Why Packing a Suitcase Changed How I Think About Experience in the AI Era

While I was preparing for my trip and packing things, I decided to buy some vacuum bags for clothing. It seemed like an easy solution – reduce. The issue is how to accelerate the employee's development without losing the conditions that help build their judgement. the volume and pack more.

But recently, there was a comparison test of four such bags conducted by Which?. As a result, while ordinary folding included 129 pieces of clothing, vacuum packing included only 113. In other words, vacuum bags made the bundles smaller, but the shapes were harder to pack. There was less space available, and clothes were creased.

It seems like a nice solution until you obtain the result that looks different from expectations.

This observation offers much more than just a simple lesson about packing. It reflects the mistake organisations often make when it comes to developing their employees – they think that the increased ability to access more information in less time means the development of their capabilities.

𝐎𝐮𝐭𝐩𝐮𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐯𝐬. 𝐉𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞

Currently, almost all organisations try to compress their people's learning. Courses become shorter, subjects become summaries, and frameworks become sets of instructions. Even AI produces an analysis before the problem itself is considered.

All these changes make the process faster and more productive. But here is where the mistake happens – when the increased output is taken for granted and believed to be a sign of the experience.

Knowledge helps people to prepare for their lives. People gain experience through applying knowledge, managing uncertainty, making decisions, receiving feedback, and taking responsibility for the results of those decisions.

One person can pass all courses but still find himself/herself unable to cope with an unknown situation. Another person can use AI to make an impressively good answer but still be unable to give an explanation or identify what is missing and when this answer is incorrect. The output may be high due to the tool's quality, not the person's experience.

The well-packed suitcase shows that the person prepared for the trip. But it says nothing about his/her response to a cancelled flight, a changed route, or a forgotten item.

𝐈𝐧𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐫 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧?

The management issue is not whether the development should be faster or slower. The organisation cannot just wait for years until the necessary work situations arise. The issue is how the development of the employee can be accelerated without losing the conditions that help build the judgement.

For this reason, I introduce the concept of Compressed Real Experience™.

𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥 𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞™ is more than repeated practice. The connection between one decision, its result, feedback, and reflection leads to a new decision that is more challenging for the person. The support becomes lower, and responsibility becomes higher while moving the person from realistic practice to independent actions in real work.

Every cycle includes the problem exposure, practice, feedback, reflection and consequences. But what changes is the frequency and deliberate combining of these elements.

Imagine a manager who learns to make an AI-based decision. Reading of any guidance will provide him/her with knowledge, while using AI to make a recommendation will provide him/her with an output. Neither of these activities helps the person develop their judgement.

A more productive process is the one in which a person needs to explore a realistic situation, question the AI recommendation, decide and provide an explanation. Feedback will show what was missed, and then the person will apply this feedback while deciding on a more difficult situation and then make a supervised real decision. As the person takes on more responsibility, the support will decrease.

The speed appears thanks to a more correct sequence and more timely feedback, not due to elimination of difficult parts.

𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐞𝐱𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐞??

Instead of focusing on the completion of a course and output of work, leaders should examine the ability of the person to explain why the answer is correct, identify what may be missed, adjust the decision when situation changes and be responsible for the results. Leaders should also evaluate whether this person is capable of working in the next situation with less support.

If the above skills are missing, the organisation has probably accelerated the output but failed to develop the individual. More work is done, but the experience is not growing at the same rate.

AI can be helpful in this process if used correctly – it can provide various cases, test reasoning and give quick feedback. The problem appears when it replaces the decision and reasoning of the person.

As AI is becoming a part of everyday professional work and gives research, structure, analysis and wording, completed work may show not the level of judgement of the person but dependence on the tool. This person's performance will depend on this tool and will decrease if it gives a wrong answer, an unusual situation arises, or the tool is unavailable.

The comparison made by Which? does not prove the theory of organisational experience. But it shows the risk: while smaller bundles brought the same amount of clothing to the suitcase, shorter training and faster access to information in organisations result in worse judgement if the person's until needs to practise, receive feedback, reflect, and take responsibility for the results.

My initial question was how much I can pack in my cabin bag. But the right question was whether I am going to pack the right things for the trip and whether I can use them in changed conditions.

Organisations face the same question: whether they will pack more information in less time or create situations in which people learn to act when there is no standard answer.

This, in turn, is the core of my upcoming book – 𝑩𝒖𝒊𝒍𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑬𝒙𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆 𝒊𝒏 𝒂 𝑯𝒊𝒈𝒉-𝑺𝒑𝒆𝒆𝒅 𝑻𝒆𝒄𝒉𝒏𝒐𝒍𝒐𝒈𝒚 𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒍𝒅 which will be published soon. The book analyses how the organisations can/must build, preserve and accelerate the experience in the time of AI and why the increased speed of information access cannot substitute the judgement development through real decisions.