“AI can fake intelligence, but not courage”: Anupam Mittal’s sharp critique of founders outsourcing thinking to ChatGPT
The People Group founder says courage and originality can’t be manufactured by algorithms, sparking a lively debate on the role of AI in leadership.
ADVERTISEMENT
Anupam Mittal, Founder & CEO of People Group, has stirred up debate with a candid post on LinkedIn cautioning against over-reliance on generative AI.
Recounting a recent conversation, Mittal said a founder proudly bragged to him: “I get all my ideas from ChatGPT.”
What the founder saw as a flex, Mittal saw as a glaring red flag.
“Because Gen AI mostly averages existing knowledge,” he wrote. “It sounds brilliant- smooth, confident, articulate- but too often it’s just platitudes and polite sycophancy.”
Read more: Microsoft AI Chief warns of public push for ‘AI rights’ as users grow attached to chatbots
Mittal argued that while AI-generated text might appear polished, the substance is often hollow.
“I’ve seen AI-written mails from senior leaders that read like genius… and meant nothing. In fact, it’s pretty obvious it’s a senseless Ctrl C Ctrl V,” he said.
He didn’t stop at emails.
“Same with decks, pitches, even ‘strategy notes’ churned out start-to-finish by a model,” Mittal observed, warning that such reliance risks reducing leadership to mechanical reproduction.
The crux of his post was blunt: Outsourcing judgement isn’t leadership.
Instead, he stressed that the best managers and founders he knows use AI selectively. “The best managers and founders I know use AI for speed and structure,” Mittal wrote. “But the instinct, the angles, the contrarian call, the uncomfortable decision? That’s all on them.”
He signed off with a sharp distinction: “My take- AI can fake intelligence. It can’t fake courage or an original point of view.”
Mittal’s post sparked strong reactions with professionals weighing in on the risks and responsibilities of AI in leadership.
One of the comments on his post echoed his words, saying: “Great one… AI is a powerful assistant, but true leadership lies in judgment, courage, and originality. No model can replicate it.”
Another was more biting: “Completely with you on it. If decisions are based on ChatGPT then what’s the point of leadership? All the higher managers should be thrown away and just pay $20 for a ChatGPT subscription—and see your ship sink.”
Some reflected on the accelerating pace of AI. “AI is growing at an unimaginable speed,” one commenter noted. “I wonder, whatever statement we make today might have to be changed after a few weeks… and then we reach a point where no more statements are needed as AI becomes omnipotent and omnipresent.”
One detailed response attempted to strip away the hype around large language models (LLMs): “Large Language Models are intelligent is a grand illusion. LLMs don’t possess sentience or consciousness. Prediction is not cognition, it simply mimics human intelligence. Autocomplete is not understanding. Fluency isn’t thought. Utility isn’t intelligence. The current amplified hype has already reached mania level. The fear of missing out has been a powerful motivator in the corporate world, where the need to appear innovative often trumps sober analysis of actual capabilities.”
Others called for balance. “Agree. Should use AI to brainstorm, practice routines, gather data, research, build a skeleton. Play devil’s advocate for us,” one professional wrote. “But raw ideas, experiential inputs, fine-tuning, adding context, applying finesse, our own tone and persona—should be on us. Use AI to amplify, not outsource our thinking. Outsource for the mundane, not for chasing breakthroughs and brilliance.”
Mittal’s post comes at a moment when startups and corporates alike are embedding AI into nearly every layer of work: from cold emails and pitch decks to investor updates and strategy documents.
