This is an interesting example of how the (imagined) productivity gains of generative AI are being institutionalised into workplace expectations. This is a job for a charity, who I support and am not criticising, calling for ChatGPT as part of an advert for a new general manager:
The ideal candidate will embrace new technologies like ChatGPT to improve efficiency and support the charity’s work. This position calls for a proactive, resilient individual who can thrive in a small, grant-funded organisation. Responsibilities include overseeing development, sustainability, reporting, and administration, and contributing to the delivery of the charity’s five-year business plan. The role is open to candidates from diverse backgrounds, with transferable skills, and offers flexibility in shaping the role to fit the right candidate.
To say the productivity gains aren’t being borne out in real contexts is far too simplistic. The evidence is complex, as would be expected, with lacklustre performance in large organisations where it has been imposed in a top-down (often co-piloted way) versus the preponderance of what Ethan Mollick calls ‘secret cyborgs’ often in roles with a significant degree of professional autonomy. The way in which cash strapped small organisations call for GenAI use is another interesting vector through which this is becoming part of workplaces.
Mark Carrigan 