WHAT AI CAN'T REPLACE -LEADERSHIP

Welcome back to 2 DOCTORS and a Twist - Operating at the Edge — the show where we stop managing AI and start leading through it. I'm Dr. Marilyn Carroll, and today we're doing something I've been building toward since Episode One. We're not going to talk about which skills leaders should develop for the AI era. That's the wrong question. Every conference is asking it. Every LinkedIn post is answering it. The right question is this: What does leadership do that no AI system — however capable, however advanced — can do in its place? Not because of current limitations. Not because the models aren't smart enough yet. But because of what leadership fundamentally is. That's where we're starting today.

A few years ago, I worked with a leader — let's call her Dana.
Dana had spent nearly a decade being exceptional at what she did. She was sharp, she was dependable, and everyone around her knew it. When the opportunity came for a senior leadership role — a real step up — she went after it. And she got it.
And the day she got it, she was on top of the world.
But something began to happen in the weeks that followed. Her team was navigating a significant organizational shift — the kind that creates real uncertainty. People had questions. Not just operational questions — existential ones. What does this mean for us? Where are we going? Does leadership even see us right now?
And Dana… went quiet.
Not because she didn't care. She cared deeply. But she was doing what she had always done: putting her head down, working the problem, trying to figure it all out before she communicated anything. That's what had made her great at the role she used to have.
But this wasn't that role.
Her team needed something she didn't know how to give yet — not information, not a polished plan, not a memo with bullet points. They needed orientation. They needed someone to stand with them in the uncertainty and say: I see you. I know this is hard. Here's what I believe about where we're going — and here's why your work still matters.
They needed meaning. And meaning requires a narrator. A person who is in it, not just managing it.
By the time Dana and I started working together, her team had already started to drift. Not dramatically. Not in ways that showed up in a dashboard. But the trust had quietly cracked. And she couldn't figure out why, because by every metric she could measure, she was doing her job.
She was. She just wasn't doing the new job.
That's the thing about leadership transitions that no one tells you clearly enough: the role you earned is not the same as the role you're now required to inhabit. And the gap between those two things? That's where leaders get lost.
That's what today's episode is about.

Stay connected with 2 Doctors & A Twist – Just What the Doctor Ordered!

• Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen.
• Follow us on LinkedIn for clips, insights, and upcoming episodes.

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:06

Hi everyone, and welcome back to Two Doctors in a Twiz. I'm Dr. Marilyn Carroll and Dr. Jamie, as I stated before, she's out for the quarter doing some special projects for work. Um, so we have it all to ourselves, and we're talking a lot about AI and how it integrates into our world today. Well, today I want to uh focus this episode on what AI can't replace in leadership. So let's start here. A few years ago, I worked with a leader, and let's call her Dana. Dana has spent nearly a decade being exceptional at what she did. She was sharp, she was dependable, guys, and everyone around her knew it. When the opportunity came for a senior leadership role, a real step-up, you know, she went after it and she got it. And the day she got it, she was on top of the world. Like many of us who get these next level roles, we're on top of the world, right? But something started happening in the weeks that followed. Her team was navigating a significant organizational shift, the kind that creates real uncertainty. You know what I mean? About like it is now. So people had questions, not just operational questions, extratential questions ones. What does this mean for us? Where are we going? Does leadership even see us right now? And Dana, Dana went quiet. Not because she didn't care, guys. She cared deeply, but she was doing what she had always done: putting her head down, working the problem, and trying to figure it out before she communicated anything. That's what had made her great at the role she used to have. But now, wait a minute, this wasn't that role. Her team needed something she didn't know how to give yet. Not information, not polished plan, not a memo with bullet points. They needed orientation. They needed someone to stand in the uncertainty with them and say, I see you, I know this is hard. Here's what I believe about where we're going. And here's why your work still matters to us and the organization. So, but let me let me let me say this. They needed meaning, guys, and meaning requires a narrator, a person who is in it, not just managing it. So this narrator has to tell a story. We are big now into how to sell the story, how to tell the story, because the story sells the momentum at that moment, right? So by the time Dana and I started working together, her team had already started to drift. Not dramatically, not in ways that showed up in a dashboard, but the trust had quietly cracked, guys. And she couldn't figure out why. Because by every metrics she could measure, she was doing her job. Okay. She was. She just has, she just really wasn't doing the new job. She was doing the old job, like many of us do, that comfort zone where we find ourselves. And that's the thing about leadership transitions that no one tells you clearly enough. The role you earn is not the same as the role you're now required to inhabit. And the gap between those two things, that's where leaders get lost. And