Latest / AI Meets MedTech / The Overlooked Human Element AI Can't Replace in Healthcare and Hiring

Transcript

The Overlooked Human Element AI Can't Replace in Healthcare and Hiring · AI Meets MedTech

• Speaker 2: Welcome to AI Meets MedTech Podcast. My name is Ananistarova, and today my guest is Luttrell Toller, who is the founder and managing director of True Talk Advisors, a California Silicon Beach-based talent consultancy firm. Luttrell is a career coach, the talent strategist, and somebody who really has a deep knowledge ⁓ of the human side of the organizational change. And this is why I invited him today. To join me on my podcast, because his perspective is so valuable in the era when AI is moving into healthcare field and other fields as well, so fast. And the biggest question nowadays is not that does the technology work, but are the people ready for it? And we all hear all the news about AI replacing people, the workforce shift, how training is changing, how hiring is changing. And I think Luttrell lives those things every day. Luttrell, welcome to AI Meets Met Tech. Thank you. And I'm so glad Speaker 1: Thank you. And I'll always say yes when the studio is so close to my office. So you'll get a yes from me every time. Speaker 2: Thank you. Well, let's jump right in. I really have lots of questions for you, especially from that perspective of talent acquisition, talent strategy. I'd like to know from your vantage point as a recruitment specialist and career coach, do you think that AI is actually changing the way of hiring, how companies are hiring people? Speaker 1: It it is, ⁓ but n not in the way that necessarily people think. I think people are finding some efficiencies with AI, and it's actually creating some inefficiencies. ⁓ but companies from especially larger organizations are trying to figure out a way to integrate AI into their into their interview process. But there's almost this over-reliance on the tool without as much thinking about the outcome that they want. So they're trying to find, they have this shiny new tool and they're trying to figure out a way to use it, as opposed to having a great optimized interview process and then figuring out how do we bring in this tool to make it even better. So what we're seeing now is some companies are what I call their scaling mediocrity. They already had, and most, and I this is no secret, if you've ever interviewed for a comp ⁓ for a for a job, most the interview process by and large is broken or incredibly inefficient, right? In in almost every way manageable, down to people not getting back to you and ghosting, and that's a big thing now, and and all the other stuff, and too many interviews. AI is accelerating that and making it worse in some instances. Now for the companies that do it really, really well, then AI is just simply one more tool that they're using to make it even better and to ⁓ improve the experience. Speaker 2: So you touched on a very interesting part, the ghosting part, the scale of mediocracy. Is there a remedy for it? What do you think should happen or can happen in the next, let's say, couple of years? Speaker 1: Other other than calling me in to fix it? Yeah. A absolutely there's a there's a remedy. ⁓ I think design thinkers do this really well where you you you think about the interview process as a design like how can we design it so that we optimize we optimize it for the best outcome. So you start thinking about it in terms of outcomes. So what's the best outcome from an interview that you want? You want, you want to make sure that you identify a great a great candidate, and you want to make sure that that candidate has a great experience. Most people would that shouldn't be controversial. So you start there and you need to start with and then consider what is it that we want. For this position. What is this person actually doing? Not the generic job description that we Google, but what's why this person, why now? So you think about that. That job description usually doesn't exist in its present form. So it takes some work to figure out why this person, why now? So what so then first you figure out the job, and then you figure out who is best equipped to assess this person. That becomes your interview panel. And then you have to think about what's the best way to assess this talent. Now we're in we're in LA. ⁓ so h you know, this is Hollywood. Hollywood does it really well. And I've talked about this for years, where if I'm bringing you in for a part to for a role, I'm probably not gonna interview you how you would approach the role. What what would I do? Just intuitively, what would w How would me as a producer figure out if you're right for the role? You audition. Exactly. So companies can learn from Hollywood. You try and approximate, you try and make the role an audition so that the candidate can demonstrate if they can do it or not. Once you do that, then you've you've realized that, gosh, there were candidates that we were that were fully capable that we were overlooking that could actually do this