Summary of Key Points
This article explores the transformation in the value of consultants after the integration of AI into professional services through two real AI consulting scenarios. The focus shifts from simply providing answers to assessing the quality of those answers, explaining the rationale for choices, and taking responsibility for the outcomes. The article emphasizes that while AI is a tool to enhance efficiency, consultants must proactively and honestly utilize it while also possessing expertise that AI cannot replace—such as precise judgment, practical experience, and a sense of responsibility. True experts will stand out in the face of AI challenges, whereas those who are not will be eliminated.
1. AI-Influenced Reports: What Clients Care About Is Honesty and Results
When clients mention that a report has an “AI flavor,” they are not necessarily opposed to the use of AI; rather, they want to ensure that the consultant is being honest. After all, clients may also use AI themselves, and hiding the fact could lead to a loss of trust. What truly matters to them is whether the problem has been resolved and whether the conclusions are solid. The author responds by admitting the use of AI (which is efficient) and deciding to clearly label all AI-assisted reports in the future. This is both a matter of trust (not hiding the tool) and integrity (informing clients about the source of the results). For example, the author includes a small note at the beginning or on the first page of the report stating, “Generated with AI assistance,” similar to how some authors acknowledge the involvement of AI in their books.
Key Point: Tools are meant to serve the results, and honesty is more important than concealment.
2. AI vs. Human Editing: What Matters Is Accuracy and Contextual Understanding
The author uses Claude to generate a solution and points out two issues and one advantage:
1. Loss of Precision in Meaning: The term “blind spot” (a professional term referring to an unrecognized risk) was replaced with “weakness,” which downplays the potential severity of the issue. AI, in its effort to create smoother language, loses the sharpness of the professional context.
2. Loss of Rhetorical Function: A concessive sentence structure (“Despite the bad news, the good news…”) was altered to a parallel structure, which weakens the impact of the bad news. AI does not understand the nuanced logic of conveying negative information in a positive way.
3. Improvement in Logic: The author suggests reorganizing the text into a more progressive structure (from minor to major issues), which is a useful improvement.
Key Point: AI can produce coherent content, but it lacks the understanding of the deeper semantic and rhetorical needs of professional contexts.
3. The Changing Value of Consultants
In the past, clients would ask, “How should this part be revised?” Now, they ask, “The AI version is different from yours—why?” The value of consultants no longer lies in creating content but in filtering it—assessing the quality of AI-generated answers, explaining the reasons for certain choices, and being accountable for the final outcomes. For instance, if a client uses AI to generate alternative solutions, the consultant must clarify where the AI’s changes are incorrect (e.g., a loss of professional precision) and where the changes are beneficial (e.g., improved logic), as well as the potential impact on communication or compliance.
Key Point: AI can provide many options, but the decision on which one to use, the reasons behind it, and the consequences are decisions that only humans can make and for which they must be responsible.
4. Skills That AI Cannot Take Over
The author lists 11 skills that AI cannot replace. In simple terms, these include:
- Personal Knowledge Base: Accumulated professional knowledge and real-world cases (not generic data provided by AI).
- Effective Questioning and Verification: The ability to ask insightful questions and to verify AI-generated answers through multiple rounds of validation.
- Iterative Improvement: The skill to refine AI-generated drafts into actionable professional results.
- Understanding of Human Context: Considering the reactions of stakeholders (e.g., the client’s brand image, potential criticisms from journalists).
- Responsibility: Being willing to take responsibility for any issues that arise, as AI cannot do so.
Key Point: These are skills that require practical experience and cannot be learned by AI.
5. The Courage to Sign One’s Name: The Differentiator Between True and False Experts
Professor Li Ning from Tsinghua University highlights that AI can handle 80% of the basic tasks (verification, drafting, rewriting), while humans are responsible for the 20% that requires critical judgment, experience, and accountability. “The courage to sign one’s name” refers to the willingness to take responsibility for one’s work and to face the challenges posed by clients and AI. True experts embrace these challenges because their expertise can withstand scrutiny; false experts fear them because AI exposes their lack of substance (e.g., their reliance on templates and lack of deep understanding).
Key Point: AI is not an enemy; it serves as a mirror that reveals who truly has the skills to excel in professional services.
Conclusion
AI will not eliminate professional services; instead, it will highlight the value of consultants by enhancing efficiency through technology. For clients, AI provides a second opinion; for consultants, it serves as a test of their abilities. In the end, only those who are honest, capable of making informed decisions, and responsible will remain in the industry.