To avoid failure, launch AI agents with high human control and low agency, such as suggesting actions to an operator. As the agent proves reliable and you collect performance data, you can gradually increase its autonomy. This phased approach minimizes risk and builds user trust.

Use a two-axis framework to determine if a human-in-the-loop is needed. If the AI is highly competent and the task is low-stakes (e.g., internal competitor tracking), full autonomy is fine. For high-stakes tasks (e.g., customer emails), human review is essential, even if the AI is good.

Instead of waiting for AI models to be perfect, design your application from the start to allow for human correction. This pragmatic approach acknowledges AI's inherent uncertainty and allows you to deliver value sooner by leveraging human oversight to handle edge cases.

To overcome employee fear, don't deploy a fully autonomous AI agent on day one. Instead, introduce it as a hybrid assistant within existing tools like Slack. Start with it asking questions, then suggesting actions, and only transition to full automation after the team trusts it and sees its value.

In an enterprise setting, "autonomous" AI does not imply unsupervised execution. Its true value lies in compressing weeks of human work into hours. However, a human expert must remain in the loop to provide final approval, review, or rejection, ensuring control and accountability.

Avoid deploying AI directly into a fully autonomous role for critical applications. Instead, begin with a human-in-the-loop, advisory function. Only after the system has proven its reliability in a real-world environment should its autonomy be gradually increased, moving from supervised to unsupervised operation.

With AI, the "human-in-the-loop" is not a fixed role. Leaders must continuously optimize where team members intervene—whether for review, enhancement, or strategic input. A task requiring human oversight today may be fully automated tomorrow, demanding a dynamic approach to workflow design.

Marketers mistakenly believe implementing AI means full automation. Instead, design "human-in-the-loop" workflows. Have an AI score a lead and draft an email, but then send that draft to a human for final approval via a Slack message with "approve/reject" buttons. This balances efficiency with critical human oversight.

Current AI workflows are not fully autonomous and require significant human oversight, meaning immediate efficiency gains are limited. By framing these systems as "interns" that need to be "babysat" and trained, organizations can set realistic expectations and gradually build the user trust necessary for future autonomy.