job. Speaker 2: But I have a question here. How do you really get to that point of interviewing? I know that many people who are watching us in the current market, they're probably looking for jobs and they're sending resumes and you know, they're trying to reach out as many companies as possible and they get no reaction. How do you really get to that point? Because that's where I find there's a little bit of a maybe wall that they're facing. And going back to AI question, I know that many people are using AI to write resumes, to adapt resumes, to trick AT. So that's another part of ⁓ the question I know many people in the audience would have in mind. So what what do you think about that? Speaker 1: Great question by the way. ⁓ so AI is doing something to resumes, it's making them all the same. So what people are doing is they're putting the job description in, they're putting the their AI created resume in. So now the people who are assessing the resumes, that first first line of people, can't really tell what the person everyone's resume looks the same, so they can't really tell. ⁓ my recommendation to break through is if they are truly qualified. is to connect with people within the organization, including the hiring authority, to start there, right? In addition to applying, but oftentimes applying is the the the return on your time and then playing, applying if you you may have even experienced this when you were looking for jobs. I don't know. If you get a one percent return Right. So I would go directly to the hiring authorities or go to people within organizations and then have have them facilitate an an intro. Yeah. Speaker 2: And if we were talking about air of AI, as that's the general theme of my podcast, ⁓ do you think in the future we will have companies have more demand for truly domain expertise or for tech savvy generalists? What do you think the future how how that future will look like? Speaker 1: Yeah. So I can base it on I I hate to make predictions, but I can base it on what I'm seeing now. We're seeing that people who have are genuine expertise in something are able to leverage that ac expertise better than people who just know AI prompts. Okay. And we're seeing that I posted something on LinkedIn a couple of days ago about that. So ⁓ it's almost like there's this this drive to find true experts to know what's good and what's not good. The prompt writers don't know that. So what's what I'm seeing is, okay, so I will make a prediction that the prompt writers will work for the people who know what good is. The people who know what good actually is may or may not know AI that well. But they'll have taste and they'll have expertise. And that's what that what's would be valued. So in a commoditized world, and AI is commoditizing it, right? It's scaling mediocrity in some respects. It's the people who actually know what's good who will stand out, which could and which could give experienced people who have the education and the expertise in an area an advantage. Speaker 2: Okay. And what would be your recommendation for people who are looking for jobs right now in the era of AI, as we call it? What types of skills or maybe tools they can use right now to be more visible? Maybe they can learn or maybe they can be, you know, aware of because you said the domain experts will stay relevant, but they may need to hire someone who can use or utilize AI better. Do you think some domain experts also should shift their focus on AI skills or do you think it's Speaker 1: What do you think? Yeah, and don't get me wrong. I don't, I'm not saying that the domain experts should not use AI. They'll use AI again, like the companies, they'll use it as a tool to leverage what they're already good at and to leverage what they'll already know. Yeah. They can look at the output that AI puts out and they'll know what to do with that better than someone who is not an expert. So so the people with domain expertise. It will actually make them tremendously better. They'll they'll have tremendous more reach. They'll be able to leverage AI far better. So your question is, should they learn it? Absolutely, because they're gonna benefit it from benefit from it the most. Yeah. It's the people who aren't experts who don't know. So I look at the way large language models write. They don't write well. But you wouldn't know that if unless you're a good writer. So it writes very confidently. Yeah. Looking at that, you would go, ⁓ my gosh, this makes perfect sense. But an a good copywriter would look at this and go, that's not going to be impactful. Speaker 2: And that comes from your for your background. Speaker 1: Right. Or or anyone who who writes well would know that this is not this is not good writing. Mm-hmm. In fact, it's garbage. And if you turn so I I have a ⁓ what I'm finding, especially from middle managers, I'll tell you this story, and hopefully some of them are watching, is that they're telling me they have to they have to go over their employees' work more because they're turning in bat work product and they're