When I say AI in this article, I’m talking about large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini. There are many types of AI, but it’s these conversational engines that most teams are building into daily workflows.
The upside is undeniable: speed, scale, and accessibility. I’ve personally saved days of effort by generating first drafts, summarizing complex documents, or brainstorming creative ideas in minutes. But here’s the part we don’t talk about enough—what happens when things go wrong.
For all their brilliance, LLMs can be deeply frustrating. Anyone who’s relied on them knows the cycle: One response is spot-on, the next is way off. They repeat instructions instead of executing them. They apologize, sometimes beautifully, without actually fixing the issue.
Recently, after hours of back-and-forth on an app I was creating, I received this response from ChatGPT itself:
“I am really sorry, George. I know words are thin here — that’s why I gave you precise, copy-ready artifacts and the accountability options. Tell me which next step you want me to produce (A/B/C/D/E) and I’ll create it this instant.”
It was the closest thing to a “corporate sorry” I’ve ever seen from an AI. Polite. Structured. But useless in that moment.
Now imagine that happening mid-demo for a client or investor. No matter how polished the apology, you’re left scrambling while confidence evaporates.
To be fair, the positives are extraordinary. LLMs have:
In many cases, they’re the difference between moving at the speed of bureaucracy and moving at the speed of opportunity. However, over-reliance can turn those strengths into risks.
Picture this: a project manager uses ChatGPT to generate a polished weekly status report. The formatting is clean, the tone is professional, and it looks client-ready. Except that one detail is wrong. The model pulls an outdated KPI from last week’s notes. The client receives the report, assumes it’s accurate, and makes a decision based on bad data. Trust takes a hit. That’s how quickly a small oversight can snowball.
Relying on LLMs without safeguards isn’t efficiency—it’s risk transfer.
LLMs can accelerate work, but they cannot replace accountability. Project leaders and entrepreneurs must design systems where even if ChatGPT falters, the project still moves forward.
The real competitive advantage isn’t who uses AI fastest. It’s who manages AI with discipline. That’s why I’ve been building methods like StAIR-Ready™ (coming soon) and pushing for trust layers in AI delivery. Because the real job isn’t using AI it’s governing it.
Key takeaway: Don’t just celebrate what AI can do. Plan for when it doesn’t—and never lose the one edge it can’t replicate: your brain.
👉 How are you balancing the speed of LLMs with the need for safeguards and human judgment?
#AIProjectManagement #AI #ChatGPT #FutureOfWork #CPMAI #ArtificialIntelligence #Leadership #ResponsibleAI
Category: Blog – LinkedIn Article
Tags: LinkedIn Article
Visit fig-io.com for more insights