How to Balance AI Automation and Human Connection

🤖 The Leadership Charade: When AI Makes You Sound Authentic (But You're Not) Imagine streamlining annual reviews with cutting-edge AI. Sounds revolutionary, right? But at what cost to employee connection and authenticity? "I automated my team's performance reviews using AI to save time." An executive client shared this with me recently, beaming with pride at their efficiency. Their smile vanished when I asked: "But do your people feel truly seen in those reviews?" We're crossing into dangerous territory: using technology to sound authentic while skipping the human work of truly connecting with our people. This isn't about rejecting AI. It's about being intentional about what only humans can do well. 🌟 AI can craft your communications, analyze your metrics, and optimize your schedule. But it absolutely cannot: • Build genuine psychological safety • Practice radical kindness when someone's struggling • Notice the unspoken dynamics in your team • Embody the vulnerable leadership that fosters belonging The most alarming pattern I've witnessed in my executive coaching? Leaders using AI to manufacture what research calls "toxic positivity" defined as perfectly crafted, upbeat messages that lack the messy authenticity of real human connection. When our leadership becomes too polished, too perfect, we lose the beautiful imperfection that makes us human. We lose trust. Here's the paradox: As AI makes communication more efficient, authentic connection becomes more valuable. 💥 The radically kind approach: ⚡ Draft important messages yourself first - even when imperfect ⚡ Ask: "Would my team recognize my voice in this?" ⚡ Include observations that only you would notice ⚡ Share a genuine challenge you're navigating Technology is a magnificent tool. But tools should amplify our humanity, not replace it. In an AI world, your humanity isn't a leadership weakness. It's your superpower. ⚡ And, Yes!, I use AI tools every day of my work and personal life. I continue to learn every day and stay Constantly Curious. Let's learn from each other authentically. Let's Celebrate being Human as much as we celebrate new Tech

“The robots are great at processing text, but they’re terrible at having coffee with a nervous author.” I shared that line in a recent talk with editors, and it stuck. Because it’s true. AI is changing how we work, but it can’t replicate what makes us human. In 2025, AI is a regular part of publishing and content production. It’s helping teams brainstorm, draft, edit, illustrate. The shift isn’t coming—it’s already here. So what does that mean for editors? It means our role is evolving. For some of us, editing now looks like guiding an AI through a task and checking its work, rather than manually pushing commas around a document. And yes, many editors are being asked to use AI tools daily. To move faster. To do more. But here’s what I reminded that room of editors: Change is not new. We’ve been automating editing for decades. Spell check went mainstream in the ‘80s. Grammar checkers and Word macros followed in the ‘90s. AI is just the next step in that evolution. So how do we stay relevant? We lean into the thing AI can’t do: be human. 📍 Make humanity your asset. Focus on your “people skills" like empathy, coaching, and face-to-face communication. Look for ways to increase human connection in your work. 📍 Become the person who knows AI. Be the one who teaches your team how to use it well. Test tools, improve workflows, and share what you learn. If AI saves your team time and money, you may have just covered your own salary. 📍 Expand your range. The editor who also understands AI search, is an SME, or leads a team? That person is harder to replace than someone who only knows style guides. 📍 Stay in the loop. Wharton Professor Ethan Mollick calls it “Human in the Loop.” At every stage of AI use, humans need to be involved—reviewing, guiding, checking for accuracy. (We’ve all seen The Terminator. We know what happens if we skip that step.) AI can help us move faster and do more, but it still needs us. Your judgment. Your people skills. Your coffee chats with nervous authors. Our humanity is the future of editing. Let’s lean into it.

