Last month, an editorial was published in the Wall Street Journal entitled Provocated:Why should most companies have Amnesty International’s strategy“
In this era of male noise, where it seems that every third word is sometimes these two letters, this proposal made some vibrant discussions in the WSJ comments section.
The authors of the introduction, Joe Pepard, academic director at SMURFIT University Executive University of Dublin, writes:
Frenbies are understood. Nobody wants to leave behind, and miss the next big thing. Therefore, many companies rush forward-even that some of them created “Excellence Centers” for Amnesty International to focus the experience and resources of artificial intelligence, and naming major artificial intelligence officers to C-SUITE.
Sorry to say this, but most of them make a mistake. My ready -made meals from my work with organizations because they are struggling with artificial intelligence are that most companies not only need Amnesty International’s strategy, but it should not have a strategy at all. Going to this way, at best, will distract.
Certainly, when it comes to health care, there is a lot of newly interested Caios, and there are no few centers of excellence from artificial intelligence. But these healthy systems are often well funded and academic medical centers. Should other younger health care providers be seriously adopted by Amnesty International?
Motivation Issues. As an unknown health system employee He said Recently: “We have just signed the multi -year Amnesty International partnership so that we can say that we did so. If care or efficiency improves, it is great, but let’s be honest, the council wanted a press statement.”
It has been observed before doing Amnesty International to do so – because every one else (or it appears to be), or of fear of being lost – can be ineffective or reverse, and perhaps even dangerous.
Should all health care providers search for at least some promising use of artificial intelligence tools, even in limited publishing operations? Or for some organizations, may it make sense to overcome them more? We have recently arrived in Ireland to talk about its WSJ column, the largest issue of “AI FOMO” in health care and other places. This is what he said.
As you hear? Subscribe to the podcast on Apple podcastand Spotify or Google Play!
Hadith points:
-
What Peppard sees with AI’s adoption of works that give it a temporary stop
-
“No one wants to leave behind, and miss the next big thing.”
-
Excellence Centers and Caios
-
Why many artificial intelligence adopts “make a mistake”
-
“Doctors will not be replaced by artificial intelligence – but documents that use artificial intelligence will replace people who do not do it.”
-
Why “did not make many organizations the basic work required” to make Amnesty International worthy of attention
-
How artificial intelligence has been adequately spread, or for wrong reasons “will distort decisions”
-
Building infrastructure, spreading auxiliary technologies and adopting change management to make Amnesty International operate
-
How to educate and train the workforce on the success of artificial intelligence
More about this episode:
Why should most companies have Amnesty International’s strategy (Wsj)
10 tips to avoid growing time bombs in your organization
Opinion: Who is the unhealthy approach to artificial intelligence
Ama Survey: More doctors who use – but lukewarm confidence a
Artificial Intelligence in RCM: Execs Healthcare Execity, but skeptical
Aspects and risks of artificial intelligence writers in 2025
Mike Milliad is the executive of the Healthcare It News
Email Author: mike.miliaard@himssmedia.com
Healthcare is news that publish HIMSS.
