More Than 60% of CEOs Are 'Digitally Illiterate', According To Their Own Employees
- Reference: 0175375921
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/24/11/01/185209/more-than-60-of-ceos-are-digitally-illiterate-according-to-their-own-employees
- Source link:
[1] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/more-60-ceos-digitally-illiterate-145748885.html
Not just CEOs (Score:3)
Us trench troops know that many managers are just as clueless abut not just AI, but the very own tech they people they manage work on.
I see it on daily display where I'm at. Network mgr will come out with the most 1990's things to say about networking, and thinks his own monitoring runs on metal -- even after we've explained to him a million times it's a vm.
And these people sign your reviews and paychecks.
Re: (Score:3)
> Us trench troops know that many managers are just as clueless abut not just AI, but the very own tech they people they manage work on.
> I see it on daily display where I'm at. Network mgr will come out with the most 1990's things to say about networking, and thinks his own monitoring runs on metal -- even after we've explained to him a million times it's a vm.
> And these people sign your reviews and paychecks.
Different people have different abilities and training.
I don't expect the CEO to know about RF intermodulation, path loss and the various propagation effects of different frequencies, nor do I expect the best IT person on staff to know either. I have done some IT work, so I'm fairly versed in it, but the smart guys and gals know more than me.
But to address what you posted, I think we can both note that the experts should make the decisions.
And there is the real problem. The cost center view of IT
Re: (Score:2)
I keep saying that IT is not a cost center, but a profit enabler. A modern company can't make money going back to typewriters and interoffice couriers.
Re:Not just CEOs - most upper management (Score:2)
/. frequently forgets that second level managers and up in the worker->manager->senior manager->...->CEO chain spend nearly all of their time in meetings, reading reports, building out budgets and leadership things.
They don't have time to get a deep understanding of new technologies and rely on 'experts' like the Gartner Group for advice and strategy.
If you've been around technology long enough, how many 'next big thing' programming languages, tools, frameworks did you not learn because, after a
Re: (Score:2)
> /. frequently forgets that second level managers and up in the worker->manager->senior manager->...->CEO chain spend nearly all of their time in meetings, reading reports, building out budgets and leadership things.
> They don't have time to get a deep understanding of new technologies and rely on 'experts' like the Gartner Group for advice and strategy.
As a CEO of a non-profit, I can say you pretty much nailed it. And while I'm pretty technologically versed, I've got other things to do to occupy my time. Budgets are a big and non-trivial thing, steering and monitoring to keep our tax exempt status is another. A slip or two, and it is lost. I review and pass judgement on recruiting efforts, and public facing areas, be it web, educational, or seeking contributions.
As much as many here on /. believe that the suits are stupid and worthless, the suits are t
Re: (Score:2)
please don't say that "they" own your personal data, unless you somehow sold it to them by agreeing to the EULA of course ... but really even the devil can't make that deal ... you own your personal data, and you always will, years from now you will regret a lot of it and pretend that wasn't you, but you own it all
Re: (Score:2)
> please don't say that "they" own your personal data, unless you somehow sold it to them by agreeing to the EULA of course ... but really even the devil can't make that deal ... you own your personal data, and you always will, years from now you will regret a lot of it and pretend that wasn't you, but you own it all
I have a safe at home where I keep important papers. I have an expectation that what is in there will stay in there, unstolen and safe.
Most people have an expectation that their personal health information will be held safely - we have laws that prevent people from fiinding out if one of our balls is bigger than the other one, or had to get a dose of antibiotics after that one company picnic when the group secretary shared her clamidya with us (or guy, depending one your inclinations or sex - no judgeme
Re: (Score:2)
Managers are even clueless about how to connect a display and a keyboard to their PC, so don't expect them to even have a realistic view of AI.
par for the course (Score:2)
I remember before PC became a thing, it was expected CEOs did not know anything about typing and using various office equipment. So no surprise it carried over to digital. I am used it is a point of pride too.
Re: (Score:3)
The CEOs promoting AI are the ones who are digitally illiterate. The whole story seems to be "dumb CEOs prevent adoption of unproven technology, according to mythical workers."
data governance (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, don't want my employees posting all of our company info into AI services that vacuum up that data. I don't want my employees relying on tools that regularly produce bad results. By limiting the use of garbage AI I'm protecting the company.
