’s the full write-up:

The Mirror Manifesto - https://hannesthallerai.substack.com/p/the-mirror-manifesto

Expand full comment
Mark's avatar

Where can we find this? “ We have built a short performance-based test of leadership that anyone can take by themselves, using the power of ChatGPT.”

Expand full comment
FilAth's avatar

Great post as always. Would it be valid to say (given the results of the HBS paper) that there is a concern that AI + human output will lead to more uniformity?

Expand full comment
elle's avatar

Great post - welcome back!

Expand full comment