Two very different stories point to the same question: when technology takes over part of the work, what happens to the knowledge and capability left behind?
AI conversations often jump from “the task can be automated” to “we need fewer people doing it.” Sometimes that may be the right economic decision. But it is not the only question available to leadership.
The more interesting question is whether the capability sitting behind the task could create value somewhere else.
Play the episode here without leaving the article. The YouTube player loads only after you choose to play it.
Watch on YouTube →
IKEA: THE LEADERSHIP LENS
In 2023, Reuters reported that IKEA was training call-centre workers to become interior design advisers while its AI chatbot Billie handled routine customer queries. Ingka said 8,500 call-centre workers had been trained as interior design advisers since 2021, while Billie had handled 47% of customer queries to call centres over the previous two years.
The interesting part is not simply that AI handled more customer service work. It is what the business did with human capability that already existed.
People who had spent years talking to customers knew the products, the recurring questions and the problems customers were trying to solve. That knowledge could be applied to a higher-value interaction: advice.
If AI removes part of the work, where else could the capability create value?
Reuters also reported that Ingka’s remote sales channel for products and services generated €1.3 billion in the 2022 financial year. That number should not be read as “the chatbot created €1.3 billion.” The useful lesson is the combination: routine work moved toward automation while human capability was developed toward customer advice and sales.
DOROTHY VAUGHAN: THE EMPLOYEE LENS
Now flip the perspective.
Dorothy Vaughan began at NACA as a human “computer,” performing mathematical calculations. When NACA became NASA and electronic computing changed how that work was done, NASA records show that Vaughan joined the new Analysis and Computation Division, became an expert FORTRAN programmer and contributed to the Scout Launch Vehicle Program.
She did not protect the old task as technology changed it. She learned the technology and carried her mathematical knowledge into the new environment.
The task can lose value while the knowledge behind it becomes more valuable.
SAME SHIFT. TWO RESPONSIBILITIES.
IKEA illustrates the leadership responsibility: do not assume that freed capacity has only one possible destination — cost reduction. Ask what the knowledge, relationships and experience inside the business could now be used for.
Dorothy Vaughan illustrates the individual responsibility: when technology changes the value of a task, understand which part of your knowledge becomes more useful in the new model and build the skills needed to move with it.
WHAT I WOULD ASK A LEADERSHIP TEAM
- What work is AI likely to remove or materially reduce?
- What knowledge, customer context, relationships or judgement sit inside the people doing that work?
- Where else could that capability create customer or commercial value?
- Are we treating freed capacity purely as cost, or also as an asset?
AI efficiency creates capacity. What happens next is a business decision.