According to @emollick, the team’s AI-and-work study that coined the term jagged frontier has now been formally published in Organization Science, confirming large productivity gains from GPT4 in real consulting tasks. As reported by Organization Science, pre-registered experiments at Boston Consulting Group found consultants using GPT4 completed 12.2% more tasks, worked 25.1% faster, and produced 40% higher-quality outputs, highlighting measurable business impact in knowledge work. According to One Useful Thing by Ethan Mollick, results varied across task types, illustrating the jagged frontier where GPT4 excels on many structured, knowledge-intensive tasks but can underperform on tasks requiring up-to-date facts or specialized judgment, guiding enterprise deployment strategies. As reported by Organization Science, the findings support scaled augmentation approaches (centaur and cyborg workflows) and suggest clear ROI opportunities for firms that identify GPT4-suitable task portfolios, invest in prompt processes, and implement evaluation guardrails.

According to Ethan Mollick on X, Google’s NotebookLM can now generate consultant-style videos from deep research reports, exemplified by a satirical Sauron strategy briefing that highlights the tool’s ability to synthesize sources into structured narratives with voiceover and visuals; as reported by Mollick, the new video generation feature is "very impressive" and shows potential for rapid creation of explainers, training modules, and executive summaries. According to Google’s official NotebookLM overview, the product is designed to ground outputs in user-provided sources, suggesting the video feature likely inherits citation-aware synthesis that could reduce hallucinations for business use cases. As noted by multiple coverage summaries from Google I/O 2024 and subsequent updates, NotebookLM focuses on transforming multi-document inputs into organized outputs, indicating practical opportunities for enterprises to convert research decks into stakeholder-ready video briefings and customer education content. According to Mollick’s demonstration, the feature streamlines script, structure, and delivery, implying lower production costs and faster iteration cycles for go-to-market teams, L&D, and product marketing.

According to Ethan Mollick, a widely shared post misrepresented a creativity study on ChatGPT; as reported by Mollick citing the paper’s results, a 61-participant experiment found no decline in creativity after 30 days and the ChatGPT group remained significantly higher at the end of the period. According to Mollick’s summary of the study, the small sample size indicates the trial was underpowered, but reported statistics still showed sustained creativity gains for ChatGPT-assisted participants over time. As reported by Mollick, this challenges narratives of rapid skill atrophy from AI use and suggests business opportunities in structured, longer-horizon adoption of generative AI for ideation, marketing copy, and product concept generation, where month-long outcomes matter. According to Mollick’s interpretation of the authors’ data, organizations should prioritize measurement frameworks that track longitudinal creativity metrics and implement controlled rollouts with baseline and follow-up assessments to capture durable productivity and creative benefits.

According to Ethan Mollick on Twitter, current AI evaluation overindexes on coding benchmarks while neglecting broader knowledge work, obscuring the real trajectory of AI progress. As reported by the referenced arXiv paper (arxiv.org/pdf/2603.01203), benchmark concentration in software tasks underrepresents domains like analysis, writing, decision support, and operations. According to the arXiv source, this creates measurement blind spots for enterprise adoption, talent planning, and ROI modeling, since most roles combine non-coding tasks such as synthesis, planning, and collaboration. For AI leaders, the business implication is to expand evaluation suites to role-relevant tasks (e.g., analyst briefings, customer escalations, compliance checks), introduce end-to-end workflow metrics (quality, time-to-completion, handoff friction), and track longitudinal performance across toolchains, as suggested by the arXiv analysis and highlighted by Mollick.

According to Ethan Mollick on X (Twitter), the viral 2028 AI crash scenario by Citrini is "hard" science fiction and not a fully plausible path, and he recommends Alex Oleg Imas’s economic analyses of AGI impacts as a better basis for forecasts (source: Ethan Mollick tweet; links to Citrini Research and Alex Imas Substack). According to Citrini Research, the scenario imagines a 38% S&P drawdown, 10.2% unemployment, and credit stress as advanced AI surpasses expectations; however, Mollick frames it as scenario-building rather than prediction (source: Citrini Research post; Ethan Mollick tweet). According to Alex Oleg Imas’s Substack, evaluating AGI economics requires micro-founded mechanisms such as productivity shocks, labor substitution elasticities, and capital deepening paths, which provide more credible planning inputs for businesses than narrative stress tests (source: Alex Imas Substack). For AI leaders, the business takeaway is to model cash-flow sensitivities to AI-driven productivity and labor market shifts under multiple elasticities and adoption curves, instead of anchoring on single dramatic paths (sources: Ethan Mollick tweet; Alex Imas Substack).