missing things because the the The large language models write with such confidence that it appears to be true. So the people who are managing the individual contributors are saying, I'm not hearing it so from much from senior leaders, because the senior leaders are managing managers and the managers know better. So they're they're it's making their job harder because they're getting all this stuff that's not good work product from people who are, ⁓ my gosh, I'll just send it as AI. They haven't been in the workforce long enough and they haven't developed the expertise long enough to know that that's not good. So it's actually creating, so imagine that inefficiency that it's creating, even where they have to have meetings to say, hey guys, you guys are turning in this AI slop. This is not right. Like what are you are you are you guys even reading this? And and they'll go back and they'll see the mistakes. So you can see it could create some inefficiencies there. Speaker 2: So maybe just top it up on that, if we would if you would give a suggestion to people who are just starting their careers, what would you tell them? Shall they learn the basic writing skills, go back to how we learned it before? Would that be your suggestion in order to actually succeed in their roles so they don't provide that poor work? Speaker 1: That's a great question. And I'm I I'm dealing with this as a as a as a a father of a teen daughter, right? ⁓ I my advice would be to not over-index on AI. Yeah. To continue to read books, to continue to write, to continue to to write longhand. To writing is thinking. Speaker 2: Yes. Speaker 1: The danger of using a large language model too much is that you you don't develop that part of your brain. So my advice would be the same advice for people with social media is to take breaks from it and do the do the hard work and the heavy lifting of learning and writing and thinking. Because large language models don't think. They're just giving you back patterns to recognize that, but it gives it back so confidently that you think it's thinking, but that's not we're not there yet. Even with machine learning to some ⁓ some respect. So my advice, which is a great question, is to don't stop thinking. Continue to do a lot of the work yourself. But still use the tool. Like there are amazing tools out there. For example, the note-taking tools. That's been a game changer for me and a lot of my clients. My clients love it. So we'll meet. Say we're losing using read AI, it'll take all the notes from us and we can interact with that. That's been Absolutely fantastic, right? So it freezes up. So now I can lock in on this conversation. Yep. Whereas before I'm like, yeah. So you imagine business development people and sales people how much that could help them. Yeah. Right. So now they'll capture everything from the conversation and not just the things that they did in their notes. Speaker 2: Yeah. And if we talk about someone, let's say mid career, so we talked about people in more junior junior ⁓ position right now. We're talking about mid career people, what advice you can give them? Because I think there is a big wave of concern that is happening right now, and I know partially it's being promoted by media. People are scared that AI can replace them. We also hear about all the layoffs in different industries. And I wonder, what do you think? Is there a true threat of losing a a big portion of workforce in the near future? And maybe we are overstating the threat. What do you think? I'd like to break it maybe into parts. Mid mid career people in general and also mid career people in related to healthcare because obviously my podcast is a little bit more on on healthcare and I think Exactly. So I'm just curious to know what what do you think about it? Are we overstating the threat and also what people in those positions can do? Should they be threatened? Should b they think differently? Should be sh maybe they should be ready to risk it. Speaker 1: Yeah. So the the the practical answer is like the the candid answer is yes, they are threatened. But it's not the threaten it's not because of anything they're doing or not doing. They're forces bigger than them and we're seeing that play out. So here's what's happening. People will and you mentioned the media mentioning it, companies are taking this in, leaders are taking this in, and they're saying, Gosh, we don't need these people because we have AI. That that's not necessarily true, but If they think it's true, the person's gonna be impacted anyway. I think it was was it Salesforce that even said we overreacted and now they're bringing some people back? I think it was Salesforce, I'm if I'm not mistaken. So companies are gonna overreact and middle managers are going to have very little control as to what they can do to say themselves. That's just the reality. But but my advice to them would be: yes, learn the tools. know that they may be impacted and network like they've never networked before and make connections and continue to develop their expertise. Because