In partnership with
THE OT ALGORITHM
Gif by josephinamusic on Giphy
Hi friends,
Understandably, I could not focus on getting this issue together yesterday, as my eyes were glued to election results all evening and night. Similar to this night two years ago, I was in tears, but this time, with hope.
One of the fascinating AI-related takeaways was a poll CNN ran with voters as to which party they felt would better handle AI regulations. The results? Neither.
This week's headline is an OT-specific study. Researchers tested whether a conversational AI could run an OT initial assessment, then asked people which version they preferred.
It's a free week, so everyone gets the full issue. We're also debuting a new game, Two Truths and AI, where you guess which passage was written by AI. Then we'll work through a vendor pitch for an intake chatbot, take a quick pulse on an AI literacy workshop, and close with the question of who should hold the first conversation with a client.
Let's get into it.
Note to readers: The ads and some of the links in these weekly newsletters contain affiliate links to help support my work. If you’d like to show support, all you have to do is click on them and look around their site a little bit. 🙂 Disclaimer: Placement of the ads included in these weekly issues is not an endorsement. Please do your own research before using any AI tools.
One workspace where buyers, sellers, and AI close deals together
Instead of running your deals across scattered email threads and forgotten attachments, Aligned brings everything into one shared deal workspace.
Buyers get a single place to evaluate, loop in their team, and say yes. Sellers get visibility into what is actually happening when they're not in the room and AI Deal Insights that help you act accordingly, before it's too late.
Best part? Your first deal room takes only minutes to stand up.
HOT TAKE THIS WEEK
The AI Matched Us on the Checklist and Lost on the Relationship
Gif by tlc_network on Giphy
When I think about the initial evaluations I've done, the part I value most usually happens between the questions. It's the pause after someone mentions they stopped cooking, or the way they talk about the role they're scared of losing. That's where the occupational profile starts to mean something.
This week's headline tested whether a conversational AI could run that first assessment. On the checklist, it held up. People found it easy to use, and they rated its goals as clear, relevant, and attainable as the goals set with a human. On the relationship, it fell behind. Perceived compassion and satisfaction favored the human format, and 25 of 30 participants said they'd rather do it with a person.
That split is the useful part of the study. If AI can match us on gathering information and drafting goals, the relationship is the part of the initial assessment we need to protect, document, and be able to explain. We call it therapeutic use of self, and it's the first thing to get squeezed when a productivity target meets a tool that promises to "do the intake."
I'm not against the tool. I'd love for clients to arrive at a first visit having already told their story once, at their own pace, from home. I just want OTPs to be the ones deciding what the AI collects and what stays in the room with us. (A compassion gap of 9.90 vs 7.53 is also a handy number to bring to your next productivity meeting.)