I hired you to do a job, not farm your job out to crap software. I can buy crap software and use it all by myself.
Re:data governance (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, I am wondering about the level of tech competence in the pool of "workers" that were polled for this.
Really, on the face of it - this sounds like a survey commissioned by a company trying to sell its AI tools.
Re: (Score:2)
You honestly think there was a poll? It's so much cheaper and takes much less work than to just claim that you did a poll. I assume you must be new to marketing.
Re: (Score:2)
> You honestly think there was a poll? It's so much cheaper and takes much less work than to just claim that you did a poll. I assume you must be new to marketing.
Joe, Suzi, Vanessa, I need to write a fluff piece - "Does management technical illiteracy limit AI adoption?" Yes, No, Yes
67% of workers surveyed said managers are technically illiterate, limiting AI adoption
Re: (Score:2)
I can understand not wanting AI to have access to your entire source repository, but it can be extremely useful for answering questions about how to perform a small coding task in a particular language. Before AI, I would use Google to find the appropriate article (usually on StackOverflow or ServerFault), but now the search results are virtually worthless. I know the article exists, but I have to trudge through many irrelevant articles until I finally find the correct one. And even when I find the corre
Justifying Lower Pay and Benefits. (Score:3)
> Sorry, don't want my employees posting all of our company info into AI services that vacuum up that data. I don't want my employees relying on tools that regularly produce bad results. By limiting the use of garbage AI I'm protecting the company.
> I hired you to do a job, not farm your job out to crap software. I can buy crap software and use it all by myself.
This.
And if the 40-hour-full-time-with-benefits employee REALLY wants that 6 hours worth of AI efficiency and is willing to degrade their “Boomer” bosses over it, fine. They can become 34-hour-part-time-no-benefits employees instead.
Enjoy. You fucking asked for it, morons.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd be amazed/terrified/tickled silly if you knew the amount of health clinics, law firms, fin/tech firms, MSPs that jumped into AI forgetting all about data governance.
When you tell their controller about how most AI solutions work, amazing how quickly the blood drains from their face.
PRINT MY EMAIL (Score:3)
Yeah, I had a boss who wanted his email to be printed out
Re: (Score:2)
I used to work for an administrator who, every few months, had a student worker print out the entirety of our website - on paper.
Re: (Score:3)
> Yeah, I had a boss who wanted his email to be printed out
I had an engineer once ask me to email him a hard copy of a document,
Re: (Score:2)
That lump coming down the wire is for you...
Re: (Score:2)
> I had an engineer once ask me to email him a hard copy of a document,
When he said, "can you email that to me" I think he meant something different than what you think he meant, or, by email, did you mean UUCP?
Re: (Score:2)
>> I had an engineer once ask me to email him a hard copy of a document,
> When he said, "can you email that to me" I think he meant something different than what you think he meant, or, by email, did you mean UUCP?
When I asked him how I could email an actual document, he was embarrassed and asked me to just email him a pdf.
Re: (Score:2)
Same here, and he was the CIO for a global investment bank. He also dictated his replies for his secretary to type up and send.
AI cannot do a**-kissing so they are safe... (Score:2)
They cannot be replaced as no AI at the moment has a**-kissing functionality not to mention there is know-how in whom to kiss...
Re:AI cannot do a**-kissing so they are safe... (Score:5, Funny)
I just wanted to take a moment to express my gratitude for your outstanding leadership. Your vision and guidance not only inspire our team but also create an environment where we can thrive. I truly appreciate the support and direction you provide, which motivates us to strive for excellence.
Thank you for being such an incredible leader. I’m excited to continue contributing to our team's success under your guidance!
Warren Buffet says who cares (Score:1)
Rich ole Warren Buffet who admits not to understand technology (even though he's been around since the movement from fax machines to email) but he rich AF. He laughing his ass off at the worker bees in tech.
Or maybe they do. (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe they are smart enough not to trust these systems to do anything critical. I am sure that some worker's time could be saved by using AI, but at what risk? Reducing workload has never been a priority of CEOs. Yes, they are often digitally illiterate. In most cases, that is because being digitally literate has nothing to do with their jobs.
Digital literacy is broad (Score:4, Interesting)
Does digitally literate mean you can use Linux? Does it mean you can pass Leetcode hard problems? Or does it mean you know what an @ symbol means? The shift to mobile devices means many people are comfortable with a mobile app but would struggle with desktop software.