that's what today's episode is about. So we're going to talk about reframing the question, the three irreducibles, and why AI can't substitute, and what this demands of you. And finally, how do we develop a reframe? Okay. So in the reframing of the question, I think a lot of times we have to reject the soft skills frame. What does leadership do that no AI can do? Not because of current limits, but because of the nature of the function. And then you may be asking, Dr. Carroll, what do you mean about the three irreducibles? Well, deep dive, moral weight, relational trust is what we're talking about there. Meaning making research anchors from Gallup, McKenzie, and Ellman. We're going to talk about those, okay? And then why AI can't substitute? Well, the structural argument there is not capability. None of these are tasks AI can complete. They're relationships AI cannot be in. Okay. Again, they are relationships AI cannot be in. And so what this demands of you is the hidden spots are gone. I love the article by HBR, and it talked about self-awareness, clear communication, compassion. The undeveloped parts are now the essential parts that many are missing. Yeah. And so how to invest differently? Well, we have a framework called Matters I C Mindset. And then we have the DDIs, the five C's, which we're going to talk more about in this episode, and then it's going to lead us into our episode seven. So think about this. I read this article in 20, these articles in 2025 by McKenzie, DDI, and Gallup. They all arrived, guys, at the same place in 2025. That the human elements of leadership are becoming more valuable, not less. You got that? More valuable, not less. But the research reveals reveals something more specific than soft skills. So let's dive into that. Now, in this show, we stop managing AI and start leading through it. I want you to welcome you again. I'm Dr. Marilyn Carroll. And today we're doing something I've been building towards since episode one. We're going to talk about which skills should develop, should we develop for the AI era? Okay. That's the wrong questions. Yeah. We're not going to talk about which skills leaders should develop for the AI era. We're going to talk about every conference is asking for it. Every LinkedIn post is answering. The right question is this. Get this. The right question we're going to talk about is what does leadership do that no AI system, however capable, however advanced, can do in its place. Not because of current limitations, not because the models aren't smart enough yet, but because of what leadership fundamentally is. That's where we're starting today. So let's start with a Gallup poll. Before I give you the framework, let me give you the data that set it up. Gallup's most recent U.S. employee engagement report stated 31% of employees engaged, the lowest figure in a decade, 17% actively disengage. And this collapse coincides almost perfectly with the acceleration of AI deployment in the workplace. Now, this is not an AI problem. AI isn't making people disengage. What's happening is something more specific: the absence of leadership presence. Leaders are seating the relational floor. No technology is filling in. That's the signal, guys. Now here's the insight. Three of the most rigorous research organizations in the world, that's McKenzie, DDI, and Gallup, arrived again at the same place independently in 2024 and 2025. McKenzie put it plainly. Leadership is ultimately a uniquely human behavior. Their work on AI and the future of leadership named resilience, learning from mistakes, and teeming with AI as the irreducible core of what leaders did. Now, DDI research produced what they call the five C's. And those five C's are connections, conscience, creativity, clarity, and curiosity. What's notable is their framing. These are capable AI amplifiers and leaders, not replacers. And Gallup, hey, Gallup, they're measuring the collapse of something AI cannot build, rebuild engagement through, which is proximity for trust. Or proxy for the trust. Proxy for leadership presence. So what are the three indeducible things leadership does? Moral weight. Let's start there. The first is moral weight. I define this as the capability to carry responsibility for decisions that affect people's lives. Yeah. AI can optimize for outcomes, given the right parameters. It can run thousands of scenarios and surface the best option by almost any measurable criterion. But guys, it cannot be held accountable when a leader makes a decision that affects someone's career, their livelihood, their sense of purpose. There is a person on the line, a human being who can be held to that, who carries the weight of it, who can look that employee in the eye and say, I made this call. And if it was wrong, it's on me. The accountability is not a software feature, it's a moral position. It requires a person. This is not a capability gap that will close, it's a structural one. So case in point. And in senior management at that time, that person said to me, reached out out of nowhere to say, I want to thank you. And this was a person that their job was reduced and they had to go somewhere else. Because it's the way you go about doing this whole letting people go and helping them to see this is coming. Because as a leader, you should know what's coming. You are privy to that. You get more engagement out of people when you're able to articulate to them, hey, this may come up. We're not looking good. Look at the financials, follow the data. Where are you going to be and what are you prepared for? The best thing I could have given my team, and this was said to me over and over again by many of them. I taught them about resilience. I taught them about the work ethic that they should hold, about accountability, about being accountable for their career, about how you look for the best in yourself and make sure you're positioned for what comes next. I didn't