Critical thinking as an antidote to an AI-informed world isn’t a new thought, but it's usually mentioned in the context of using it to verify the answers so very confidently presented by generative and agentic AI. Or sometimes in the system design phase context of AI governance and ethics.

To effectively respond to looming change (with the added threat of mass layoffs due to advancements in Artificial Intelligence (AI)), knowledge workers – and their employers – don’t need more predictions on what exactly will happen over the next two years as AI wrecks well-laid plans like coffee spilled over last-minute homework. They (we) need to buckle down and get to work. Different work.

Even so, it’s still a collaboration – not a handover. Machines look at data, but they can’t (yet) take human behaviour or preferences into account. That’s why artisans are still key to making sure that everything runs in a way that works for people, not just numbers.

When using generative AI to produce content that will be submitted to media for publication consideration, we have to be honest with ourselves when we consider whether we are asking AI to help with the pure “doing”, or whether we are inadvertently outsourcing our thinking to AI.

If we consider this from a pure linguistics point of view, then why on earth would anyone want to FUTUREPROOF a businesses?!?!?!

The adoption of technology and innovative processes are threatening the traditional role of travel agent and meeting buyer as middleman. These professionals now have to redesign the role they can play as client expectations shift to hyper-personalised, dynamically changing experiences that are devoid of any pain points door-to-door.

The future is often described as an insurmountable obstacle racing towards us at a frightening speed. We are however not as unprepared as we might think, even when we take into account trend predictions made by futurists. Developments over the past decade have already provided us with guidelines and structures to prepare for the future.