Our marketing manager is using generative AI to write our weekly newsletter, but the tone has started to drift into generic corporate jargon. How do we use the GWC™ (Get It, Want It, Capacity to Do It) framework to hold them accountable for the output quality of their AI tools?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

When an employee uses AI to do their work, they do not get to outsource their accountability. If your marketing manager's newsletter is turning into generic corporate fluff, you have a GWC issue that needs to be addressed immediately. Let's break down how to evaluate this using the three components.

First, do they Get It? Does your marketing manager truly understand what our unique brand voice sounds like and why generic AI outputs fail to connect with our audience? If they do not understand the standard, they cannot hit it.

Second, do they Want It? Are they genuinely motivated to put in the hard work of editing, refining, and guiding the AI tool, or are they simply lazy and using AI as a shortcut to slide by with minimal effort? If they do not want the responsibility of being the final editor, they are in the wrong seat.

Third, do they have the Capacity to Do It? Do they possess the cognitive and conative ability to write effective prompts, analyze the output, and inject the necessary human nuance? Sometimes, an employee wants to do a good job but simply lacks the skill to manage the technology effectively. You must sit down with them and clearly define that their seat is not responsible for generating content volume; their seat is responsible for the final quality and conversion of the newsletter. If they GWC the role, they will embrace their job as the critical human filter, ensuring no generic AI-generated garbage ever reaches your audience.