From Tool to Teammate

"While the explosion threatened the astronauts' lives, the response demonstrated masterful teamwork through effective communication, collaborative problem-solving, and clear division of expertise. Lovell's actual words in 1970 were "Houston, we've had a problem." This subtle difference matters: Lovell took time to assess the situation before acting, showing how stepping back can improve teamwork under pressure. We need that same thoughtful approach with GenAI in the workplace. While recent research highlights performance and productivity benefits, most studies focus on tasks, not on teamwork."

"We need that same thoughtful approach with GenAI in the workplace. While recent research highlights performance and productivity benefits, most studies focus on tasks, not on teamwork. If GenAI is going to work in real organizations, we need to think of it as a potential teammate, not just a tool. Like Lovell's measured response to crisis, we need to step back and thoughtfully examine the research before moving forward with integration strategies."

Generative AI is widely deployed for tasks from email drafting to decision assistance, but research emphasizes individual productivity over collaborative outcomes. Most studies measure task-level efficiency rather than team dynamics, communication, role division, or organizational integration. Treating GenAI as a smart assistant limits potential; integrating GenAI as a genuine teammate could reshape workflows, decision-making, and coordination. Historical teamwork examples show that stepping back and assessing roles improves crisis collaboration, suggesting careful evaluation before broad deployment. Rigorous measurement of collaboration outcomes, redesign of team processes, and strategies for AI–human teaming are required to realize organizational benefits.

Read at Psychology Today