What if I told you that using AI could make you more human? That's exactly what I do as a solo GP of my VC fund. It's more important than ever to focus on the human factors with founders. While other VCs hire armies of analysts, I use AI to do the research so I can focus on what actually matters: the humans. The future of venture is seeing more deals and iterating faster with fewer people who are more human, not less. Here's how AI helps me Deal Analysis in Minutes: Claude + Notion MCP analyzes every pitch deck I see. I built prompts that automatically research: - Competitive landscape and positioning - TAM validation and market sizing - Go-to-market strategy assessment - Risk factors and red flags What used to take analysts hours now takes me 10 minutes. Same depth without the bias. Content That Scales: Claude helps me write newsletters and social posts. I feed it real portfolio insights and market patterns. It captures my voice while I focus on building relationships. Due Diligence Speed: Upload financials, product specs, legal docs. Claude flags issues instantly that would take junior analysts days to find. Here's the most interesting part: AI doesn't replace human judgment. It amplifies it. I'm not trying to automate away empathy or intuition. I'm automating the grunt work so I can spend more time understanding founders as people. The result: - 100s of deals reviewed monthly vs. 50 for traditional funds - More time for founder conversations versus spreadsheet analysis - Faster feedback cycles in hours, not weeks - Deeper human connections because I'm not drowning in busywork The future I see: Venture funds with fewer people, but those people are more human, not less. They understand founder psychology, market dynamics, and relationship building because AI handles the mechanical stuff. This is how AI makes you more human: by eliminating the work that made you less human in the first place. Big funds are still hiring armies to do research that AI does better. Meanwhile, I'm using technology to be more present with founders, not more distant. To founders: Look for VCs who use AI to enhance their humanity, not replace it. We move faster on the analysis so we can move slower on the relationship building.

With the advent of generative AI there’s been a lot of discussion about the role of “human in the loop” (HITL) models. At Mineral, we’ve been doing work in this area, and I’m often asked how long we think HITL will be relevant. So I thought I’d share a few thoughts here. HITL is not a new concept. It was originally coined in the field of military aviation and aerospace, and referred to the integration of human decision-making into automated systems. Today, it’s expanded to be a cornerstone in the AI discussion, particularly in fields like ours — HR & Compliance — where trust and accuracy matters. At its core, HITL is a design philosophy that involves human intelligence at critical stages of AI operations. It's not just about having a person oversee AI; it's about creating a collaborative environment where human expertise and AI's computational power work in tandem. HITL is a key part of our AI strategy at Mineral, and as we think about the value and longevity of HITL, we think about two distinct purposes it serves. The first is technical. Our domain is a complex arena – federal, state, and local regulation and compliance. As good as AI has become, our tests have shown that it’s still not capable of fully navigating this landscape, and is unlikely to get there soon. HITL plays a critical role in catching and correcting errors and ambiguities, and ensuring the accuracy of the output, so clients can rely on the guidance we give. The second is cultural. This aspect of HITL is both more intuitive and less understood. Even if AI is capable of providing correct information, HITL plays a critical role in establishing trust in a cultural sense. Think about the last time you went on an amusement park ride. Odds are a human operator tugged on your seatbelt to ensure it was fastened. There’s no technical reason why a human needs to do this work — a machine could do it better. But culturally we feel better knowing a human has confirmed we’re safe. The same is true in HR and compliance. Whether they’re starting from scratch or already have an instinct on how to proceed, clients often want confirmation from a human expert that they’re on the right track. In the world of AI, this cultural value of having a human in the loop is likely to extend beyond the technical value. So how long will HITL will be relevant? For a long time, and probably even past the point at which AI’s capabilities equal or surpass our own. As we continue to innovate, the importance of #HITL in areas like this is more evident than ever. It represents a balanced approach to AI, acknowledging that while AI can process data at an unprecedented scale, human insight, empathy, and ethics are irreplaceable. In this partnership, #AI amplifies our capabilities, and we guide it to make sure it serves the greater good. That’s a recipe for long-term success. I’d love to hear from you: how do you see human in the loop systems evolving?

