Using AI Thoughtfully: Bring Your Voice and Judgement
I’ve followed Simon Sinek and Ethan Mollick for a long time, so when I saw that Mollick was a guest on Sinek’s podcast, I expected to learn something useful about AI, and I sure did!
This is a blog about connection, and there is plenty to explore about AI’s impact on how we relate to one another. I’m not ready to write that post yet, and I don’t want to force it. But I did want to share a few practical takeaways from this episode because people in my own circles have been asking how I’m using AI, especially as I prepare to start a doctoral program and continue working outside the structure of a single organization.
So here goes. Please feel free to add your own suggestions in the comments and I’ll do the same as I keep learning.
Mollick’s advice was typically practical - pick one of the major tools: ChatGPT, Claude, or Gemini, and start using it. Don’t overthink it. Choose the strongest model, not just the default one, and begin.
For those of us who write, lead, teach, manage programs, or work in mission-driven spaces, the question is not, “Can AI do this task?” Increasingly, the answer will be yes, at least in some form. The better question is: How do I bring my voice, judgment, taste, experience, context, and care to my engagement with AI?
One point I found especially useful was Mollick’s guidance on helping AI understand your voice. Give it a large sample of your writing. Ask it to summarize your style and turn that summary into instructions. Then use those instructions when asking it to draft or revise. That does not mean outsourcing your (or your organization’s) voice. It means becoming clearer about what your voice actually is.
Another useful point: AI tends to agree with us. It can be overly encouraging, even when what we need is resistance. So we have to ask for it:
Act like a critic.
What am I getting wrong?
Where is my argument weak?
What patterns am I missing?
How could this be more persuasive?
Where might someone with more expertise push back?
Where am I being irresponsible?
I also appreciated the distinction between models, apps, and tools around them. The model is the brain. The app is how we access it. The surrounding tools for writing, research, images, coding, files, or other workflows shape what it can actually help us do.
For research, the advice was also practical: use AI early, but do not stop there. Let it help identify questions, themes, sources, and gaps. Then verify, read again, check again. Bring your own standards to the work.
That feels especially important for those of us who work in education, justice, nonprofits, or public-serving institutions.
Some of this may seem basic to those who use AI every day. But most people I connect with are still at the beginning of their journey and we have to meet people where they are, and learn and grow alongside them.