Considering my definition of marketing as being: ‘The identification, development, leveraging and defence of competitive advantage’ it makes sense to consider the impact of AI, as it is happening all around us. Largely unnoticed until the explosive birth of ChatGPT in November last year following the earlier release of Dall-E, the doomsayers are at work.
I am not a data scientist, my limit is writing a formula in Excel no longer than 3 factors, but you do not need to be a data scientist to think about this stuff.
AI learns from itself by iterating with the benefit of ‘digital hindsight’, the outcomes of the previous iterations built in. Think of a radiologist reading scans. In the course of a year they might read a thousand, each time learning from the experience of the previous readings. Over the course of a professional career of 25 years, they might read 25,000, then they retire, and the experience is lost. An AI system can read hundreds of thousands in a week, each building on the previous, looking for patterns, so millions over a couple of years. They can also take data from other sources and blend it into the analysis, and they never retire, so the experience is not lost, it compounds. Importantly however, it compounds based on what has happened, making visible what is already in the data. We have yet to build an algorithm that can be creative.
The ingredients necessary are just 4:
- Input data,
- Computing power,
- Quantitative understanding of human behaviour (still evolving) and,
- An AI system.
Successful Marketing uses all four, although to date in vastly different ways and to differing degrees. It requires an intimate understanding of customer behaviour and how your behaviour and that of the customers impacts others in the supply chain. This is almost ground zero for marketing success.
The combination of the recently released ChatGPT and its stablemate from OpenAI Dall-E will do for content creation in its broadest sense, what the digital camera did for photography. Suddenly everyone became a ‘photographer’, so who needed professionals? Slowly, the gap between even good amateurs and the professionals became clearer, the value added by the real pros, as distinct from the others became more obvious, and presented the clear choices that needed to be made. A similar process will evolve with written and visual content. It has become very easy to produce stuff that will pass muster as OK, but is that good enough in a homogeneous world?
The combination of these tools and a professional will reduce the time taken to produce great work, so the costs will go down, and the quality will not suffer, but be enhanced. A great outcome for the few true professionals.
The downside will be felt by those who claim expertise, but do not genuinely have it. Their output of regurgitated marketing strategies, tactics and collateral material will resemble the thousands of templates already available, and be of little genuine competitive use.
Header cartoon credit: Tom Gauld in new Scientist
