If AI will never be able to truly master emotional intelligence or originality, there are some possible implications for skills that could retain or gain value in job markets.
For example, roles that demand empathy, interpersonal judgment, and nuanced social interaction will retain value. That might be a good thing for:
Therapists, counselors, and social workers
Nurses, doctors, and caregivers
Teachers and early childhood educators
Some personnel professionals, coaches, and conflict mediators
Customer service roles involving delicate or high-stakes interaction
Sales personnel (especially complex sales in business-business areas)
Hospice workers
Occupational therapists
School counselors
Childcare providers and nannies
Youth mentors
Leaders in any organization
Hospitality managers
Flight attendants
Diplomats
Negotiators
Crisis intervention specialists
Journalists (some, at least)
Creative directors
Public relations leaders
User experience designers
Nonprofit leaders
Community organizers
Volunteer coordinators.
These roles require real-time adaptation to complex emotional cues and relational context, and AI struggles to do so.
Also, jobs that rely on genuinely original thinking in art, design, entrepreneurship or strategic vision will remain human-led, even if AI aids the process. That should be good for:
Artists, writers, and filmmakers
Architects and designers
Entrepreneurs and product innovators
Strategy consultants and futurists.
So note that not all these roles are necessarily “high-paying” or “thinking-based.” You might conclude that many of the “empathy required” jobs, though, tend to be dominated by females, which might have some implications for job protection and value.
I’m not sure we can reach any similar conclusions about the “originality” roles.
No comments:
Post a Comment