While AI will make average performers good, its most dramatic effect will be making great performers spectacularly great. By augmenting top talent in fields like coding, art, or science, AI enables a single individual to achieve productivity levels previously requiring large teams, creating a new class of hyper-achievers.

Related Insights

The fear that AI will replace top artists is misplaced. The correct framing is what happens when top talent gets AI tools. A director like Steven Spielberg could potentially increase their output 20-fold for a fraction of the cost, leading to a massive increase in high-quality creative work.

While AI can raise the baseline for average performers, its most profound impact will be on "super-empowered individuals." The already great will use AI to achieve 10x productivity leaps, becoming "spectacularly great" in their fields.

Framing AGI as reaching human-level intelligence is a limiting concept. Unconstrained by biology, AI will rapidly surpass the best human experts in every field. The focus should be on harnessing this superhuman capability, not just achieving parity.

While many believe AI will primarily help average performers become great, LinkedIn's experience shows the opposite. Their top talent were the first and most effective adopters of new AI tools, using them to become even more productive. This suggests AI may amplify existing talent disparities.

AI coding assistants won't make fundamental skills obsolete. Instead, they act as a force multiplier that separates engineers. Great engineers use AI to become exceptional by augmenting their deep understanding, while mediocre engineers who rely on it blindly will fall further behind.

The 'cracked engineer' archetype is a direct response to AI's growing capabilities. As AI automates the work of average engineers, the value of human engineers shifts to exceptional tasks. Companies now prioritize hiring these highly productive superstars who can supervise multiple AI instances, as AI itself can handle the rest.

AI is expected to disproportionately impact white-collar professions by creating a skills divide. The top 25% of workers will leverage AI to become superhumanly productive, while the median worker will struggle to compete, effectively bifurcating the workforce.

The productivity gains from individual AI use will become so significant that a wide performance gap will emerge in the workplace. The most talented employees will become hyper-productive and will refuse to work for organizations that don't support these new workflows, leading to a significant talent drain.

AI disproportionately benefits top performers, who use it to amplify their output significantly. This creates a widening skills and productivity gap, leading to workplace tension as "A-players" can increasingly perform tasks previously done by their less-motivated colleagues, which could cause resentment and organizational challenges.

AI will handle most routine tasks, reducing the number of average 'doers'. Those remaining will be either the absolute best in their craft or individuals leveraging AI for superhuman productivity. Everyone else must shift to 'director' roles, focusing on strategy, orchestration, and interpreting AI output.