• doeknius_gloek
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    We will have more salespeople next year because we really need to explain to people exactly the value that we can achieve with AI. So, we will probably add another 1,000 to 2,000 salespeople in the short term.

    Well, good luck!

    I can’t wait for the AI bubble to burst. It’s going to be hilarious to see these kinds of CEOs falling flat on their faces. Unfortunately, it will not be the CEOs who will suffer the most from the consequences.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I have never interacted with an enterprise software salesperson as a customer. But I’ve had a ton of them as coworkers since I work in software development. Knowing them from the inside, so to speak, it is impossible for me to imagine how anyone takes them seriously. The only things they actually know or care about are their quota and bonus. How anyone bases a large cash spend on the things they say boggles my mind.

    • Natanael@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      The funny thing is it’s easier to replace salespeople with AI than developers. They should be losing salespeople first!

      • peoplebeproblems@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 hours ago

        No man, sales people are far more important to the bottom line. Profits first, then working product in the future. It’s genius, no way that model could go wrong

      • Slotos@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        It’s not about business optimization, it’s about not having to defer to someone’s knowledge from the position of power.

        AI bubble makes so much sense when you start looking at it this way.

        • SirActionSack@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          8 hours ago

          I think it’s just that MBA types see engineering and support as costing money and sales as making money.

          • clutchtwopointzero@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            Precisely this. This is, in my view, the biggest lie American MBA schools forced down to the society: the notion that, if you can’t quantify the value of support and engineering then it does not matter. That is just a side effect of how limited accounting is as a tool to measure value and of how unimaginative accountants are, as a class of professionals.

            Then MBA schools don’t directly say it but do condone the notion that one can always squeeze more profit from less cost, which works in the beginning but at the end throws the company into a potentially unrecoverable corner (Boeing), damaging people’s lives, suppliers’ businesses, and the community at large.

        • pdxfed@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Agree, and “defer” can mean organizationally as in needing someone else’s input, knowledge, support, buy-in…vs. running an autocratic hierarchy, which the weak and stupid prefer. Defer also means acknowledging the value and contributions of others and compensating them accordingly.

          If I had to boil a lot of the churn in the water about AI, it’s by stupid people trying to sell even stupider, desperate people the idea the immense knowledge of the earth (or even that of their accounting or customer service practices) will be within their grasp and they won’t need others anymore. Of course, some say great cut headcount, because they didn’t understand the work others do in the first place.

          While most won’t fully take an approach as extreme, and any AI use will likely be more organic, there will be outliers who receive the bulk of the press.

          Saying you don’t need X position in early 2025 based on the state of AI is like declaring in 1996 libraries are dead.

        • Drunemeton@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          What does that mean? “Defer” “knowledge” “position” & “power” aren’t connecting in my head…

          • JayleneSlide@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            10 hours ago

            My read of it was “the C-suite hates when the engineers actually know how shit works, and the leadership must kowtow to the people doing the actual work.” YMMV or the commentor may have meant something completely different.

    • Kekzkrieger@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Sad thing is that the CEOs who always claim big responsibility wont be responsible and just jump to the next big job.

      Then the company goes bancrupt people lose their income and there are 0 consequences flr these fuckers

    • leisesprecher@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 hours ago

      Reality is, they will just rebrand employees.

      You’re not a developer anymore, but a customer satisfaction consultant. Same job as before, but technically not a developer!!

      Also, this is a great way to reduce headcount while seeming innovative to the market ghouls.