Elon Musk caused a media stir recently. Not for his innovative technologies or promises to commercialize space travel. In front of a meeting of the National Governors Association, the Tesla CEO warned attendees that [Artificial Intelligence] AI is a fundamental existential risk for human civilization. Based on his observations, Musk cautioned that AI is the scariest problem.

Its not the first time hes sounded this alarm. He madeheadlines with it a few years ago. In fact, Musk is so concerned, he suggested something almost unthinkable for most tech leaders: government regulation.

What AI needs, in fact, is a human touch.

AI is most certainly here as a fixture in our lives from suggesting news articles we might like to Siri on your phone to credit card fraud detection to autonomous-driving capabilities in cars. But are we having the right conversations about its impact? There are conversations about the kinds of job loss that might come from future technologies like self-driving cars or the blue-collar jobs that might be lost to increasingly automated processes. But do we really need to look far into the future to see its impact and its potential for harm? And are these impacts only relegated to entry-level jobs in transportation or manufacturing?

The reality is much more complicated, widespread, and immediate than our current public dialogue or Musks diatribe betray.

An immediate opportunity and also a risk is that first variations of AI are destined to repeat the issues that already exist. But what happens when you need to move beyond a historical mold?

When managed by and for people, AI creates new opportunities for ingenuity.

For example, many mid- to large-size companies use AI in hiring today to source candidates using technologies that search databases like LinkedIn. These sourcing methods typically use algorithms based on current staff and will, therefore, only identify people who look a lot like the current employees. Instead of moving an organization forward and finding people who complement current capabilities, this will instead build a culture of sameness and homogeneity that does not anticipate future needs.

As these AI sourcing methods become pervasive, HR and talent acquisition professionals wonder what this means for the industry and for their jobs. Will we still need recruiters now that we have AI to cover many hiring responsibilities?

The answer is a resounding yes.

Where AI algorithms encourage sameness and disqualify huge swaths of potentially qualified candidates simply because they dont look like current employees, humans can identify the gaps in capabilities and personality and use that to promote more innovative hiring. Companies are looking for new and different approaches, creative solutions, and new talents. To evolve they need to anticipate future directions and adapt to meet those challenges. They need a diverse range of problem solvers, and they need new and varied skills theyve never hired before. AI cannot deliver those candidates. People can.

While AI can be incredibly useful, the biggest harm it can inflict is if used without human input. We need humans to think creatively and abstractly about the problems we face and to devise new and innovative strategies, to test out different approaches, and to look to the future for upcoming challenges and opportunities. We need to be sure we arent using algorithms to replicate a past that does not meet the needs of the future.

Laura Mather is thefounder and CEO of Talent Sonar.

Follow this link:

Why AI needs a human touch - VentureBeat