Hey Reader, Welcome to the 19th edition of the 3-2-1 (check out previous issues here). One post on LinkedIn last week would not stop moving. It was about AI making your people more productive and more likely to quit. Ninety thousand people saw it, and the comments improved my thinking on it. The version they argued me into is the one idea below. Let's get into it. 3 Things for Work (in L&D)In the workforce, AI is having the opposite effect it was supposed to, UC Berkeley researchers warn (Fortune)
IC work is the new career flex (Elena Verna)
Bloom's Taxonomy Needs an Update for the AI Age (Education Week)
2 Things for LifeJacob Collier Improvises With Orchestra (Live in San Francisco)
Ursula K. Le Guin on listening: "Listening is not a reaction, it is a connection. Listening to a conversation or a story, we don't so much respond as join in — become part of the action." That line is the whole Collier video in one sentence. The audience orchestra is not reacting to the music. They have joined in and become it. 1 Idea from MeAI is making your people more productive and more likely to quitAI raises everyone's output floor at the same time. An analyst with two years experience and one with ten now hand you the same decent first draft. That looks like a win until you see the cost. The floor rose, but the ceiling that used to separate your strong people from your average ones got harder to see. Because volume isn't value. When everyone can generate a decent first draft, the work that's left is the work AI can't do: framing the right problem to analyze in the first place, or getting a stakeholder to act. Almost no team has a shared name for that work, so they can't see it, coach it, or reward it. Do nothing and the cost lands in two places. First, your highest-impact ICs are already doing that nameless work two levels above their title. Running real budgets, agents, cross-functional calls, without the title or the words for it. They don't leave because the work is hard. They leave because the growth went unacknowledged. Recognition is one of the strongest levers we have for changing behavior, something I was reminded of at a conference in Toronto last week. But when the capacity has no name, the lever never gets pulled. Second, your managers can't coach what they can't name. A manager with shared language can say "your framing was sharp, but you dove right into implementation with the exec team instead of explaining why it matters." A manager without it says "that didn't land" and moves on. One builds capability. The other watches it stall. So the fix is not another promotion cycle or a wider salary band. It is giving your team a shared language for the work AI can't do, so that capacity becomes visible, coachable, and acknowledged before someone has to quit to get it noticed. None of this shows up as a fire. It shows up as your strongest people getting faster at work that doesn't move the business, and your succession bench quietly thinning. That is the real cost of waiting to build team capability. That's it for this week - enjoy your Sunday! I'll be back in two weeks ✌️ Andrew P.S. 👉 If your best people are getting faster at work that doesn't move the business, that's the problem I spend my days on. I do a few free 30-minute strategy calls each month for L&D leaders working through it. Reply and I'll send a link. |
ICs can do more on their own with AI than ever before. This is both a challenge and an opportunity for L&D. This newsletter explores how to equip ICs with the influence skills that drive retention, accelerate OKRs, and position L&D as a strategic partner to the business. (Sent twice a month).
Hey Reader, Welcome to the 24th edition of the 3-2-1 (check out previous issues here). Last edition I argued that judgment gets built through reps. This week I go one level deeper and try to answer what judgment actually is. A new HBR article gave me a starting taxonomy, AI helped me stress-test it, and now I need your judgment to finish the job. This edition ends with a chance to share your perspective, so read to the end! Let's get into it. 3 Things for Work (in L&D) How Do Workers Develop...
Hey Reader, Welcome to the 23rd edition of the 3-2-1 (check out previous issues here). This week I sat down with alumni of a thinking-skills program we've been running for almost two years. One of them, now leading a team, described working with AI as a pressure cooker. Everyone is expected to have an answer instantly, and AI makes instant answers easy. That conversation is the theme of 1 Idea From Me below, plus I've got two new papers that landed on opposite sides of the same argument up...
Hey Reader, Welcome to the 22nd edition of the 3-2-1 (check out previous issues here). This one started with a post from Jolene Skinner at MongoDB lamenting how the skills-based movement is distracting us from the real problem we need to solve. It charged my brain for the rest of the day. The problem, in five words: skills sit still, work doesn't. Let's get into it. 3 Things for Work (in L&D) Why the skills-based movement doesn't work for most companies (Jolene Skinner, LinkedIn) Jolene...