just like anything, for although ⁓ those enough those of us who are old enough to remember like the dot com and all that stuff, there's an overreaction and then it comes back. Yeah. Right. So know that people will probably overreact, you'll probably be impacted, but make sure you're you're you're okay if that does in fact happen. ⁓ continue to develop your skills, domain expertise, and continue to network so you have connections and a place to go. ⁓ if you are impacted. I know that's probably not there's not I don't know if there's anything one thing they can do to protect themselves. That's just sort of the reality of of let's just say of of capitalism, right? Like the forces are bigger than them, but they can do something to sort of pivot once it if if it does happen. Speaker 2: And I do think historically healthcare was a relatively slow and more protected field, I would say, if we would compare it to other industries. But even then, right now, like I said at the ver in my intro, yes, the question is no longer is the technology does the technology work? The question is are the people ready? And it seems like There are pushbacks, people are not ready for new tech, and there are some amazing technologies coming out for patient care and some hospitals are adopting them. So it's a big change and I think many people are not ready for it and they have to somehow get ready for it. and I do think health care still is relatively slow, but we all hear about that. Yeah, we have shortage of nurses. We need to replace them. The AI now help can help with this. They can replace, I don't know, some doctors, some surgeons, even some people say. but do you think it's true from your perspective? Do you think AI can replace the healthcare sector? As a maybe not as a recruiter in that space, but maybe as a person who receives healthcare, someone who sits on on in the seat of the Speaker 1: Yeah. Well I and I can even speak to the industry. Some of my clients were sort of are tangential to that space. ⁓ you're fortunate to be in a space in a in an industry that's growing, that's doing incredibly well. And they they are investing resources and they're not for as as far as I've heard, they're not having these mass layoffs like tech, right? So they're investing right now. Yeah. Probably a good space to be in, right? If you just if you just had to pick a space that you're gonna be in, you want to be in the one that's growing and the way they're investing. My thinking is they're probably going to be a little more thoughtful and less reactive because they're doing so well. If if the profits are rolling in, you don't need to overreact, you don't need to cut costs. Yeah. ⁓ so that might be, I mean, that might if I'm picking industries, that's not a bad space to be in right now. Yeah. ⁓ so your question was, what should I'm sorry, re Speaker 2: It what with the person in let's say in the healthcare industry, but in the mid level, let's say career mid career person in healthcare, should they be threatened? Do you think they can upskill or should they feel relatively comfortable in that sp Speaker 1: You might be better equipped to answer this than me, but I I think from from an outsider's perspective, that industry, they're probably gonna be okay for the foreseeable future. Yeah. Right. There's no and again you could speak to this better than I can, but there's no forecast about the industry. Everything I read and see is it's it's going up and there's new technology and then there's new innovation, there's new ways, people are trying to find ways to deliver care. I think the cost is a big thing in that industry, right? Like if someone can figure out a way, be it a a a government entity or private sector to solve that, then that I think if AI can be here it if AI can be used to lower the cost, that's where the opportunity is, which is and that could be trillion, I'm just throwing in number. The the opportunity to lower costs could be huge for someone. Speaker 2: Mm-hmm. So part of my audience who's listening right now, they're looking for jobs and they're trying to be prepared for what's coming or the reality we're already in. But another part of my audience, ⁓ are the people who are in management positions in companies, organizations. And I wonder if we could talk a little bit more ⁓ about how they should approach hiring process, because that's your expertise and how they should approach Finding right candidates and maybe not scaring people with all those statements. We're gonna f lay off half of the staff. We're looking for efficiencies. We don't care. Like how what kind of advice you can give them? What what are your thoughts about current state of events and organizational Speaker 1: side. ⁓ so yeah, especially in your sector, they they should be I would think there's a lot of competition for talent. Right? ⁓ and if someone is talented, everyone wants that that talented person. Is that the case? Do do candidates have more options in this industry? Because people Speaker 2: But it i varies, I guess. It varies. Speaker 1: