|
Although Python is my usual weapon of choice, I'm not averse to building the occasional model in Excel when the use case fits. Having originally trained as an actuary, there was a point in my life when I literally lived and breathed Excel. It still feels like second nature - which is probably why I've never felt tempted to use AI assistance when building Excel models, despite using it when writing code. However, after speaking recently to a fellow data professional about how much AI struggles with Excel, I decided to give it a go. The first thing I noticed was how fast it was. In less than five minutes, it was done. The second thing I realised was what a nightmare I had just created for myself. Hundreds of formulae, each hiding in its own cell, each a potential source of error, each requiring me to check it manually. As astrophysicist Professor Matthew Bailes recently observed in the Australian Financial Review: "The challenge now is to know that what AI produced is actually correct because you can't use AI to check it." This is the part of the AI productivity story that tends to get missed. When I use AI to write code, validation is manageable. Code is designed to be read like text and loops mean hundreds of repetitive calculations can be reduced to a single line. If the logic is right, it's right everywhere. Excel is an entirely different beast. Every formula lives in its own interconnected cell. There are no loops, no way to verify once and move on. You have to check every individual instance manually. The AI saved me five minutes of production and handed me an hour of tedious validation work. After five minutes, I lost the will to live. It was like delegating work to a keen but unreliable graduate. The question isn't whether they're fast, it's whether supervising them costs more than doing the work yourself. Sometimes the answer is no, and AI assistance is clearly the right call. But sometimes, as in the case of Excel, the intelligence required to verify the output exceeds the intelligence required to produce it. In those cases, the productivity gain is an illusion. Every time you reach for AI assistance, you're making a choice about where to allocate intelligence. It's worth making that choice deliberately. Talk again soon, Dr Genevieve Hayes |
Twice weekly, I share proven strategies to help data scientists get noticed, promoted, and valued. No theory — just practical steps to transform your technical expertise into business impact and the freedom to call your own shots.
When I’m looking for guests for my podcast, the first place I turn is invariably my bookcase. The authors of data science books have already demonstrated their authority in the field to the point of developing their own original IP. That makes them ideally suited to a podcast about data science expertise. And it’s no coincidence that many of those authors started off by writing blogs. It turns out conference organisers do something similar. When Cynthia Dunlop, who helps organise two major...
A couple of years back, I watched a TV series called The Fear Index. The series focused on a hedge-fund manager who had developed an AI system to optimise fund profits. Of course, as you would expect for a TV show - 🚨Spoiler Alert🚨 - everything falls apart when the AI starts taking highly illegal and frequently fatal actions in order to drive the market and achieve its goals. I enjoyed the show immensely, but at the time, felt it was far-fetched. However, recent reports of an OpenAI agent...
It’s no secret that many data scientists chose this profession in part because they enjoyed maths and wanted to avoid writing essays. When I was managing a data team, my team members would happily spend hours writing code. But ask them to write up what they’d done and suddenly everyone was too busy. Getting them to document their results in the form of a report was a lot like pulling teeth. And I understood why - to them, writing felt like a distraction from the “real” work. But over time, I...