Faster Bottlenecks

One of the biggest AI mistakes will not be bad prompts. It will be faster bottlenecks — more output routed back through the same person.

I am starting to think one of the biggest AI mistakes will not be bad prompts. It will be faster bottlenecks.

I have noticed this even in my own AI workflows. My initial wins were speed. Then I figured out the hidden cost: review load.

An agent for outreach. An agent for meeting notes. An agent for research. An agent for content. All useful. But every output still comes back to me for review, routing, correction, prioritisation, and follow-up. I had not built leverage. I had started building a faster queue.

We think the problem is that work is taking too long. So we add AI to produce more work, faster. But the real issue is the system has too many places where progress depends on one person pushing it forward. That person is usually the founder, operator, or senior person who holds context.

AI does not fix that. In some cases, it makes it worse. Now, instead of 5 people waiting for your input, you have 5 people plus 12 agents producing things that still need your judgment.

The better question is not: “Which AI agent should I use?” The better question is: “Where does work stop unless I personally move it?”

Part of that list looks like this:

The real leverage of AI is not that it can write, summarise, analyse, or reply. The leverage is when AI sits inside a loop and reduces how much manual pushing the system needs.

Some ideas I have been thinking about, and I am sure solutions already exist:

Not more AI output. Less manual system load.

If the system only works when you are personally holding it together, it is just slightly faster dependency.