Okay. ⁓ I would have them start with why do we need this person and and why do we need them now? Like I said before. Yeah. And then build the interview process around that and let them know exactly what they're getting into. So for some people that's gonna be it's gonna be very attractive. For some people it's gonna be filter it's gonna filter them out. But if people know what they're getting into and they know what to expect, they tend to s be more engaged and stay longer. It's when they are surprised and when they think, and you I don't know if you've experienced this where you take a job, like, wait, this is not what I I signed up for. Yeah. Oftentimes what we find out if people know what they're going to get, even though if it's it's tough or even it's quote unquote bad, they'll stick it out because they knew that it was coming. So I guess the advice is to to be self-aware and let people know what they're getting into. Mm-hmm. Let people know if they're going to be empowered, let people know how much autonomy they have. All of that stuff. Give them the good, the bad, and the ugly. Yeah. Right. And if it's too ugly, fix it before you bring them on. Mm-hmm. Right? That should be the case. ⁓ And then design an interview process that measures those things that you actually need. You don't need to put someone in an artificially anxiety-written process, especially if that's not going to be part of the work that they're doing. So, what can you do to make the person comfortable so that they give you their best during the interview? Yeah. Some of my best clients, what they do is they'll have one of the senior leaders come in and talk to the candidate and they'll Make her really comfortable. It won't even be an interview. They're just hanging out talking. Canada gets comfortable. Now she can relax a little bit. And now she can really demonstrate and give her best during the interview because she's not the nerves aren't getting in the way of the assessment process. Right? So I would say let them know up front what you're gonna be evaluating them on. Yeah. And then start the start the process, right? Like if you are bringing in athletes to try out for a team, you want them first to be like very comfortable. You want to let them know this is we're gonna be evaluating you on these things because we're looking for the best athlete for we're looking for the person the best person for this role. Speaker 2: And did you work with startups on on that process or you mostly work with larger organizations? Speaker 1: ⁓ I started off most working with mostly startups, but we've since expanded and pivoted a little bit. ⁓ we've since expanded to working with with non-start, like some more traditional organization. Speaker 2: The reason why I asked that question, because I'm just curious if that approach applies to both large enterprises and small companies. Speaker 1: It it it does. ⁓ the the interview process is broken with startups for different reasons that it's broken for different larger companies, but it's still broken in some respects. Like maybe the startup might be a little bit more gut instinct. Yeah. Because often sometimes you're you're Startup founders are people who've never managed a company before. So manage people people who've never or ⁓ never managed people. So they've raised their 30, 40 million dollars. Now they gotta go out and hire 25, 30 people, but they've never really done that before in their role in some instances. So they'll make hiring mistakes based on, ⁓ yeah, I feel good about this person. Let's bring them on. Organizations make hiring mistakes for different reasons. May maybe they'll have the person interview like eight eight times and person will get interview fatigue and they'll want to pull out and they'll measuring them on different things that have nothing to do. They're giving them psychological tests that haven't really been validated. So it's it's broken on both sides, but for different reasons. Speaker 2: Yeah. Actually talking about those eight interviews, I started hearing more and more of those stories that now because the market shifted, employers actually put candidates through five, seven, eight rounds of interviews. Do you really find that's efficient? Absolutely. Speaker 1: Absolut absolutely. I I first I would ask why do you need eight rounds to assess if it's an availability issue, then we need to organize the calendars better. We can usually go in and find and and optimize the process. Like five, six rounds of interviews, well like w we just did one where why don't we just do a panel? Yeah. We have everyone which which is not that's not ⁓ earth shattering. And they were like, ⁓ yeah, great, that's a great idea. Okay, we'll have everyone in on that same day. So And then it became after they interview them, let's schedule a time where we get everyone together and we all debrief on the same day. So what does that do? So now if I have a can I can tell the candidate now, or they can tell the candidate directly, we're gonna interview these next two weeks. On Friday, we're having