𝗚𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗔𝗜 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘁𝘀; 𝗶𝘁 𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝘁𝗶𝘀𝗲! 👉 It’s about harnessing AI to enhance our human capabilities, not replace them. 🙇♂️ Let me walk you through my realization. As a healthcare practitioner deeply involved in integrating AI into our systems, I've learned it's not about tech for tech's sake. It's about the synergy between human intelligence and artificial intelligence. Here’s how my perspective evolved after deploying Generative AI in various sectors: 𝐇𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐡𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐞: "I 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 AI to analyze complex patient data for personalized care." - But first, we must understand the unique healthcare challenges and data intricacies. 𝐄𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: "I 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 AI to tailor learning to each student's needs." - Yet, identifying those needs requires human insight and empathy that AI alone can't provide. 𝐀𝐫𝐭 & 𝐃𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧: "I 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 AI to push creative boundaries." - And yet, the creative spark starts with a human idea. 𝐁𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬: "I 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 AI for precise market predictions." - But truly understanding market nuances comes from human experience and intuition. The Jobs-to-be-Done are complex, and time is precious. We must focus on: ✅ Integrating AI into human-led processes. ☑ Using AI to complement, not replace, human expertise. ✅ Combining AI-generated data with human understanding for decision-making. ☑ Ensuring AI tools are user-friendly for non-tech experts. Finding the right balance is key: A. AI tools must be intuitive and supportive. B. They require human expertise to interpret and apply their output effectively. C. They must fit into the existing culture and workflows. For instance, using AI to enhance patient care requires clinicians to interpret data with a human touch. Or in education, where AI informs, but teachers inspire. 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐀𝐈 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐫𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐬 is critical. And that’s where I come in. 👋 I'm Umer kHan, here to help you navigate the integration of Generative AI into your world, ensuring it's done with human insight at the forefront. Let's collaborate to create solutions where technology meets humanity. 👇 Feel free to reach out for a human-AI strategy session. #GenerativeAI #HealthcareInnovation #PersonalizedEducation #CreativeSynergy #BusinessIntelligence

How can we ensure the empathetic aspect of customer service doesn't get lost in the AI mix? I was asked this question in a recent podcast. My answer? It's all about balance. Here’s my simple formula: 🎯 Enhance the customer experience: Empower your support professionals with AI tools. This allows them to focus more on the quality of communication they send back to the customer. 🎯 Engage Human-to-Human: With the valuable time saved by AI, your team can be intentional about their responses, ensuring they are as human and relatable as possible. 🎯 Prioritize valuable tasks: Let's not waste human potential on repetitive tasks that a computer can handle. Instead, let's focus on what humans do best – empathize, understand, and connect. The goal isn't to replace humans with AI but to enhance our abilities and improve our jobs.

AI Automation is killing human creativity. A recent study by Gartner shows a significant drop in innovative output in companies heavily reliant on AI-driven automation. But only if you let it... The Gartner report highlights decreased employee engagement and a stifling of novel ideas in organizations that have fully automated key creative processes.  However, the study also revealed that strategic integration of AI tools, focusing on augmentation rather than replacement, led to significant productivity increases and enhanced creative problem-solving. I fundamentally believe AI automation is a powerful tool for accelerating progress, but only when human ingenuity remains central to the process. And it would be a mistake to simply replace humans completely. So, here are my thoughts and takeaways from the Gartner study: ✅ Focus on augmentation, not replacement.  ↳ Leverage AI for repetitive tasks, freeing humans for strategic thinking. ✅ Invest in employee training and development.  ↳ Equip your team with the skills to collaborate effectively with AI. ✅ Foster a culture of experimentation and innovation.  ↳ Encourage employees to explore new ideas, even if they seem unconventional. ✅ Regularly evaluate and adjust your AI implementation.  ↳ Monitor its impact on employee creativity and make necessary changes. AI automation can be a game-changer, but it shouldn't be at the cost of human creativity. The key is to find the right balance between automation and human ingenuity. For more insights and strategies for leveraging AI in your business, follow my page for regular updates!

Algorithms have their language, but humans resonate with stories. The fusion of human intuition and machine intelligence can produce magic. Reflecting on my past launches, I've found that the best AI-driven projects always had a strong human touch at their core. Consider the art of storytelling. For centuries, we've been captivated by tales of triumph, sorrow, love, and adventure. Stories shape societies and mold beliefs. Now, think about the narratives crafted by brands, products, and services. They're essentially stories, right? AI can churn out data, analyze trends, and even generate content, but can it understand the heartbeat of a story that resonates with human emotion? As Product Managers, our role isn't just to leverage AI for efficiency but to intertwine it with the art of storytelling. It's our narratives that give AI a soul. Here's a simple approach: ✨ Let AI handle the extensive data analysis, identifying patterns and insights that can inform your strategy. ✨ Then, blend these insights with a story that speaks to the heart. For instance, while AI can predict that a user might need a particular product based on their browsing history, it's the compelling narrative behind the product that convinces the user to make a purchase. ✨ This duality is where the future lies. It's not about humans vs. AI, but rather humans with AI. Embrace this synergy, and you'll craft tales that not only make sense but also matter.

