Cost or Profit: Are You Key to Revenue?

14 July 2024 | Issue #56

In this issue:

How close to revenue are you?
Gen AI's language bias
Creatives need human and tech skills
Is the AI bubble bursting?
How to start your career pivot

PIVOT!

As we continue cruising through our third year of tech layoffs, and the potential of a new US government administration that will encourage more M&A activity (which comes with "efficiencies" that reduce headcount), many people are anxious about what is coming next.

When life is unstable, people will choose unhappiness over uncertainty.

This leads some people to explore new career paths, which may be more stable. I recently read a Threads post asking if any UX designers plan on pivoting to a new career.

The responses provided a gamut of answers. One career path seemed to rise above the others: product management. This makes a lot of sense to me. Some companies see design as a necessary evil. A toll they have to pay. But those businesses couldn't function without products.

A business needs revenue. To achieve that, it has to provide a product or service. Then, it needs to create that product. To turn a product into revenue, the business needs a method to sell the product. There has to be infrastructure in place to support this business. The company needs to bring people in to work on the product and buy the product.

Let's think of the needs of a business like Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

The secret to job stability is to be closest to revenue. Each of these sections has different roles that are more secure than others. The closer you are to generating revenue, the more secure your job should be.

This is why we're seeing many designers move to adjacent roles. A product can exist without UI or UX, but it can't exist if someone doesn't first have the idea and bring it to life.

I personally disagree with this mindset. However, when you think of the executives sitting in a room looking at spreadsheets with names, job titles, and salaries, you want to be seen as essential when it comes time for those execs to cut budgets.

NEWS AT THE INTERSECTION OF MARKETING, DESIGN, & AI

✍🏻 Generative AI’s Language Bias: The Common Words Study

Wired explores a study on generative AI’s tendency to overuse common words, revealing implications for developing and using AI-generated content.

• Language Simplification: The study found that generative AI often relies on a limited set of common words, which can lead to less diverse language in AI-generated content.

• Impact on Creativity: This reliance on common words might limit the creativity and uniqueness of AI-generated text, affecting fields like marketing and content creation where originality is crucial.

Do you use any of these words?

👩‍💻 Why Creatives Need Human Skills as Much as Tech Skills

Robert Half emphasizes the importance of balancing human skills with technical skills for creatives, highlighting how both are essential for career growth and success.

• Interpersonal Communication: Strong human skills like communication and empathy are crucial for collaborating effectively with teams and clients, ensuring that creative projects meet diverse needs and expectations.

• Creative Problem-Solving: Human skills enable creatives to think outside the box, providing innovative solutions and enhancing the overall quality of their work, complementing their technical proficiency.

Keep reading

NEW RESOURCES FOR YOU

Source: Census Bureau, Goldman Sachs GIR.

AI Bubble Bursting?

The latest Goldman Sachs Research report, “GEN AI: TOO MUCH SPEND, TOO LITTLE BENEFIT?” delves into the big question on everyone’s mind: Is all this spending on generative AI actually worth it? With tech giants and other companies gearing up to pour over $1 trillion into AI in the coming years, the stakes are high.

On one side of the debate, we have MIT’s Daron Acemoglu and Goldman Sachs’ Jim Covello, who are pretty skeptical. They argue that despite the huge investment, AI isn’t likely to deliver the economic benefits everyone’s hoping for anytime soon. Acemoglu points out that only a small fraction of tasks will be cost-effective to automate in the next decade. Covello adds that the technology isn’t built to tackle the complex problems that would justify such a massive spend.

Three other analysts from Goldman Sachs take a more hopeful stance on AI and automation. They believe AI’s potential is still unfolding and that we’re in the early stages of what could be a significant transformation. They acknowledge the current hurdles like chip shortages and power constraints but maintain that, in the long run, AI could revolutionize industries and drive substantial economic returns. They forecast that AI could eventually automate 25% of work tasks.

For the rest of us, the future of work is a key concern. The report touches on the potential for job loss and creation with AI’s rise. This could mean new roles and opportunities as AI reshapes industries, creating tasks we can’t even imagine.

The way I look at it: My job didn't exist when I was in high school and trying to plan my career. Who knows what will come out of this AI revolution.

H/T Taylor Peterson and The Sauce