Depth in three fields used to be unhireable, AI changed that
I used to be "unhireable" by HR standards. Too many interests. Too many disciplines.
AI just changed that.
For decades, organizational design ran on the assumption embraced also by Taylorism: one person, one specialty. Depth in three fields looked unfocused. So companies optimized inside silos. The cost lived between them.
That cost is now the bottleneck.
AI collapses the cost of execution inside a discipline. What it can't do is decide which problem matters, judge whether the output is actually good, or translate between a client's messy reality and three different technical domains. That work sits between specialties, and it requires depth in each.
The people who can do this own problems end-to-end. They talk to the client, shape the solution, build it with AI, and stand behind the result. That's what entrepreneurs have always done. Now companies need it internally.
The age of the AI intrapreneur has started.
And suddenly my profile is hireable.
Related posts
- No bootcamp can give you the judgment clients pay forWhat an 8-12 week AI consulting program leaves out: messy data, legacy systems, growing scope, and the judgment calls the first client project demands.
- You forget your role is to decide and start only approvingFive ways heavy AI use erodes judgement, from treating suggestions as truth to losing process knowledge, and three checks that keep the decision yours.
- The top 1% ChatGPT badge is the new workaholismEight hours a day in Claude and Perplexity left my judgement foggy. The signals that mark the shift from AI as a tool to AI as a crutch, and what changed.