After admitting he uses ChatGPT, Narayana Murthy says management and technology graduates are same for him
As artificial intelligence continues to reshape the job landscape, confusion around which field is more relevant—technical or management—continues to linger in the minds of young graduates. While some argue that AI is driven by technical skills and therefore holds dominance, others may lean towards the importance of management skills to create a collaborative workspace between humans and AI. However, Infosys co-founder N.R. Narayana Murthy rejects this divide altogether. In his view, both fields are equally important and relevant in navigating the AI-led future.advertisementIn a recent interview with Moneycontrol, the 78-year-old software industry titan said he sees no meaningful distinction between the two educational streams. He argues that both fields simply approach problems from different angles. 'I do not see any difference between a management graduate and a technology graduate because they attack the problem at different levels,' Murthy said. 'One asks 'what,' while the other focuses on 'how'.'Murthy also expressed his disagreement with the idea that AI is a threat to human jobs in the future. He believes AI is a tool that can significantly boost human productivity. 'It is all about improving productivity. It is all about solving problems that are beyond human effort,' he added. Sharing his own experience with AI he reveals that ever since he started using ChatGPT to prepare lectures, the chatbot has significantly helped him improve his productivity. What once took him up to 30 hours now he is able to finish it in just five. 'I improved my own productivity by as much as five times,' he noted, emphasising how AI can act as an assistive agent, not a replacement.advertisement
Murthy believes that AI will elevate, not eliminate, the role of the human worker. Instead of mass job losses, he anticipates that AI will bring about transformation and more jobs based on evolving skill sets. 'Everybody said when computers came to the banking sector, jobs would go away. But jobs have multiplied by a factor of 40 to 50,' he noted. On the same lines, he suggests that AI will help in making people smarter and work smarter. 'Our programmers and analysts will become smarter and smarter... They will solve bigger problems, more complex problems.'What will change, however, according to Murthy, is the kind of thinking that will be required. He believes future professionals will need to become sharper in defining problems and crafting better, more complex questions. 'The smartness is in asking the right question,' he said. According to him, the true value of human input in jobs will lie not in routine execution, but in strategic thinking and creative problem-solving.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
27 minutes ago
- Mint
Productivity puzzle: Solow's paradox has come to haunt AI adoption
AI enthusiasts, beware: predictions that the technology will suddenly boost productivity eerily echo those that had followed the introduction of computers to the workplace. Back then, we were told that the miraculous new machines would automate vast swathes of white-collar work, leading to a lean, digital-driven economy. Fast forward 60 years, and it's more of the same. Shortly after the debut of ChatGPT in 2022, researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology claimed employees would be 40% more productive than their AI-less counterparts. These claims may prove to be no more durable than the pollyannish predictions of the Mad Men era. A rigorous study published by the National Bureau of Economic Research in May found only a 3% boost in time saved, while other studies have shown that reliance on AI for high-level cognitive work leads to less motivated, impaired employees. We are witnessing the makings of another 'productivity paradox,' the term coined to describe how productivity unexpectedly stagnated and, in some cases, declined during the first four decades of the information age. The bright side is that the lessons learned then might help us navigate our expectations in the present day. The invention of transistors, integrated circuits, memory chips and microprocessors fuelled exponential improvements in information technology from the 1960s onward, with computers reliably doubling in power roughly every two years with almost no increase in cost. It quickly became an article of faith that computers would lead to widespread automation (and structural unemployment). A single person armed with the device could handle work that previously required hundreds of employees. Over the next three decades, the service sector decisively embraced computers. Yet, the promised gains did not materialize. In fact, studies from the late 1980s revealed that the services sector—what economist Stephen Roach described as 'the most heavily endowed with high-tech capital"—registered the worst productivity performance during this same period. In response, economist Robert Solow had famously quipped that 'we see computers everywhere except in the productivity statistics." Economists advanced multiple explanations for this puzzle (also known as 'Solow's Paradox'). Least satisfying, perhaps, was the claim, still made today, that the whole thing was a mirage of mismeasurement and that the effects of massive automation somehow failed to show up in the economic data. Others have argued that the failure of infotech investments to live up to the hype can be laid at the feet of managers. There's some merit to this argument: studies of infotech adoption have shown that bosses spent indiscriminately on new equipment, all while hiring expensive workers charged with maintaining and constantly upgrading these systems. Computers, far from cutting the workforce, bloated it. More compelling still was the 'time lag' hypothesis offered by economist Paul A. David. New technological regimes, he contended, generate intense conflict, regulatory battles and struggles for market share. Along the way, older ways of doing things persist alongside the new, even as much of the world is remade to accommodate the new technology. None of this translates into immediate efficiency—in fact, quite the opposite. As evidence, he cited the advent of electricity, a quicker source of manufacturing power than the steam it would eventually replace. Nonetheless, it took 40 years for the adoption of electricity to lead to increased worker efficiency. Along the way, struggles to establish industry standards, waves of consolidation, regulatory battles and the need to redesign every single factory floor made this a messy, costly and prolonged process. The computer boom would prove to be similar. These complaints did not disappear, but by the late 1990s, the American economy finally showed a belated uptick in productivity. Some economists credited it to the widespread adoption of information technology. Better late than never, as they say. However, efficiency soon declined once again, despite (or because of) the advent of the internet and all the other innovations of that era. AI is no different. The new technology will have unintended consequences, many of which will offset or even entirely undermine its efficiency. That doesn't mean AI is useless or that corporations won't embrace it with enthusiasm. Anyone expecting an overnight increase in productivity, though, will be disappointed. ©Bloomberg The author is professor of history at the University of Georgia and co-author of 'Crisis Economics: A Crash Course in the Future of Finance'.
Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
Aviation foray: Zomato's Deepinder Goyal backs LAT Aerospace, aims to disrupt regional air travel with compact air-stops
Zomato co-founder Deepinder Goyal is venturing into the regional aviation space with LAT Aerospace, a startup that aims to redefine short-haul air travel in India, according to a LinkedIn post by LAT co-founder Surobhi Das. 'While building Zomato and flying across India, Deepinder and I kept circling back to the same question: Why is regional air travel still so broken—expensive, infrequent, and mostly out of reach unless you live in a metro?' Das wrote, quoted PTI. India has over 450 airstrips, but fewer than 150 see regular commercial operations. That means nearly two-thirds of the country's aviation potential remains untapped, even as millions in Tier 2 and Tier 3 cities spend hours—sometimes days—travelling by road or rail, the post added. Outlining the vision for LAT Aerospace, Das said the company envisions 'buses in the sky—affordable, high-frequency, and designed to connect the places the airline industry overlooked.' The startup plans to build 'air-stops'—compact takeoff and landing zones, no bigger than a parking lot—closer to residential areas. 'No chaos. No security lines. Just walk in and fly,' she said. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel warns of tech stagnation: 'Without AI, there's just nothing going on'
In a candid conversation on The New York Times ' podcast Interesting Times, billionaire investor and PayPal cofounder Peter Thiel offered a contrarian take on artificial intelligence. While Silicon Valley giants pitch AI as a transformational force, Thiel suggests that it may be more of a lifeboat than a rocket ship—a necessary but modest remedy to deeper societal stagnation. For Thiel, AI isn't a 'machine god' or humanity's path to immortality. But he still believes it's the only visible way out of what he calls 'technological stagnation.' The billionaire, who has invested in OpenAI, Palantir , and DeepMind, warns that despite AI's immense potential, it may still fall short of reigniting the sweeping innovation seen during the early space age or the internet boom. What AI Can and Can't Fix Thiel has long argued that society has slowed down since the 1970s in everything from energy innovation to transportation. On the podcast, he says, 'The fact that we're only talking about AI is an implicit acknowledgment that, but for AI, we are in almost total stagnation.' In short: if it weren't for artificial intelligence, there'd be little else driving excitement in tech. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Play War Thunder now for free War Thunder Play Now Undo Even with his investments in some of AI's most high-profile startups, Thiel remains skeptical. 'It might be enough to create some great companies,' he admits, 'but I'm not sure it's enough to really end the stagnation.' What he yearns for are bolder moonshots—missions to Mars, cures for Alzheimer's, and deep human transformation. — vitrupo (@vitrupo) You Might Also Like: Forget BTech. Zerodha's Nikhil Kamath says only one skill will matter to stay relevant in job market in 10 years More Than Hype, Less Than Salvation Asked whether the almost religious fervor surrounding AI is justified—whether visions of digital immortality and mind-machine mergers hold water—Thiel's response is striking. He critiques transhumanism not for being unnatural, but for being 'pathetically little.' To him, simply swapping human organs or extending lifespan falls short. 'We want you to be able to change your heart and your mind and your whole body,' he says. 'And transhumanism doesn't go far enough.' At the same time, Thiel questions whether AI enthusiasts are overhyping their ambitions to raise money. 'Is it hype? Is it delusion?' he muses, casting doubt on the techno-utopian dream while reaffirming the need to try AI nonetheless. The Choice: Try or Decay Despite his skepticism, Thiel's message isn't cynical, it's urgent. 'I still think we should be trying AI,' he says. 'And that the alternative is just total stagnation.' Without innovation, he warns, society may simply 'unravel.' His remarks serve as both a caution and a call to arms: AI may not deliver transcendence, but without it, there may be nothing new left to try. As the rest of Silicon Valley rushes to deify artificial intelligence, Thiel's grounded—and unsettling—warning is this: if AI fails to spark true transformation, we may find ourselves stuck not in dystopia, but in something worse—irrelevance. You Might Also Like: Nikhil Kamath's 'lifelong learning' advice is only step one: Stanford expert shares the key skills needed to survive the AI takeover
