This is fascinating. People losing their jobs over the POTENTIAL of GenAi’s ability to do that work:

…findings suggest that the phenomenon of AI taking jobs and reducing hiring is somewhat artificial….

…organizations are having difficulty establishing the economic value of generative AI: 44% said that it was the most difficult form of AI technology to assess in that regard (harder to value than analytical AI, deterministic AI, and agentic AI).

Overall, however, 90% of the survey respondents said that their organizations are getting either moderate or a great deal of value from AI.

Crazy, huh? I see value in GenAI every day, and I learn what things it can do that I wouldn’t even begin to know how to do (vibe-coding). But it’s a problem that business is firing people because of what they think AI will do, not what it has done.

The biggest risk isn’t that AI “doesn’t work”—it’s that leadership measures potential while employees live the implementation, and that gap can turn a promising tool into a credibility crisis where “productivity gains” quietly become redistributed labor: more checking, more cleanup, and more pressure—without the time savings anyone promised. (source)

Worse, I suspect these executives have less clue about Gen AI use than some of the employees they are terminating.

In the meantime…this is adapted from a Section presentation…there is a world of work in this and firing folks prematurely, without capacity building is dumb.