pat my people, I didn't sugarcoat things with them. I didn't say, oh, you're great when you weren't great. I told the truth. And by telling the truth to people, that helped to prepare them. I was not one, maybe right, wrong, or different. I was not one to hear crying or whining or any of that. Because listen, we're in an adult world and we don't have time to be teenagers. We we need to be grown. Okay. So look at the variables. Look at what's happening. Because if you're intending to move forward in your next position or next company, you have to know things. And the best thing I could hear from all of these direct reports that have worked with me before was thank you. Thank you for preparing us. Thank you for the candor. Thank you for the structure. Thank you for teaching us how to be resilient. And thank you for managing teaching us how to manage our careers. That gave us mountains of information, even in this chaotic world, we're constantly finding ourselves living within. So the next, the number two in reducible is relational trust. And what I want to, and I really want to be precise here, because this gets confused with being likable or having good communication skills. No, relational trust is earn, is earned credibility that transcends transactional utility. What do you mean, Marilyn? It means people trust a leader not because they're competent, but because of who that person has been across time. The moments they showed up, the commitments they've honored, and when it would have been easier not to, the honesty they offered when it cost them something. Yes. Trust is a relational phenomenon. It requires a person with something at stake. An AI system can be relatable, reliable, and consistent, even predictable in ways that feel safe, guys. But it does not have anything at stake. It cannot lose your trust in the way a person can earn it. This is why Elderman's 2025 trust barometer is so significant. Only 75% of employees globally report trusting their employer. And that number continues to decline. The trust gap is widening at exactly the moment when we're asking AI to do more. That's not coincidence. It's a leadership vacuum, guys. And the third one I'd say here is meaning making. And this is one of the most underestimated of the three. When things are uncertain, when the direction isn't clear, and when people are disoriented by change, they need a narrator. Someone to provide the framework, someone who can carry or who can say, here's where we are, here's why it matters, and here's how we move forward. That narrative function is not informational, is not about communicating facts, it's about orienting people existentially, connecting the work they they do in something larger. That requires shared experience. It requires a narrator who has something at stake in the story. It requires a person who is genuinely in it, not generating plausible conditions or continuations. AI can draft a compelling mission statement. Guys, it cannot mean it. Just because it drafted, don't mean it mean it. Okay, you gotta know what it is you want to draft with this AI. It's just a tool we're using. So now by now you're asking me why AI can't substitute. Why can't it? You are a firm believer with AI, Marilyn. So what are you saying now? Well, now what I want to make is for you the distinction that I think is critical, guys, because I hear this framing wrong a lot. When people say AI can't replace human leadership, they usually mean not yet. Yeah. They mean AI isn't smart enough. The model will get better, maybe in five years, maybe 10. That is not what I'm arguing. I'm making a structural argument here, not a capability argument. And let me show you what I mean. Okay. Moral weight doesn't require a smarter AI. It requires a person who can be held to account. That's not a function of intelligence, it's a function of personhood, of being embedded in a moral and social community where accountability means something. Guys, AI is not that community. Relational trust doesn't require a more consistent AI. It is built through accumulated experiences of a specific person. Present, consistent, honest across time. You're not present, you're not consistent, you're not honest across time. You're just regurgitating information that someone has put in it. Trust is not a transaction, it is the residue of a relationship. AI cannot be in that relationship, and mean making doesn't require a more eloquent AI. It requires a narrator with something at stake in the story. AI generates content, it does not have stakes in the game, it cannot risk anything by telling a particular story. And that is exactly what makes meaning meaningful. That someone is risking something to make it. Here's a summary. There are no tasks AI can complete. Okay, that's the structural argument. I'll say that again. There are no tasks AI can complete. There are relationships AI cannot be in, and that's the structural argument. So what this demands of you and I as leaders, so if that's structure, if that is structure, what does it demand? What does it demand in this structure? Here's the uncomfortable truth, guys. The three irreducible capabilities are exactly the ones most leaders have historically underdeveloped. Why? Because they could compensate, they had processes to hide behind, structures to route around, difficult conversations, hierarchy to absorb accountability. They could optimize and execute and look like leaders without ever really doing the relational. Work. AI removes those compensations. The hiding spots are gone, guys. They're gone. It's you. You're transparent now. I love this uh Harvard Business Review, how they put it plainly in an October 2025 piece by Hargard and Carter. It said, organization need leaders who strengthen self-awareness, clear communication, and compassion, precisely because trust and engagement are declining. And that's why describing it exactly is the territory of moral