our debrief. That day we should know, right? Like you're telling the candidate that. So the candidate doesn't have to do that awkward thing of, should I reach out? Should I not reach out? They're having their debrief on Friday. We have our debrief, and then from that we're gonna bring in our finalist after that. If we don't call you, you know you're not a finalist. We may or may not call you that. So let's say for whatever reason they they don't know if they're gonna call. Tell them that. If we don't call you on Friday, you're you're you're probably not a finalist. But maybe, maybe they do call. Ideally, they would call them, right? ⁓ but they're letting them know you're giving them transparency into the actual process. Yeah. Speaker 2: I do agree that transparency p should play a bigger role for sure. And especially with with AI theme, because we kinda g get back to that theme again and again. Speaker 1: Yeah, and then people if the the candidates thinking, man, are they using AI to screen me out? Is that what's what's going on here? Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah. I know people, I speak to people who are looking for jobs right now and that's their concern. Do companies use AI now? Why am I not doing this? Or why everyone is talking about adjusting resume for AI and you know, ultimately leads to a lot of misinformation. on the in resume. And then obviously because you're trying to break the system, break the play the game. That's what that's the new thing that I see right now. That's the trend that I see among my friends and former colleagues. It's it's an interesting shift that that I notice. Speaker 1: I'm glad you okay, so so you're saying the same thing that we're saying. Yeah. If I were them, what I would do is since everyone is trying to hack the system, I would hack it in a different way by over indexing on doing the things that only humans can do. Mm-hmm. And go the other way. So while everyone is trying to optimize their resume, go the other way and just invite the hiring manager to coffee or someone someone there for coffee, like like an actual meeting. Yeah. If you can get it, now not saying it's easy, but the but I know it works because the people who we work with when we're because I work with a lot of people who are pivoting careers, we over-index on that, right? And if they happen to be charismatic, like yourself, right? Like if you were one of our, I mentioned this to you in the green room, if you were one of my coaching clients, I would over-index on literally getting you in front of people and having meeting because you're compelling in person. So leverage that. AI cannot beat that. Speaker 2: That's actually a goal, and that's exactly where I want this conversation to go to. Like, what's the next for people right now? Like I think we are going back to more human to human connection. Even though AI adds so much efficiency, we can save time, we can do lots of tasks simultaneously now. But I think when it comes to interpersonal connection, going after people in person, I think we're going back to it now. More more than even five, ten years ago, I would say. It was always a thing. Like networking was always a thing. But I feel like it's almost Speaker 1: You are spot on. You are sp you you look at the popularity of events now. And in person events now are incredibly popular. It's coming back. It's it hasn't reached pre-COVID level. Yeah. But I I'm even seeing it with my cli I do a lot of ⁓ work with clients in the event space that that manage huge venues. A lot of that and they're doing exceptionally well because people want that human connection. You think about all the things that technology has made more efficient, but the things that have it's taken away. Mm-hmm. And people are getting away for dating apps, right? So the people who Invented dating apps, we're trying to improve the efficiency of dating. But think about all the things you lose by slaping swiping right and s swiping left, right? Like all the serendipity, serendipitous interaction that you could have, and all the spontaneous stuff, and all the skills you learn, and all the stuff that happens from that, from those random encounters, from from going to a social event to meet someone and doing it in person and the angst you feel from walking across a crowded dance floor and asking a perfect stranger to dance. There's value in that as a as a human being. Yeah. And so then losing that, and we're seeing that with the younger generation, right? Like they are, they tend to be more isolated. They tend to be, they stay in their rooms longer, they are glued to the screen. So think about the even like let's say Netflix has made sort of turn art into an arg into an algorithm. Right? We think you might like this. Yeah. And we'll de we'll deliver it right to your living room so you don't have to go out and experience in the theater with other people. You're not gonna have these discoveries. We're gonna give you what we think we you want, but humans weren't built that way. We were built to dabble. Mm-hmm. Like to