I have been thinking about the co-pilot vs autonomous agent branding of AI capabilities lately and finally had critical thought mass to put my ramblings into words. As AI capabilities have grown, there are two contrasting emerging perspectives on how it can impact the future of work. One view is the "auto-pilot" model where AI increasingly automates and replaces human tasks(eg. Devin). The other is the "co-pilot" model where AI acts as an intelligent assistant, supporting and enhancing human efforts. Personally, the co-pilot approach seems more promising, at least with AI's current level of development & intelligence. While highly capable, today's AI still lacks the nuanced judgment, high-level reasoning, and rich context that humans possess. Fully automating complex knowledge work could mean losing those valuable human strengths. On a Psychological level, the co-pilot model keeps humans involved. It allows us to focus on aspects of our work that require creativity, strategic thinking, emotional intelligence and other distinctly human skills. It also preserves the key psychological needs derived from work - autonomy, mastery and purpose. The co-pilot model maintains human agency while providing efficiency gains at the same time. I have been observing products that are taking this co-pilot centric approach. One key and contrarian observation from these is that from a design perspective, AI assistance works better when users can opt out of specific automations, rather than being forced to automate everything. Rather than asking "what do you want automated?", ask: "what do you NOT want automated?" This puts control in the hands of the human for how AI lends a hand. At this point, this co-pilot approach of combining human and AI capabilities is not just an abstract concept - it is being operationalized into the foundations of AI developer frameworks and tooling. For example, Langchain has an "agentic" component called Langgraph that includes an "interrupt_before" functionality. This allows the AI agent to defer back to the human when it is unable to fully accomplish a task on its own. The developers recognize that AI agents can be unreliable, so enabling this hand-off to a human co-pilot is critical. Similarly, Langgraph provides functionality to require human approval before executing certain actions. This oversight allows humans to verify that the AI's activities are running as intended before they take effect. By building in these human-in-the-loop capabilities at the foundational level, developer frameworks are acknowledging the importance of the co-pilot model. I seem to use more products that assist me using embedded AI layers rather than promise me completely autonomous task completion, only to massively under-perform and lead to incorrect outcomes - What about you?

Yesterday, I posted a conversation between two colleagues, we're calling Warren and Jamie, about the evolution of CX and AI integration. Warren argued that the emphasis on automation and efficiency is making customer interactions more impersonal. His concern is valid. And in contexts where customer experience benefits significantly from human sensitivity and understanding — areas like complex customer service issues or emotionally charged situations — it makes complete sense. Warren's perspective underscores a critical challenge: ensuring that the drive for efficiency doesn't erode the quality of human interactions that customers value. On the other side of the table, Jamie countered by highlighting the potential of AI and technology to enhance and personalize the customer experience. His argument was grounded in the belief that AI can augment human capabilities and allow for personalization at scale. This is a key factor as businesses grow — or look for growth — and customer bases diversify. Jamie suggested that AI can handle routine tasks, thereby freeing up humans to focus on interactions that require empathy and deep understanding. This would, potentially, enhance the quality of service where it truly mattered. Moreover, Jamie believes that AI can increase the surface area for frontline staff to be more empathetic and focus on the customer. It does this by doing the work of the person on the front lines, delivering it to them in real time, and in context, so they can focus on the customer. You see this in whisper coaching technology, for example. My view at the end of the day? After reflecting on this debate, both perspectives are essential. Why? They each highlight the need for a balanced approach in integrating technology with human elements in CX. So if they're both right, then the optimal strategy involves a combination of both views: leveraging technology to handle routine tasks and data-driven personalization, while reserving human expertise for areas that require empathy, judgement, and deep interpersonal skills. PS - I was Jamie in that original conversation. #customerexperience #personalization #artificialintelligence #technology #future