In his article, Joseph Desmond Cruel argues that when organisations bring in AI tools under the banner of doing “more with less,” they risk sending the wrong message to their creative teams. The technology is often framed as replacing humans rather than empowering them, which can stifle motivation, reduce questioning of AI suggestions and ultimately dull creative output. As he puts it, the opportunity of AI lies not in supplanting teams, but in removing friction so people can do what they’re best at.
Cruel emphasises a key distinction between automation (machines doing the work) and augmentation (machines enabling the people). He suggests that successful deployment of AI in creative contexts requires teams to treat it like a smart assistant: something that supports, rather than decides. To preserve creativity and human contribution, organisations should create workflows that encourage users to either accept AI suggestions after improvement or reject them with a brief rationale — thereby keeping human judgement central.
The article further highlights that when AI is introduced without careful change management, teams may stop engaging deeply in their work. The “assistive” technology then becomes a crutch, leading to stagnation rather than innovation. To mitigate this, he recommends setting up systems that require critical human review, maintain space for experimentation, and reinforce trust in team members’ own creative capabilities.
Ultimately, the piece argues for a cultural mindset shift: the introduction of AI should be accompanied by clarifying who is responsible for creative direction, and how human insight remains the differentiator. When done right, AI frees teams from repetitive tasks and empowers them to focus on strategic thinking, storytelling and the “why” behind the work — the areas machines cannot reliably replicate.
