The "AI Cake Fallacy" - Why NZ Businesses can't have their AI Cake and eat it too

A deep dive into why AI implementations fail and how to get them right

I'll be honest with you - I'm living this contradiction every single day.

In my role as a business owner, I'm constantly looking for ways to cut costs and improve efficiency. When I see a process that could be streamlined or a role that might be automated, there's this immediate mental calculation: "What would this save us monthly? Could AI handle this?" It's almost automatic now, this lens of optimisation and cost reduction.

But here's the thing - I'm obviously a huge AI user. And when I use AI tools, I'm not trying to replace myself. I'm trying to get rid of the tedious stuff so I can focus on what actually matters. I want AI to handle my scheduling, draft my initial emails, and organise my notes so I can spend more time on strategy, relationships, and the work that genuinely energises me.

The contradiction hit me recently when I realised I had been looking at my team's roles through that "efficiency lens" while protecting my own work from the same scrutiny. I wanted AI to free me up to do more meaningful work, but I was unconsciously viewing their roles as potentially replaceable.

Last week, I stumbled across this Stanford research that perfectly captures what I call the "AI Cake Fallacy." Everyone wants their slice of the AI productivity gains, but nobody wants to give up the parts that matter most to them. And the data proves this disconnect is real - and it's killing AI implementations.

The Problem We're All Dancing Around

The Stanford study surveyed 1,500 workers across 104 occupations and found something that should make every business owner pause. Yes, 46% of workers want AI automation, but only for specific tasks. They want AI to handle scheduling, data entry, and file management. You know, the stuff that's genuinely dull. They want to focus on strategy, creativity, and meaningful work.

Makes perfect sense when you think about it. Why would anyone want to spend their workday doing stuff they don't enjoy?

But here's where it gets interesting. The research shows that 41% of current AI investments are going to what they call the "wrong places" - either low-priority areas or "Red Light Zones" where workers actually resist automation.

We're literally investing in the stuff people don't want automated while missing the opportunities where they'd welcome it with open arms.

The Four Zones That Change Everything

The researchers identified four distinct zones, and understanding these may shifted how you think about AI implementation.

There's the "Green Light Zone" where workers actually want automation and AI can deliver. Think automated scheduling, basic data processing, routine admin work. Companies operating here see both productivity gains and employee satisfaction. It's the sweet spot we should all be aiming for.

Then there's the "Red Light Zone" - high AI capability but low worker desire. This is where we often get seduced by what's technically possible rather than what's actually wanted. Creative tasks, strategic planning, client relationship management. Force AI into these areas and you'll create resistance and disengagement faster than you can say "digital transformation."

The study found that Arts and Design workers only wanted 17% of their tasks automated. Editorial roles consistently rated as requiring essential human involvement. The pattern is clear - workers fiercely protect tasks involving creative expression, human relationships, strategic thinking, and work they find genuinely enjoyable.

The Reality Check I Needed

There's a cycle that is all too familiar. We saw it with failed digital transformation projects as well. Initial excitement about AI capabilities, followed by the slow realisation that implementation isn't working as expected, then confusion about what went wrong, followed by the frustrated "just make it work" directive that leads nowhere.

We skip the critical step of understanding what our people actually value about their work before trying to automate it away. We assume that because AI can technically do something, it should do something.

What Workers Actually Want

The most telling finding from the Stanford research is that workers prefer equal partnership with AI, not replacement. They want collaboration, not elimination. This isn't about being resistant to change - it's about being protective of meaning.

When you dig into what creates the strongest resistance, it's the human-centred stuff. Customer service conversations where relationship building matters. Sales interactions that require reading between the lines. Training and mentoring colleagues where empathy makes the difference. Any work requiring genuine human judgment or emotional intelligence.

Workers will gladly hand over the scheduling, the data entry, the routine administrative tasks. But ask them to surrender the creative problem-solving, the strategic thinking, the work that makes them feel human, and you'll hit a wall.

The Skills Revolution We're Missing

The research reveals something important about where we're heading. There's a clear shift happening from information-processing skills toward interpersonal and organisational competencies. The traditionally high-wage work like data analysis is becoming less valuable, while relationship building, creative thinking, and strategic judgment are becoming more important.

This isn't just about redistribution - it's about fundamental redefinition of value. The most valuable human skills are becoming the ones that are most distinctly human.

Getting This Right

The companies that succeed with AI won't be the ones who automate the most. They'll be the ones who understand that AI works best when it amplifies human capability rather than replacing it.

This means having real conversations with your team about which tasks they'd actually want automated. It means understanding what they find meaningful about their work before you try to optimise it away. It means designing AI implementation with them, not to them.

The Bigger Picture

The Stanford research proves what many of us have suspected - the real opportunity lies in that collaboration zone where AI handles the tedious while humans focus on what they do best: thinking, creating, relating, and innovating.

As business owners, we need to resist the temptation to see AI as primarily a cost-cutting tool. Yes, it can reduce costs, but its real value lies in freeing our people to do more valuable work. When we get this right, we don't just save money - we create more value.

The question isn't whether your business can have its AI cake and eat it too. It's whether you're smart enough to share the cake in a way that everyone wins. Because the research is clear - when you get this alignment right, both productivity and satisfaction go up.

And honestly, isn't that the kind of transformation we actually want to be part of?

---

The Stanford study that inspired this piece can be found at: Future of Work with AI Agents: Auditing Automation and Augmentation Potential across the U.S. Workforce