The future is low-tech
When we talk about AI, the conversation often revolves around what will be automated – and how machines will take over everything. No more typing emails, no more entering product information, no more manual forecasts... A future that feels much less human compared to today.
But is this image accurate?
If you look at last month's applicants, it’s clear that around 80% of them used AI tools to create and send their resumes and cover letters*. Ironically, those documents are then also immediately screened by AI tools, as the volume of incoming applications becomes unmanageable without that help.
For most, the inevitable response is a negative one, followed by automatically generated replies asking where they can improve. Perhaps we could also send something AI-generated in return as part of an automated workflow?
I don’t think I’m the only one who finds this situation rather absurd. But where exactly are we headed?
The value we attach to a message is linked to the cost of sending it. Expensive printed invitations sent by post for a wedding set different expectations than WhatsApp message. The more effort something has cost, the more attention we are inclined to give it. In the past, writing a good cover letter and resume also required considerable effort (or possibly money, if you wanted to outsource it).
Low-tech interactions can once again raise barriers. That’s why I believe there’s a future for low-tech forms of interaction.
Very concretely, it’s about two things:
- Forms of interaction that require more energy – so they can't be automated. For example, attending a physical event, because you can only be in one place at a time. Solving a task that’s difficult to automate and demonstrates your skills and interest is another possible alternative. Simply asking candidates to apply by post might also help improve the quality of incoming applications.
- Signals that show a candidate has invested effort. In a world where a well-written email could just as easily come from a strong AI tool, the quality of the message itself doesn’t mean as much anymore. Other signals are harder to fake, such as obtaining a specific degree or work experience with a reputable company. Having an extensive (professional) network is again a way to prove your qualifications. For companies, oddly enough, investing in office spaces might once again become more important.
The context of a job application is just one example; the parallels to other interactions are easy to draw. How do you, as a person or a company, make important decisions? Which supplier do you partner with? What’s the right set of insurance policies? Which tax or legal advice do you follow?
Seeing proof that the other party has put effort into an interaction and invested in what they do will be even more crucial than before. And perhaps that’s not such a bad thing. As much as I work with algorithms, I still prefer talking to people.
*And the remaining 20% are likely using those tools in a less obvious way.
