|
12 months ago, we started working with a potential client. They were worried about how AI might impact their role and career. They could see the technology moving fast and knew they probably needed to think differently about their future. They asked questions. They explored options. They engaged with us for a while. Then they disappeared. We followed up a few times. Nothing. That's usually what happens when someone recognizes a shift is coming but doesn't yet feel immediate pressure to respond. Then, a few weeks ago, they came back. Their company was restructuring. Layoffs were being discussed internally. Some of their peers had already been affected, and suddenly the questions they had six months earlier felt urgent. I couldn't stop thinking about that conversation. When they came back, the thing they wanted hadn't changed at all. The same concerns. The same uncertainty. The same realization that AI was going to reshape how work gets done. The only thing that had changed was the cost of waiting. The cost of feeling safeSix months ago, doing nothing felt inexpensive. The job was stable. The team was intact. The future seemed distant enough that there would always be time later. AI could remain an interesting topic instead of an immediate priority. As long as things felt secure, they could postpone the harder questions:
And so they waited. Then the environment changed. The job stopped feeling guaranteed. The future became less abstract. And suddenly the same questions demanded immediate answers. The fifteen-story jumpIn 1988, an oil rig called Piper Alpha exploded in the North Sea. A superintendent named Andy Mochan escaped to the platform's edge and faced a choice: stay on the burning rig, or jump fifteen stories into freezing, oil-slicked water where survival was unlikely. He jumped. Later, when he was asked why he took the leap, he said it was a matter of "jump or fry." He chose to jump because staying was no longer an option. A change consultant named Daryl Conner later built a concept around this idea. It's called the burning platform. People rarely move when change feels optional. They move when staying put becomes riskier than acting. The burning platform didn't create the need for change. It simply removed the ability to ignore it. And that's exactly what we're seeing with AI. For years, many professionals have known that AI would change how work gets done. Most agreed with the premise. Many even intended to prepare. But intention isn't action. As long as business was good and careers felt stable, there was always a reason to postpone the deeper work of rethinking skills, positioning, and long-term career strategy. Now, for many people, the platform is starting to feel warm. Why urgency is the wrong starting pointThe challenge is that AI isn't a problem you solve in a weekend. It requires deliberate thinking. Experimentation. Learning. Reflection. Testing assumptions about how your role, industry, and value creation may evolve over the next few years. Those things are much easier to do when you have time. Not when you're rushing to react to a restructuring, a hiring freeze, or a layoff announcement. The professionals who navigate major shifts best are rarely the ones who start preparing when the pressure arrives. They're the ones who invested time while they still had options. Because readiness isn't built during a crisis. It's built before one. And AI may be the most significant shift many of us will experience in our careers. The question isn't whether you'll eventually need an AI strategy. It's whether you'll create one while you have the space to think clearly, or wait until circumstances force the conversation. Before I go, let me ask you a quick question: Are you intentionally investing time today to rethink your career and role in an AI-driven future, or are you waiting for a burning platform to make the decision for you? If you'd like to discuss your situation and build a personalized AI career strategy, simply reply to this email. Happy to jump on a free call and talk through your specific circumstances.Warmly, Till next time, Jerry Kurian |
Hi Reader, The traditional role boundaries that defined tech careers for the last 20 years are breaking. Satya Nadella recently explained what LinkedIn (a Microsoft company) has already done: They used to have separate product managers, designers, front-end engineers, and back-end engineers. They took those four roles, increased the scope, and combined them into one: full-stack builders. At the same time, the way we build AI products has inverted. The new workflow no longer starts with a PRD...
hi Reader, Developer marketing just got a lot hotter. Around two months ago, Grok Build dropped as a serious competitor to Claude Code. Fast, sharp, and genuinely useful. A lot of us (myself included) started leaning back into Cursor + Grok because of it. And now Meta has thrown its hat in the ring with Muse Code — a multi-agent terminal tool built for large codebases. What’s really happening here? Claude Code didn’t just launch a product. It proved product-market fit for AI coding agents....