One of the biggest news from the world of tech in recent times has been the intriguing developments at OpenAI, an American artificial intelligence research organization. Founder of Lexion, Gaurav Oberoi, described it as, “the debacle of the decade”. In a world where artificial intelligence has gained significant notoriety, OpenAI has become one of the most consequential players in the global tech community. This also meant its original ideas had to be tweaked to accommodate the social, economic and political nuances their products, the most successful of them being ChatGPT; a language model- based chatbot.
Sometimes, more money comes with more problems, turf wars and heightened interests. After OpenAI’s valuation tripled from about $29bn to $80bn between May and November 2023 – the cracks within its ranks became more visible.
A.Change In Strategic & Philosophical Direction
To think that the drama at OpenAI are isolated incidences would be to be naïve; as with many other episodes – there are immediate and remote causes. OpenAI started out in December 2015 as a non-profit “with the goal of building safe and beneficial artificial general intelligence for the benefit of humanity”. It was all nice and dandy until the stark realities of funding research and development, hiring top talent and associated costs quickly saw it switch to a limited liability company. OpenAI would subsequently reconsider its open source policy because it realized that its products could be weaponized by people with bad intentions on such a wide scale that it could cuse major political disruptions to leading civilizations in the world.
Change management has to be one of the most difficult things leaders have to do in today’s world. You have to learn how to pivot from one idea or direction without betraying your core values and brand ethos. A lot of communication has to be done such that the critical stakeholders are adequately carried along. Change is inevitable but its management can be the difference between a sustainable organization and a failed one. Satisfactory explanations must be made on why any such organization is shifting its focus or repurposing its resources away from one idea to another. There has to be a ready playbook or established protocols for effecting radical changes such that the trust or goodwill of the brand isn’t lost.
B. Stakeholder & Reputation Management
When the board of OpenAI decided to axe Sam Altman from his role as CEO, it didn’t come without drama – a lot of drama. Sam Altman was accused by the organization’s board of underhand dealings, failure to communicate candidly and not being able to guarantee that under his leadership, the organization could develop AI without compromising one or both of its two leading signatures – speed and safety. Being one of OpenAI’s co-founders, the tech world read a lot of political meaning into Altman’s removal – some alluded that it was a badly executed hostile takeover. Major investors such as Khosla Ventures, Sequoia, and Thrive Capital struggled to hide their surprise at such drastic action. It would seemed that even they weren’t properly briefed about the plan to relieve the CEO of his job.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions, so wanting to do the right things isn’t enough – process is everything. There should never be a consequential move such as firing a CEO without a thorough interrogation of the fallout. Most top organizations phase out old leadership, it’s never abrupt – the idea is to ensure a smooth transition and ensure that there is no damage to the organization’s fortunes owing to a switch at the top. A poorly-managed change is not only bad optics, it also affects the sentiments in the market especially if the deposed leader has some sort of cult following or mass appeal in the ecosystem. Certain decisions aren’t as clear-cut as decision-makers would want them to be, a critical look at the nuances can save organizations from a bearish run.
C. Corporate Governance
It was a no-brainer, the board had to do the common-sense thing. Bringing back Altman – something that shouldn’t have happened in the first place. What the board tried to do clandestinely backfired and saw its members lose their seats. Their ill-informed actions didn’t only have personal consequences, it even made Sam Altman a bigger player. Organisations are so called because they are organized; meaning there is a methodology to their actions. The episode at OpenAI lacked credibility; the reasons annotated for the change didn’t appear to be based on factual evidence but on pre-emptive or speculative intentions.
For transparency sake, if huge decisions are to be made, it should be done in the open where it can be scrutinized by others. Calling a dog a bad name just to get rid of it is textbook Machiavellian. Personal vendettas or interests should never be the driving for effecting changes in any organization. Being blindsided by biases could cause leaders to make decisions that are inimical to an organization’s growth. Office politics can be sweet when things are going according to plan; stakeholders won’t be raising eyebrows when all the ducks are on a row. The moment things begin going south, light will be shone on the thinking that led to certain decisions.
About Dr. Abiola Salami
Dr. Abiola Salami is the Convener of Dr Abiola Salami International Leadership Bootcamp,The Peak Performer Recognition,The Peak Performing Woman of The Yearand Publisher/Editor-in-Chief ofThe Peak PerformerTM. He is the Principal Performance Strategist at CHAMP – a full scale professional services firm trusted by high performing business leaders for providing Executive Coaching, Workforce Development & Advisory Services to improve performance. You can reach him on hello@abiolachamp.com and connect with him @abiolachamp on all social media platforms.