Tell the boss that he can replace you with AI (Score:2)
And he's the idiot?
Not surprising (Score:3)
Most employess have no idea what CEOs do. I find people have this strange notion that if a manager has multiple teams that they would somehow at least have working knowledge of all those teams' day-to-day technical knowledge when in fact many C-level managers haven't the foggiest.
While CEOs tend to be mutli-disciplined most are or were sales people. They sell the vision, convince the shareholders, decide to take the risks in strategic plans and generally have the experience and reassuring smile to lead.
As the article mentions AI there's a lot of hype. Like how eeryone jumped on the cloud bandwagon to save money we now know that most companies have not actually saves any money by adopting cloud technologies.
The fact is AI has yet to deliver much. It will no doubt be an amazing tool in the future but early adoption of tech has a price. Most CEOs do not need to be early adopters.
Currently if you just use some of your company's data to chuck at ChatGPT you'll probably get fired for leaking information. It's not as easy to "just use AI" even if Microsoft has tried to shove Copilot down your throat.
An idea for using AI is by running a company private LLM+RAG as or in fact instead of a knowledgebase. Another idea for companies that have no data classifcation is to have AI help scan through the millions of documents to help classify...still these activities take some thinking and planning and must work within compliance. -Just ask your sensitive customers how they feel about their data being scanned by AI tools.
Like the internet we might still be 20 years away from AI being reliably good at helping us with many things but certain niche use cases are already showing promise.
I keep saying Dilbert is a (Score:2)
...documentary, not just a comic strip. It's based on actual emails sent to the artist by fans. (Too bad the artist got trapped in the MAGA cult, I miss the strip.)
Clueless managers who are willing to listen can and do successfully manage technical projects, but too many let their big ego cover their ears.
Don't kid yourelf... (Score:1)
Don't kid yourself Judge. You are an incredible slouch....
This study way underestimates this phenomenon.
Re: (Score:2)
> Don't kid yourself Judge. You are an incredible slouch.... This study way underestimates this phenomenon.
While I can appreciate a good Caddyshack reference, fiscal conservatism and being skeptical of the technology that is designed to replace your most valuable asset, is more than understandable. Criticism of CEOs is perhaps dead wrong here.
Right now, AI marketing is giving dot-bomb vaporware a run for its wasted money in the Hype Olympics.
Yep, including software company CEOs (Score:2)
"OK team, we're going to add this fancy whiz-bang feature and roll it out in the next couple of months.
Wait, what are you talking about, it's going to take you a year to complete the feature? What's the matter with you programmers, don't you know how to write code?"
Suspicious of the survey. (Score:3)
From snippets:
> “[lack of access to the latest AI tools] has caused a noticeable drop in my motivation to tackle new challenges at work.”
Those brackets might be doing a *lot* of heavy lifting. The respondent complained about some thing bogging them down and the report 'helped' them to clarify it's lack of latest AI tools. I'd bet they complained about the actual problem rather than a lack of the specific imagined fix for the problem.
> A Japanese engineer, meanwhile, told the group: “I have to spend a significant amount of time on repetitive tasks that could be automated.”
This is a common complaint that is as old as time, with or without AI. Tasks that frequently are not needed but are inflicted anyway.
I'm suspecting the general response is similar to always, bad leadership is very common and inflicting demoralizing tedious bureaucratic crap on people, but this time the party running the survey is framing it as specifically about AI. LLM might be able to provide a bandaid, taking efficient interactions and 'formalizing' them into stupid 'business appropriate' fodder and then breaking that fodder back into some semblance of efficient interaction. However from my experience, people really would most prefer getting rid of the bureaucratic stuff in general.
Digitally Literate CEOs know AI is mostly hype (Score:4, Interesting)
Using AI in data science and such has it's place. But to use it for average business oriented activity like writing reports is not going to save time and labor. It just shifts the creative process to having to review everything AI generated to make sure it's accurate, i.e. it shifts the work load, not eliminate it.
If you want something automated, it's better to have some code it up so it's deterministic and can be maintained by people who know the business domain.
