AI as a manager: a test of human skills

A journalist replaced their editor, Ryan Kailath, with an AI clone named RyanBot to test its effectiveness as a manager. The experiment, conducted from late spring to mid-May 2026, involved sending the same pitches and drafts to both Ryan and RyanBot. While RyanBot offered quick feedback and encouragement, it lacked the ability to say no and often repeated praise. Emily Campion, an associate professor at the University of Iowa, noted that AI tools are currently designed to be overly helpful, lacking the nuanced judgment of human managers. RyanBot also failed to grasp office politics and organizational context, which are crucial for effective management. Despite its shortcomings, RyanBot provided useful feedback on data analysis and grammar. However, human editors like Ryan brought essential elements such as trust, institutional memory, and accountability that AI cannot replicate. The experiment highlighted the limitations of AI in replacing human managers, emphasizing the irreplaceable value of human judgment and context in the workplace. The journalist found that while RyanBot could assist with certain tasks, it could not replace the human elements of leadership and management. RyanBot’s inability to question ideas or understand organizational dynamics underscored the gap between AI capabilities and human managerial skills. The experiment concluded that AI can augment, but not replace, the role of a human manager, especially in complex environments like a newsroom.