— Opinion column by manufacturing expert Buckley Brinkman
Earlier this month, I spoke to the Wisconsin Space Grant Consortium (WSGC) at Carthage College and coached MBA candidates at UW-Madison. In both cases, it was a delight to be back on campus and to engage with bright students from around the state, along with some of their advisors. The two days left me feeling optimistic about the future, provided our older generations can stay out of the way.
Students dominated the crowd at the WSGC, with a strong contingent of faculty filling out the rest of the audience. Almost everyone participated in some part of space exploration – from rocketry to interplanetary mining. This group pushes the envelope every day, using technology in ways most of us never think about.
My talk focused on the contrast between the Apollo and Artemis moon programs. Sixty years ago, the scientists and engineers who put a man on the moon had a fraction of the computing power available to Artemis today – the modern toaster has more computing power than all of Apollo 11. Yet they went from President Kennedy’s challenge to Neil Armstrong hopping off the ladder in seven years. They leveraged the talent they had against the available technology to accomplish the impossible.
We’re nine years into the Artemis program, with one lunar flyby completed. The program has the best of today’s talent, modern resources, and computing power unrivaled in history behind it. Yet a landing remains two years away.
What’s the difference? I see two main distinctions. First, reaching the moon is no longer a national imperative. In the sixties, we fought the Russians in a life-and-death struggle for the hearts and minds of countries around the world. The Space Race showcased the power and prestige of each nation. The first country to reach the moon would hold the upper hand in leading the world – creating an urgency that simply doesn’t exist today.
The other distinction is the sheer abundance of computing and communication resources we have today that the Apollo team never had. Frankly, everyone working on Apollo needed their A-game just to keep up – and had to improve from there. Today, computer programs, connectivity, and advances in AI make it far easier to solve complex problems and put those solutions in front of a wider audience. As a result, teams can accomplish much more with less human intervention and – dare I say – less talent.
At the UW School of Business, I worked with several student project teams to refine their analyses and polish their presentations. The students were “wicked smart” and pulled together some terrific insights in a short amount of time. It surprised me, though, when I asked each team how they’d used AI to sharpen their analysis. They described using AI to format their presentations or track down data sources – relatively timid applications.
At both Carthage and UW-Madison, one thing became crystal clear – the kids are just fine. They’re every bit as talented, engaged, and curious as we were, and their work ethic is every bit as strong as any generation before them. They will change the world – if we get out of their way.
AI will play a huge role in that transformation. Real transformation means using AI to expand human capability – thinking about problems differently, solving them in new ways, and creating opportunities that didn’t exist before. Unfortunately, too many people use AI simply to boost their productivity on current tasks, without rethinking the process enough to make radical improvements.
AI depends on imagination, creativity, and a willingness to take risks to reach its full potential. That requires leaders willing to let their people make a bit of a mess while they explore new ways to tackle old problems. Our job is to help them get the most out of AI – and then trust their judgment to point it where it can do the most good.
That will take most of us out of our comfort zone. If we want to complete our own moonshot, that’s exactly where we need to be.
