2026-06-29
Hand reports to AI and growth stops: the line where AI drafts and humans decide
It's tempting to automate reports and evaluation with generative AI, but if AI writes the answers, problem-solving never grows. Keep AI to drafts and hints, and keep the final call human.
The temptation to automate, and the trap
With generative AI you can produce improvement ideas and evaluation comments in an instant. But if AI writes even the answers, members stop thinking for themselves. Convenience quietly takes away the very problem-solving that was supposed to grow — that is the trap of automation.
Keep AI to drafts and hints
Limit AI's role to support on stuck days. Instead of filling in the answer, have it return questions like 'where did you get stuck?' and 'how will you change next time?', and the thinking stays with the person. A growth mode where they write it themselves by default, with AI as scaffolding, keeps development alive.
The final evaluation call is always human
AI suits organizing facts and drafting, but the final call on evaluation and feedback stays with people. Being able to explain who judged on what basis is essential for fairness and accountability. AI's output is material; the decision is human.
The line builds trust
Knowing that 'AI won't make the final judgment' brings reassurance to employees and customers alike. AI shortens time, people judge meaning — making that division of roles explicit is what sustains trust in the tool.
A tool for a culture of improvement and fair evaluation that implements these ideas.