Re: (Score:3)
There's so much built in assumption in every one of the statements made in the summary, that AI actually has value. That has NOT been proven, and most of the perceived value is by low tech literate managers, or engineers that buy the hype then forget how this technology works (if they bothered to make an effort to learn about that).
There are going to be a LOT of companies that lose big because of they bet hard on AI (LLMs in particular) because it doesn't do 90% of the things proponents promise.
I call shena
wow (Score:1)
That's surprising. A firm that is offering to recruit AI personnel finds that more AI personnel is needed. This is almost as shocking as when the SAS Institute found that people should buy SAS software and supplement it with open source rather than just stick to open source software.
So what? (Score:3)
Employees are generally terrible at knowing what people in higher layers of a hierarchy know or do. You hear it on here all the time. Management are clueless and inept, CEOs are bumbling fools, leaders do nothing but hold meetings, engage in toxic politics, and contribute bugger all... all the same buckshot time after time.
It's my favorite form of hubris. The idea that you don't get something must mean there's nothing to get. When I read these things, I just move on. No point in addressing it - I learned what I need to know.
(I meant "bullshit" above... but my mistype got autocorrected to buckshot... and I like it better!)
Re: (Score:2)
> (I meant "bullshit" above... but my mistype got autocorrected to buckshot... and I like it better!)
Just chiming in to say that when I read "buckshot" on the first pass I was impressed with the novel use of the word! I'm going to steal it.
If you want to automate your job, automate it.... (Score:2)
I've spent the last 3 days writing a tool in GO to deploy Web Apps with zone redundant App Service Plans, that utilize Front Door for a fail-over. No one else at my company could write this app, but I also didn't wait for "executive management" sign-off, I just did it. Regardless if your C suite is just learning about the horse and buggy, you can still use new tech to do cool things, the two aren't really linked.
Big dirty lie for marketing (Score:2)
There are a number of ways a CEO's tech illiteracy might show.
Not buying the AI these people are selling isn't one of those ways. Things I know about AI: At least one lawyer tried using AI and ended up in a show cause hearing for why the judge shouldn't have him disbarred. Sometimes AI says embarrassingly incorrect things but it puts it so fluently the mistakes are easy to gloss over if you're busy. AI sometimes produces horribly brittle and insecure code, there too it can lead you down the garden path.
Some
The other 40%? (Score:2)
They're illiterate altogether.
This premise has the "problem" backwards (Score:2)
If more CEOs were actually digitally "literate" AI adoption would be even lower, because it's mostly nonsense.
Companies are set to spend hundreds of millions on AI next year according to another story today, and I'd wager heavily that the resulting ROI will be a negative number.
But some gullible CEOs are being convinced to invest in tech that's not ready for prime-time just as they have always been because they live with constant financial FOMO.
It's not digital literacy (Score:2)
It's the state of the AI market
Everything that's available today is crap generators
AI is a research project. I predict that useful tools will be developed, but today's AI is useless for real serious work
Fiscal Competency vs. Digital Illiteracy. (Score:2)
So, let me get this straight. We’re now labeling CEOs as “digitally illiterate” when it comes to dumping millions into technology that hasn’t been this hyped with marketing bullshit since dot bomb vaporware.
Those CEOs might be digitally illiterate, but as an employee you’ll probably be thankful they’re being fiscally competent right now with resisting the very tech designed to make those whining about 6 hours wasted per week, completely unnecessary for the other 34.
Workers should shut up about AI (Score:2)
Or they could find AI taking their jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
AIs seem better suited to taking over a CEO's job, actually.
That's an entirely different type of technodystopia though.
=Smidge=
Re:Workers should shut up about AI (Score:4, Funny)
I will always maintain that a magic 8 ball is good enough to replace most CEOs.
Re: (Score:2)
Magic 8 ball can't play golf! Yet.
Re: (Score:2)
The day an AI can do plumbing and welding in a dirty industrial environment as well as changing elevator bucket without human supervision it's going to be an issue.
So far most corporate leaders are so computer illiterate that they don't understand how to file a problem report over the web and just picks up the phone and gets help filing the problem report.
Re: (Score:2)
AI might take some of their jobs, but nobody will pay the same for the resulting work, and the lawsuits are going to be more expensive.
Imagine two companies, one with AI to solve a problem, and the other using people, when the first is mired in lawsuits, and strikes and violent threats against their CEO. The second one gets all the customers.