I was talking about AI recently with someone close to me when he said something that stuck with me:
"there seem to be two kinds of people using it. The first says, "Make this for me."
The second brings their own thinking to the table (the strategy, context, connections and ideas)
and uses AI to refine or accelerate work they were probably capable of doing without it."
"there seem to be two kinds of people using it. The first says, "Make this for me."
The second brings their own thinking to the table (the strategy, context, connections and ideas)
and uses AI to refine or accelerate work they were probably capable of doing without it."
I agreed. But I kept thinking there was a third.
An old fishing analogy came to mind: give someone a fish and they'll eat for a day; teach them to fish and they'll eat for a lifetime. But what happens when the fish move or the rod breaks?
That's the third thinker I'm interested in.
They don't only apply the solution they were taught. They get curious. They ask why something isn't working, challenge assumptions, experiment and look for another way. In their hands, AI isn't there to hand them the fish. It's a partner for exploring what else might be possible.
Their conversations with AI sound different: What am I missing? Challenge this idea. What assumption am I making? Argue the other side. What would someone from another discipline see here? Are we even solving the right problem?
Those aren't really requests for answers. They're invitations to think. In agency we use to do this in a conference room with sticky notes, white boards, stress balls and snacks, together. Now, with the expected output speeds we often have, many creatives are tasked with coming up with the solution with no time to truly explore the possibilities. We are left to do the thinking. Alone. Quickly.
Psychology calls part of this metacognition or thinking about our own thinking. AI gives us an interesting way to externalize that process. We can follow an idea, question our reasoning, recognize when something isn't landing, back up and try another path.
Not because AI thinks for us, but because it gives us another place to think outloud, bounce ideas, compare concerns... and offers us another perspective (sometimes several) to consider.
There's another kind of thinking at play, too.
One of my favorite quotes actually appeared beneath my high school senior portrait (apparently teenage me was already a philosophy nerd): "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." It's commonly attributed to Aristotle, although the exact attribution is debated.
I've always loved the idea that we can seriously explore something without needing to immediately accept or reject it. Dialectical thinking asks us to do exactly that: hold two or more seemingly opposing ideas at the same time.
The two thoughts/truths I hold? AI can make us dramatically more efficient and intellectually lazy. It can expand creativity and create an ocean of sameness. It can help us make connections faster and become a crutch that keeps us from learning to make those connections ourselves.
The interesting thinking happens in the tension between those ideas.
And that requires something else I value: intellectual humility. The ability to say, "I don't know," without treating that as the end of the conversation. The thinkers and leaders I admire tend to follow it with, "Let's figure it out."
As a creative leader, that's what interests me most about this moment. Tools will change. AI will change. The enduring advantage isn't knowing today's technology better than everyone else. It's curiosity, judgment, critical thinking and the willingness to recognize when something isn't working and explore another way.
AI isn't the differentiator. The person using it is.
And maybe that's what AI is revealing most clearly: as our tools get better at producing answers, our ability to ask better questions becomes even more valuable.
About Leadership Notes
Leadership Notes is a collection of short reflections on creativity, leadership and how we think when the conditions around us change. Drawn from my experiences leading creative teams, raising a curious human and occasionally questioning my own assumptions, these aren't intended as instructions for how to lead. They're observations about the things I'm still thinking about, learning from and figuring out along the way.