figure things out. ⁓ you think about we talked about product market fit where companies try and find a product market fit and people try and find a product market fit. You find that through dabbling, through trying different things, and the tech can make it more efficient, but take a take some of that away. So I would say to just be aware that the tech, there's a profit motive behind the tech that's not necessarily behind your best interests. So ⁓ so make the tech work for you instead of you working for the tech. Speaker 2: I like that. I like that a lot. And if we're kind of going into a more futuristic theme of this conversation, do you think that AI will replace a big portion of human work? Or do you believe that it's an overstatement that we see right now right now? I think what I'm doing right now, I'm just rephrasing and maybe repeating the question I hear from people I talk to and the fear and the conversations, you know, that people have that shall we go and get skills like a physical skills versus intellectual skills? Shall we think long-term, let's say next five years, maybe my job as an intellectual. ⁓ domain exp expert will no longer be needed because that's what we hear o right now, that all the tech founders are talking about. So I wonder what what what do you think? Speaker 1: And again, I'm hesitant make make predictions, but I'm a bit of an armchair historian. Mm-hmm. And if you go back and look at history, first they said robots would replace people. None of that has actually happened. So I'm hesitant to make a prediction, but I but I can say what I'm seeing come back is So remember that movie Revenge of the Nerds? Mm-hmm. That might be that might be before your time, but you know that the theme where these So the Nerds were the bad guys in that movie. If you go back and look at that movie, the nerds were the bad guys in that movie. ⁓ now it's becoming this sort of revenge of the humanities. So it's unlikely that you're going to be made obsolete. You can make yourself so here's what I mean by revenge of humanities. Right. Like if you're an engineer major, maybe also major, double major in philosophy. Because that thinking, we're gonna need that more so than ever. We're gonna need people to know again what good taste is, what good is, right? So English majors are going to be musicians, people like who can actually play and learn music and read music, all this stuff. Right, is is this humanities, these so-called soft skills are gonna be now made to be even more valuable because you can't commoditize them. So This this idea is is to lean into sort of the humanities and the stuff that makes us human more. And I think if I had to pr it hasn't happened yet. Like we we haven't been replaced by the technology at this point. The mundane work, absolutely, but people have been saying that we're gonna be replaced for years and years and years. It it still hasn't happened. People are trying to force, there are forces who are trying to force it on us. You gotta think there's a profit motive behind that, right? Like they're trying to sort of make this the case. It's not inevitable. Yeah. Right. We could pass let legislation and regulations, like protections, to sort of limit the impact of this. So it's not like there's this inevitable march of AI and it's actually gonna happen. No, there are people who are trying to make it happen for their own reasons. But it's interesting, once they make it. What I'm seeing is that that the the technologists and the founders will will cash out of their stock. And make hundreds of millions of dollars from the technology they created, and then they'll go off and write poetry and say and give say and give this cautionary tale. But they've already cashed out. Yeah. Right. And now they're gonna say, ⁓ my gosh. Yeah. So I think for for us as people who consumers of technology and users of the technology is to be mindful that the forces that are pushing it on us have a different agenda that's not necessarily in our back interest best interest. And keep that in mind. But in going back to answer your question, I think. If you just remember the things that makes us human and be good at those things, we're we're probably gonna be fine. Yeah. Speaker 2: That's a very nice pause with thought. I like that. Yeah. But I do like ask questions about future and to be honest, I don't really look further than maybe two, three years from now because things change so fast. Right now it's hard to look further than that. But what do you think about the concept of AI? Speaker 1: Probably gotta be. But who who knows? But we probably are. Speaker 2: matching candidates, organizations, skill sets, even personal traits in kind of overruling the HR process, recruitment process that we know as is right now. I heard those concepts from different people and I wonder what do you think? Because what I heard, there's a platform that's been built where young candidates can put the interests in in what type of they I think they also go through some tests ⁓ to f to analyze the strength and they also can