Judgement is becoming the bottleneck
AI can generate and analyse faster than organisations can decide what is good enough, what matters and when to intervene.
I’ve spent most of my career around business systems, operations and technology.
These days I’m especially interested in what AI changes, what it doesn’t, and how people and organisations can use it without making work more complicated.
I consult, teach, build small experiments and write about what I’m learning, drawing on a background in business systems, regional digital operations and applied AI.
A few things have my attention at the moment.
What changes when AI can observe ongoing work instead of waiting to be prompted?
Where should agents act, what should remain human, and how do we keep the workflow reliable?
Where does AI genuinely change the economics of existing work rather than merely save a few minutes?
Teaching keeps showing me that using AI well is often less about prompting and more about judgement, workflow and confidence.
Observations, arguments and things I’m still working through.
AI can generate and analyse faster than organisations can decide what is good enough, what matters and when to intervene.
Better AI makes it easier to automate badly understood work.
Many organisations can buy AI faster than they can absorb it into everyday work.
The useful question is not whether agents are autonomous, but where autonomy belongs and how humans stay in control.
Small things I’m building, testing or trying to understand.
Some will become useful. Some won’t.
Teaching AI keeps showing me where people actually struggle.
The challenge is rarely the first prompt. It is using AI repeatedly, knowing how much to trust it and fitting it into real work.
I teach practical generative AI, agentic AI, workflow design and human review.
More about teachingI work through Harvest Point Consulting on business systems, operational improvement and practical AI adoption.
I also take on selected advisory, teaching and collaboration work.
I started in infrastructure and software, then moved through projects, systems and business analysis.
Over time, I realised the difficult work was rarely the technology alone. It sat between people, decisions, processes and systems.
AI has pulled me into another transition.
I’m interested in what becomes possible when software can reason, observe and act, and in what still needs to remain distinctly human.
That is partly why this site exists.
More about meThese are working principles, not doctrine.
If you want to compare notes, collaborate on an experiment, discuss a piece of work or invite me to teach, feel free to reach out.