Do you really think doing mindless grunt work builds strategic thinking? Fortune ran a piece warning that AI will hollow out corporate America by removing “grunt work,” the work that supposedly forged strategic thinkers. That sounds alarming. It’s also wrong. And it exposes a classic thinking error: confusing correlation with causation. The Claim Everyone Accepts Too Quickly Junior lawyers reviewed documents. Junior analysts lived in spreadsheets. Some of them later became great strategic thinkers. Conclusion: grunt work created judgment. AI removes grunt work. Therefore, judgment disappears. That logic feels tidy. It just doesn’t hold up. What Actually Really Happens Those same juniors also: - Sat in rooms where real decisions were made - Watched partners argue over assumptions - Got feedback that actually mattered - Saw deals succeed and fail in real time - Built relationships that exposed how power and incentives really worked The spreadsheets and document creations didn’t teach strategy. The environment did. Grunt work was the excuse to keep them in the room long enough to absorb it. Three Red Flags You Can’t Ignore 1. Survivorship Bias The people surveyed succeeded under the old system. Of course, they credit it. You never hear from the thousands who did the same grind and never developed judgment. They didn’t make partner. They didn’t become executives. They aren’t being interviewed. No comparison group. No falsification. Just stories from the winners. 2. Incentives Matter The survey came from Protiviti. Protiviti then discovers an urgent “AI-driven talent crisis.” Protiviti sells job redesign and upskilling programs. Draw your own conclusions. When someone benefits from identifying a crisis, you examine the diagnosis twice. 3. The Evidence Problem If grunt work built strategic thinking, we would expect to see: - Everyone who did it improved at similar rates - More years of grunt work produce better judgment - Industries with less grunt work produce weaker thinkers None of that lines up with reality. Tech develops leaders faster than law. Startups build judgment without ten-year ladders. Some people grind for decades and never improve their thinking. The model never worked the way people claim it did. What Was Really Going On Most firms ran an accidental development system: 1. Hire juniors cheaply 2. Extract value from repetitive work 3. Keep them around long enough to learn by proximity 4. Promote the few who figured it out AI breaks step two. Once the economic justification disappears, the weakness of the system becomes obvious. What Actually Builds Judgment - Reading widely and reflecting deliberately - Fluency in the language of business - Case studies as target practice - Decisions with consequences - Tight feedback loops - Close exposure to experienced judgment Grunt work delivered none of that reliably. Time served never guarantees good thinking. https://lnkd.in/eVTtarvv