Nathan Christensen, former CEO of Mineral and advisor to Mitratech.
In a recent, groundbreaking encounter, LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman sat down for a virtual conversation with an AI avatar trained on his own knowledge, words and videos. This wasn’t your average tech demo; it showcased a sophisticated digital twin of Hoffman created using AI technologies from Hour One and ElevenLabs. The interaction was profound and highlighted the emerging ability of AI to replicate human-like ideas, conversation, body language and active listening cues. Despite the avatar’s impressive mimicry, however, subtle differences hinted at the digital nature of “AI Hoffman.”
The adoption of AI avatars like Hoffman’s is growing quickly, especially within the corporate sector. In a survey of people in the L&D space conducted by Synthesia, 43% of respondents said that “AI tools have replaced traditional video production processes in their organization.” Beyond video, businesses are leveraging AI avatars for text and voice-based communications. This shift is not without reason. AI avatars promise a range of benefits, from efficiency to consistency to flexibility to scalability, and can serve purposes as varied as executive communications, coaching, social media interactions, leadership development and even fan engagement.
But amidst the growing enthusiasm for AI’s capabilities, there’s a tension business leaders need to balance. The 2024 Edelman Trust Barometer reports that business is our most trusted institution for integrating innovation into society. Trust is a business’s—and executive’s—most valuable currency, and as leaders begin to incorporate AI into their work, they are presented with a unique challenge: leverage AI to expand reach without compromising trust. This is a delicate balance to strike.
AI’s utility, and the extent to which it should be visible or in the background, varies widely depending on several factors. As a starting point, leaders can ask themselves five questions to determine how to balance AI with their own humanity when creating and delivering messages to their stakeholders:
• How complex is my message? The more complex the message, the greater the need for more human involvement to navigate the nuances of the message. For instance, a product announcement might be low in complexity (and therefore appropriate to fully delegate to AI), while a pivot in strategy might be more complex and therefore appropriate for a more human interaction assisted by AI. For instance, in these more complex situations, leaders who will deliver the message themselves could ask the AI to develop an employee persona and test how it receives various messages.
• How sensitive is my message? If a message is likely (or intended) to provoke strong emotional reactions, it’s crucial that leaders engage directly on a human-to-human basis. This approach grounds the message in authenticity, empathy and clarity—essential elements for managing sensitive communications like crisis responses or major organizational changes, such as reorganizations and layoffs. In these cases, AI can support leaders in the background by preparing initial message drafts, analyzing emotional tone, and providing data-driven insights to refine the communication strategy. But the final communication must come from the heart.
• How disparate is my audience? Sometimes a single corporate message needs to be delivered to very different audiences. For instance, a global acquisition announcement may be relevant to people who speak different languages, adhere to different social norms, or have different relationships with the company, such as employees, customers and shareholders. AI can assist in customizing a core message—crafted with human insight—for these varied audiences, ensuring the message is adapted to suit each group’s unique characteristics, rather than expecting the audience to conform to a one-size-fits-all approach.
• How high are the stakes? In situations where the survival of the organization, or a significant part of its operation, is at stake, the precision and accountability of a human are indispensable. For example, during a financial crisis, legal or regulatory inquiry, or existential competitive threat where the costs of an error in messaging are very high, leaders need to ensure the message is accurate and credible by relying on their human judgment, wisdom and connection. While the need for human intervention is higher in these instances, AI can still play a valuable role in compiling, analyzing or organizing information, as well as in identifying potential inconsistencies or errors.
• What is the impact I’m trying to achieve? When I’m preparing a message, I ask myself: what do I want my audience to think, to feel and to do? The answer to that question is important in deciding how much of a message to delegate to AI. When the intended impact is simply to inform, AI could be an efficient and effective way to deliver the message. On the other hand, when the goal is to inspire or galvanize an audience or drive change, a leader’s authentic humanity, and the emotional connection that comes from it, is difficult to replicate. In those cases, AI’s assistance is best left to preparing, refining or testing the message, rather than delivering it.
As AI continues to evolve, so will our cultural norms, and the framework above will need to be revisited. The key is for leaders to thoughtfully discern when AI should inform their messaging as an input versus when it also should be used to represent them as the output. By doing so, leaders can make sure AI supports and extends, rather than supplants and undermines, the human connection essential for trust and leadership effectiveness.
Forbes Business Council is the foremost growth and networking organization for business owners and leaders. Do I qualify?
Read the full article here