weight, relational trust, and meaning making. You can't manage your way out of this one. You have to lead, guys. You just can't. So you might be saying, so are you asking me or you saying, Marilyn, leadership gets harder? Yeah, it gets to the point where it should have been all alone. Because there's nothing else for us to hide behind anymore. We've taken away all those structures and things of that nature with AI that we used to be able to hide behind. Now we got to deal with the facts. And I'm going to ask you this. Where have you been hiding? What decisions have you been routing through process rather than owning it yourself? And where has your relationship presence gone on autopilot? And then I'd say that's where the work is. Because you have to ask yourself that. And people say to me, Well, Marilyn, why should I need an executive coach? Why do I need because we haven't learned how to deal with things like we need to. We don't know how to see ourselves in the mirror, so to speak, as to uh a few clients of late have said to me, I don't know what you're talking about because they don't see that. They haven't seen what real leadership is about these days, how you have to deal with people or work with people in a way that shows who you are and that you're capable of having compassion, that you're capable of the five C's. They haven't seen that in leaders, and so now they're having to build on that. So let's talk about investment. Investment in you as a leader, because I think a lot of leaders are spending their development budgets in the wrong place. AI literacy is important, guys. I'm not minimizing it. You should understand how these tools work, you should know how to use them, but that's table stakes now. That's not differentiation. The real investment is in your capacity to carry moral weight, build genuine trust, and make meaning for people who are disoriented. And here's the good news for you: those capabilities compound. Every relationship you build with integrity, every time you hold accountability publicly, every time you narrate the why before people ask for it, those are the deposits in a ledger that AI cannot access. My matter I see mindset framework maps precisely to this territory. Mission and awareness. That's your moral grounding. Timing and execution, that's where you demonstrate reliability, which trust requires. Reflection and integration. That's how you make meaning for yourself first, and then for others. Collaboration, that's the relational layer where trust lives. DDI's five C's hit the same mark. And those are again connections, conscience, creativity, clarity, and curiosity. These are human capabilities that AI amplifies in a leader. Okay? They are not capabilities AI replaces. These are human capabilities that AI amplifies as a leader. Again, that connection, conscience, creativity, clarity, and curiosity. Now, some people may say, uh, collaborations. I try to collaborate with people, but they won't collaborate. Collaboration does not mean that one person is doing everything while everyone else is taking credit for it. That's not collaboration, guys. That is bad leadership. That is not the best management. If you're not in this to collaborate the right way with people and to really bring your mind to the game and your expertise and knowledge, then maybe you don't have those expertise and knowledge to collaborate with the right people that's going to make things happen. If you still keep getting the same results you've always gotten, and everything is a flower because it's been covered up by all these processes, you're not going to get anywhere. And that's why I think I built my flight deck model for leadership flight deck for what I call relational capital and cultural capital. That's exactly what McKinsey and DDI identify as the leadership assets AI cannot replicate. And the intellectual assets, information advantage, pattern recognition, those are being equalized by AI. The relational and cultural assets are where the edge lives. So let me close today by saying this. My core argument at the start was clean. And it's this AI doesn't make human leadership less necessary. It makes the parts AI cannot do visible. The hiding spots are gone, the compensations are gone, and what remains is irreducible. The capacity to carry moral weight, to build genuine trust, and to make meaning for people who are trying to find their footing in an uncertain world. That's not soft skills, that's the job. And it's never been more valuable. Thank you for being here for episode six of Two Doctors in a Twist. The next episode seven, we're going inside the $360 billion learning industry that is being completely reinvented. The learning management systems era is ending. The implications for leaders, for organizations, and for anyone building human capacity in the AI era are massive. Because the collaboration we saw, the creativity that was built off one person and carried by many, that's over. We are into this world now and have been for quite some time, that's based on the individual. People have to have the skill sets needed to lead, to manage, and coach their staff. No longer can they hide behind systems unless they are a part of implementing a system that works, that has checks and balances, and that operates in the real world with real people and real time. So I'll see you on our next episode of Two Doctors and a Twist. I'm Dr. Marilyn Carroll, and I love to hear what you have to say to us about this conversation. We're almost at the end. We had a total of 12 episodes, and before we'll have Dr. Jamie back with us, but I really want you to be aware that mission, awareness, timing, execution, reflection, integration are all collaboration maps. And they all fit into three irreducibles more grounding, demonstrated reliability, and mean making, as well as relation relational presence. Okay, I'm Dr. Marilyn Carroll again, and thank you for joining me today.