Negative social proof
We’re a funny bunch of fish, us humans. And Richard Shotton has been reminding us why. He’s been looking at the pitfalls of trying to shock people into action by flagging negative behaviours, because you either excuse yourself (‘not me’) or you plead helplessness:
“Either way, our behaviour is unlikely to change. And there’s academic evidence to suggest why such [things] might backfire — because highlighting bad behaviours only makes them worse.”
Meet your new sparring partner
Christina Lemieux, Executive Strategy Director at PG One, has spoken about how strategic planners (read: insights) can survive and thrive with the rise of AI:
“[The more you are tempted] to look for the answers behind and within a screen, the more important it is to get out into the world and out into life to inspire fresh thinking […] get into people’s homes, get into their hearts and minds through really deep conversations and discussions, spend time in a mall, spend time talking to moms at the school gate, and then feed that into gen AI as your sparring partner.”
Christina also discussed hopes of a golden age of planning:
“[…] where we’re free from desks and able to luxuriate in contemplation and observation.”
We’re here to help with that 😉
But beware the sucker punch…
A new paper in Nature Machine Intelligence has concluded that large language models which replace human participants can harmfully misportray and flatten identity groups. *Gulps.*
As researchers, we have to be aware of this, it’s hugely important. And worth the £14.99 to access the full report.
Meanwhile, Zoe Scanman has recommended that we stop using AI notetakers. I’ve found them handy when I’ve used them in the past. However, Zoe says that in doing so you lose out on a big part of processing, interpreting, and engaging with the information. She’s got a point. Dagnabbit.
Related, Careful Industries have published 5 things to think about when adopting an AI tool. And included in that list is not falling for FOMO.
Positive inefficiency
Simeon Adams wrote about how we should foster inefficiency when searching for brilliant ideas. It’s a solid argument, one that actually made me conclude we should be both. I mean, I really (really) like being efficient, but I like the inefficiency of things too, such as this:
“Imagine returning to the office because there’s more inefficiency to be had there. In the commute, the distractions, the idle chats. Acknowledging that it’s precisely the moments of inefficiency that make being together better. Or, equally, at home. Whatever works for you.”
And finally…
I didn’t know I wanted to see inside Gloria Steinem’s house until I saw inside Gloria Steinem’s house. What a joy.
Okay, it’s 2hrs long, but this conversation between Dave Dye and Martin Jones about pitching is incredibly interesting. If you have a long drive coming up, bung it on.
Life lesson right here: always make a cuppa at work for your colleagues.