put obviously their skill set, education, etc. And AI matches them with the organization or the potential job post, et cetera. So what do you think about that? Do you think that will be more and more ⁓ you know usable? Or maybe as an alternative, maybe you'll think more People like you who would be more of a consultant, third party, independent human who would do that, versus AI. So what do you think? I know it's a tough one because I put you in the position like you are going Speaker 1: I was doing some work for a startup back in 2018 and where they're trying to use machine learning to do something similar. we're not quite there yet. What the what the technology is getting good at is there's an aspect of recruiting called sourcing, which is exactly what it sounds like, where you're you're you're trying to find candidates based on a criteria that you think might be a fit, based on profiles that you could. You see from all over the web. So ⁓ maybe it surfaces you and says, okay, and it might be a fit-for-your job, Lutrell. But I don't know that until I actually have a conversation with you. So the part that it can create an efficiency is to be better at the sourcing. These people are based on these signals that they're giving, we think that they might warrant a conversation about the role, but you're still gonna have to have the conversation to find out. Career aspirations are. Are they in fact a fit that like some some of the other things? Is this the right time for them? It's tough to know that from, but I could see, and I know people who are building ⁓ tools now ⁓ and agents that are are they like so the sourcing aspect in recruiting is the most tedious aspect where you're just doing name, it's name generation. Very tedious, very time consuming. AI seems to be making that a lot more efficient, which is making the get recruiters more efficient because now they have more candidates to select from. So this goes back to the theme of if you're already good at what you do, it can it can make you better. So now instead of looking at pool of candidates of 20, I could look at a pool of 300 and and service the client better or service the hiring manager better. Speaker 2: Well, I think to wrap it up, ⁓ I think this is a great conversation we can talk for. Absolutely. Speaker 1: Absolutely. You ask great questions by the way. Speaker 2: That's that's fantastic. And I think I can talk about AI in the future and predictions and thoughts like for a very long time. But there's one question I like to ask my guests as a common theme, because that's something I w I envision that I ask them now and maybe let's say in five years we'll we'll revisit and ask the same question again. And that question is related to AI and MedTech and healthcare. As a patient, as of now, would you trust AI? to diagnose you and treat you, or you still will go to a human doctor. I mean nurses we're not talking 'cause nurses are much more hands on, but we're talking about doctors. So would you feel comfortable with AI fully diagnosing you and being your care provider? Or you would still go to a human ⁓ Speaker 1: So it it's FDA approved. All that it's Yeah. Speaker 2: Yeah, call all but of course. Yeah. ⁓ it's more of a theoretical question. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Speaker 1: So as long as there's a human part of the so let's say the technology, so it's been validated. Okay. That we know this works. Yeah. And we know this works in this specific application. Yeah. And the and the because I'm all about what does the data show? Mm-hmm. Because everything other other than that it's just theory. If the data shows that this is in fact validated and there's a human involved, I I okay. Absolutely would. Okay. Absolutely would. Okay. ⁓ Speaker 2: Do you think the human to human interaction will be missed or you th Speaker 1: think it I would mi I well I would hope that are are you saying at the exclusion of the human? Yeah. ⁓ no I wouldn't want that. I would want you still still absolutely Yeah a combination absolutely Speaker 2: want to have so maybe a combination. As of now I see that response more common. It seems like we're still in that space. And some people say no I want to see a doctor. Like that's an interesting perspective. But I just again it's just my ⁓ theory and I would like to revisit in a couple of years and see if that will change. Speaker 1: My primary physician, I wanna I wanna meet with her, him or her, and ⁓ have that conversation, let them know where I'm coming from. Because sometimes things come up that they won't see, like they'll notice something. ⁓ I noticed that you you keep looking at right. Like something could happen during that conversation. ⁓ you don't seem right. That right, we still need that that human element. But if it was just something like, ⁓ we're gonna use AI to look at your data your your your MRI we can use AI to in fact we can use this AI in lieu of getting you an MRI. Something like that absolutely would. Speaker 2: Thank you so Lutrell. It was such a pleasure. Thank you. Thanks.