The winning tech-to-human ratio for AI use

Artificial intelligence can be used to overcome productivity issues, including keeping costs down, but “it won’t make the boat go faster”, says Ōtautahi Christchurch-based professional director, technology consultant and commentator Ben Kepes CFInstD. 
 
“I’ve observed organisations that view AI as providing a 100 per cent solution and it has totally degraded their brand value because they have lost the human element,” he says. 
 
Kepes sits on a number of boards, including Kordia, UniMed, Pegasus Health and Corde, and is the owner of intergenerational apparel brand, Cactus Outdoor, New Zealand’s largest remaining clothing manufacturer. 
 
A keen advocate of the value that machine learning can deliver, Kepes points to “the potential of how AI and cloud computing will change the world” but he remains sceptical where organisations are tempted to use AI as a be-all and end-all, and fail to understand and appreciate its nuances. 
 
“Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should do it. We’re in this weird world where every organisation is falling over themselves to deploy AI,” says Kepes, who admits to some excitement of this new gadget in the toy box. “AI is incredibly useful, but not the panacea for all ills, or a potential replacement for every function within your organisation.” 

Ben Kepes

While it might be tempting to jump on the bandwagon and say your business is all AI or tech, this approach is “patently absurd”. 
 
“Yes, every company can absolutely use AI to accelerate their outcomes, but that doesn’t mean they are an AI company. It simply means they will use AI to help them get to where they need to go.” 

Kepes says AI should be considered much like any other board issue and needs to align with a company’s values and objectives. Accessing valuable insights from data is one key area where boards and businesses can and should use AI, according to Kepes. 
 
“For instance, analysing spreadsheets. It’s a way of increasing the velocity of otherwise laborious processes.” 
 
For Cactus, a small business selling products globally, AI is deployed in the marketing space. But Kepes says it shouldn’t be seen as a total solution. 
 
“AI does a terrible job of creating ready- to-use marketing copy, but it can get 80 per cent there. If you are not using AI to ensure your marketing spend is targeted and effective, then you are leaving value on the table,” he says. 

The 80 per cent tech to 20 per cent human ratio is a model Kepes is happy to apply in his own business to achieve desired outcomes and improve efficiency. 

Given that technology has long been capable of creating very close copies of designs, when asked whether AI could disrupt Cactus as a brand, Kepes says ‘no’. 

“There are lots of things that can be challenging for us, such as supply chain practicalities, product and marketing agility, and competing on a global stage. AI can have an impact around the edges of those, but it doesn’t fundamentally change the playing field,” he says. 
 
The risk, if the business was to fully go down an AI path, would be changes that could be detrimental to the brand. “We could become just another generic brand of creating perfect, but vanilla products and messages, and ironically, when everything is perfect, nothing looks any good. Because of that, AI is a great augmenter for human beings, but not a replacement,” he says. 
 
Kepes comes back to ‘the why’ for boards who are considering its use and application. “What is the fundamental problem you’re trying to solve with AI, and what risks does its use introduce?” 
 
In particular, organisations need to be wary of the risks regarding their IP. “Use AI to drive efficiencies, where one person might take X amount of time to make product Y. Instead, that person can use half that time to make product Y because your workflow planning will be more efficient, your decision-making will be based on analysing more data points more rapidly and your time-to-value will be reduced,” says Kepes. 
 
Lastly, Kepes believes boards should approach AIthrough a lens of “curiosity, rather than full implementation”. 
 
“They need to explore AI for two reasons: One, because AI is going to be important for operating processes in the future, so they need to understand it. And two, they need to have an ongoing curiosity to maintain relevance,” he says.