Why Human Leadership Matters More Than Ever In The AI Era
By Christine Ann Miller
The recipe looked perfect on paper. I'd told ChatGPT about my family's preferences for Jamaican dishes, Italian pastas, bold flavors, and it generated what seemed like ideal meal plans. The first dish came out beautifully. But the second? My family's verdict was swift: “bland.”
I had to go back and tell it, "Listen, no offense, but my family thought this wasn't flavorful." It gave me a more robust version, but I still had to continuously provide guidance. I'd taste something and think it was fine, then my husband would say he didn't like it. Because taste buds are different.
This highlights an obvious truth: AI may be able to get you 90% of the way there, but it cannot taste the food. That final 10% is the human judgment, the lived experience, and the wisdom to know what will actually work. This is what will separate organizations that master AI from those that are disrupted by it.
Where Accountability Really Lives
When I think about strategic decision-making, I always come back to accountability. Someone has to take responsibility for the decisions being made. You can gather data and information from AI, but you need to be discerning, just as you would with input from any advisor. At the end of the day, the person who is ultimately accountable is the one who needs to decide.
At this point, most of us have witnessed AI hallucinations firsthand. Like the responses that seem reasonable but reveal themselves to be completely off-base when you dig deeper. You can end up making an avoidable mistake if you don't do the appropriate due diligence. AI should be an input, not the reviewer, not the strategist, and most definitely not the decision maker.
We already know that diversity of thought and experience gives better results. So why would you only get one source's input, which AI can end up being if you're not careful?
The Experience Gap Nobody's Talking About
What concerns me is how younger people may be comfortable with AI, while older people may be more apprehensive about being replaced. But on both ends of the spectrum, if AI is misused, it can have a negative impact across generations.
Entry-level roles are being eliminated. How do younger people develop the strategic muscle if they're not getting those early experiences that breed wisdom? Meanwhile, experienced leaders who know which paths not to take risk being sidelined in favor of technical prowess alone.
And there are other limitations. For example, when AI pulls case studies, it's mostly getting highlight reels of things that went right. It offers disproportionately less for all the drama and things that went wrong. If you're using AI to develop strategy without the benefit of those lived experiences and failures, that's a problem.
Integrating AI With Authentic Leadership
When I worked in Germany, my time with European colleagues fundamentally shaped how I think about leadership. When there was conflict, someone would say, "Hey, can we have a coffee?" and they would tell me not just the problem, but the “actual thing” behind the thing. That directness allowed me to address the real issues that often derail teams when left unspoken.
This approach becomes even more critical as we integrate AI into our organizations. The leaders who will thrive are those who know how to use AI as an enhancement to how they make decisions and lead, not as a replacement for actually showing up and being engaged. That requires curiosity and spending real time with your team to understand not just what they're doing with these tools, but also the concerns that lie beneath the surface.
You should use AI to have more authentic discussions. It’s a great tool for churning through data and information to bubble up questions or insights worth discussing. The goal isn't to let automation take over, but to enable more strategic thinking and human connection, not less.
As I've continued my cooking experiments, AI gets better with more data. But like I said, it only ever gets me about 90% there. I have to taste things to make sure they come out right. That's the model for how we should think about AI in leadership. There is something irreplaceable about work when you know somebody put their heart into it, just like cooking, you can taste the difference when someone has put genuine thought and care into what they've created.
The Path Forward
The next decade won't be defined by who has the most sophisticated AI tools. Technical capabilities are becoming commoditized. What will differentiate thriving organizations is their ability to combine AI's power with distinctly human capabilities.
We must resist favoring youth and technical fluency over experience and strategic wisdom. We need environments where people across all career stages contribute their unique strengths, where emerging talent gains experience necessary to develop judgment, and where senior leaders stay engaged with evolving technologies.
Most critically, remember that AI is a tool, not a substitute for leadership. It can generate options but cannot account for culture. It can process data but cannot weigh intangibles. It can write the recipe, but it cannot taste the food.
Human leadership matters more than ever precisely because AI is so powerful. The question isn't whether to embrace the technology — that ship has sailed. The question is whether we'll be wise enough to maintain the human elements that make the technology worth having in the first place.
About The Author:
Christine Ann Miller, a BioPharma CEO, is a forward-thinking, transformational leader who has dedicated her career to establishing clinical, operational, and commercial excellence across the pharmaceutical life cycle.