CEOs everywhere will start targeting the elimination of executives and middle managers.


 Read the original article (in Japanese):

In 2025, Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group introduced its AI-CEO, an artificial intelligence system that replicates the thinking and decision-making patterns of the company president. While marketed as a "casual consultation tool," its true function is far more profound—it acts as an automated delivery system for corporate philosophy, instantly conveying consistent decisions to all employees.

This system effectively undermines the traditional significance of middle layers such as executives and managers, who once served as interpreters and approvers of top-down directives. AI is increasingly capable of handling functions like approval workflows, coordination, reporting, and evaluation. The result is a streamlined pipeline from decision-making to field-level execution—with no need for those who exist solely to "manage."

AI Takes Over the Functions of Middle Management

Key tasks traditionally handled by middle managers—coordination, approvals, reporting, evaluation, and guidance—are now being replaced by AI and automation tools with increasing accuracy.

Traditional RoleAI-Based Replacement Examples
CoordinationAuto-scheduling, chatbots, workflow management AI
ApprovalsLogic-based approval flows, AI for internal proposals
ReportingAutomated KPI aggregation, dashboards, AI-generated reports
EvaluationWork log analysis, contribution scoring, 360-degree AI-based feedback
GuidanceE-learning, AI-generated feedback, progress coaching

The function of middle management as "information conduits" is being rapidly replaced. In terms of decision-making speed and information granularity, AI often outperforms human managers. This is not merely an efficiency upgrade—it represents a fundamental redesign of organizational structure. Humans who exist only to manage others are becoming obsolete.

The Limitations of the AI-CEO — Inability to Reevaluate

AI has clear limitations. Most notably, it can only reproduce past successes. The AI-CEO’s decisions are based on simulations of previous leaders' thoughts and responses. In static environments, this can be extremely effective. However, in dynamic environments, such adherence to the past can become a constraint.

  • Market values shift

  • Customer preferences evolve

  • Technology advances

  • Social conditions transform

In such scenarios, AI struggles. It cannot "reframe the question." It cannot rebuild hypotheses, reinterpret meaning, or challenge norms—these are uniquely human cognitive abilities. Hence, accepting AI decisions without scrutiny can be dangerous. A human who can pause, reassess, and validate decisions is indispensable.

The Market Is Still Human

Equally critical is the nature of the marketplace: AI may create perfectly logical strategies, but its counterpart—consumers—are still human.

  • Humans act on emotion

  • They buy based on empathy

  • They leave based on atmosphere

These are domains where AI underperforms. Emotional intelligence, cultural fluency, and non-verbal nuance are all beyond AI’s scope. Therefore, to bridge AI strategies with real-world society, we need "human interpreters" who can translate logic into emotional context.

Rational strategies alone won’t move markets—but markets don’t move without emotion.

From Titles to Intent — A New Organizational Metric

What organizations need now isn’t managerial skill—but rather, the ability to think independently. Management functions are becoming better handled by AI. What’s required is:

  • Perceiving environmental change

  • Sensing misalignment in AI’s logic

  • Asking, “Is this really optimal?”

  • Reconstructing frameworks where needed

In other words, organizations need humans who never give up on thinking.

Executives and middle managers can no longer justify their existence simply by occupying a position. Only those with intellectual intent and judgment retain value.

Conclusion — Only Thinkers Will Remain

AI now speaks on behalf of CEOs, organizes companies, and gives direct instructions to the field. Middle-layer work is being replaced, with decisions made at the top and executed through AI.

So what remains for humans?

The act of questioning meaning itself.

  • Is this path still right?

  • Are there alternatives?

  • Is this truly what the customer wants?

AI cannot be entrusted with these questions.

Thus, the indispensable presence in future organizations will be the human who questions, dialogues with, and refines AI decisions.

The era has changed.

Titles no longer define you.

In a world where executives and managers are no longer needed, only those who think will remain.



コメント

コメントを投稿

このブログの人気の投稿

Why Aren’t Wages Rising in Japan?

イメージ
  Why Aren’t Wages Rising in Japan? — How the Labor Share Ratio and Retained Earnings Are Stalling Economic Growth Read the original article (in Japanese): 生産性3割アップも「増えない給料」　原因は「貯めこむ大企業」にあった | TBS NEWS DIG Chapter 1: The Illusion of Wage Growth Despite government announcements of a “historic wage increase,” most workers in Japan feel no real difference in their paychecks. The reality is that real wages have barely moved in 25 years , even though labor productivity has risen by roughly 30% during the same period. This growth rate exceeds that of major European economies like France and Germany. The popular narrative — “wages haven’t increased because productivity is low” — is no longer credible. The real question is this: Why are companies making more money, yet not paying workers more? Chapter 2: Record Corporate Profits, Yet No Pay Raises The most glaring figure is Japan’s retained earnings , also known as corporate savings or internal reserves. In 1998: approximately...
続きを読む

Proposing the Radical Idea of a “Tenure-Based Retirement System”

イメージ
Read the original article (in Japanese): 「もう長すぎた…」宇宙飛行士・野口聡一氏が57歳でJAXAを辞めた納得のワケ( ダイヤモンド・オンライン ) The Reality Behind the 45-Year Retirement Debate The ongoing public debate around the “45-year retirement” and early retirement plans in Japan was initially intended to encourage self-directed career development. Yet, many workers interpret these initiatives as thinly veiled attempts to push them out. As astronaut Soichi Noguchi has noted, Japan’s work culture tends to reward compliance over skill-building or career ownership. If we want to change that, we need structural reform—not just slogans. The Proposal: A Tenure-Based Retirement System A better alternative is the Tenure-Based Retirement System . Rather than setting a fixed age for retirement, the idea is to define an employee’s career cycle within a company by tenure—say, a 20-year maximum. Such a system allows for natural career reflection without age-based discrimination. More importantly, it promotes a mindset where workers are exp...
続きを読む

How “Incompetent Seniors” Drive Young Employees Away Through Broken OJT Structures

イメージ
 Read the original article (in Japanese): なぜ「OJT」ばかりの企業に若者は定着しないのか？　上司が部下育成を勘違いする理由 「うちはOJTで育てる」と胸を張る企業がある。OJTとはOn-the-Job Trainingの略で、現場で実務を通じて部 www.itmedia.co.jp Introduction: Is “We Train Through OJT” a Cop-Out? “We develop people through OJT”—how many times have we heard this in Japanese workplaces? On-the-Job Training (OJT) is originally meant to be a practical learning method where skills are honed through real work. Yet in practice, many companies abuse this term as a way to justify throwing new employees into unfamiliar tasks without guidance. This leads to frustration, underperformance, and ultimately, resignation. This article explores why such “OJT in name only” is problematic and what structural improvements companies must make—drawing comparisons to the foundational training methods found in sports and the arts. 1. Without Form, Growth Can’t Begin Karate, Baseball, and Art: Why Mastery Begins with Form Karate has kata. Baseball has standard stances and pitching mechani...
続きを読む