Track Changes On Podcast

Caroline Warnes

Musings on the future of work, corporate accountability and burnout from an office escapee who thinks we can and should expect better www.trackchangeson.com

Episodes

  1. 9 hrs ago

    The AI Industry Wants You to Be Afraid of Falling Behind

    Episode summary: Are we buying AI because we’re afraid not to? AI was initially sold as an extraordinary opportunity. Greater productivity, competitive advantage and new ways of working. Increasingly, however, another message has entered the conversation: adopt AI or risk being left behind. Workers are told their colleagues will have an advantage if they use AI. Companies worry their competitors are moving faster. Women are warned that lower rates of AI adoption could leave them particularly vulnerable as the technology changes the workplace. In this episode of Track Changes On, Caroline Warnes looks at fear as an AI marketing tool and asks what happens when adoption starts to feel inevitable. She explores the commercial interests behind some of this messaging, what the research actually tells us about women and AI and the important difference between becoming more productive with AI and developing the underlying skills we need for our careers. In this episode * How fear of being left behind became part of the AI conversation * Why the idea that “AI won’t replace you, someone using AI will” deserves more scrutiny * What the research actually says about women’s AI adoption and occupational exposure * Why productivity gains do not automatically prove long-term business or career value * The difference between performing better with AI and developing expertise * Why companies and workers should still expect AI to make its case Companion article This episode is accompanied by a full article on Track Changes On, where the ideas, research and practical reflections are explored in greater depth. Supporting the show If you enjoy Caroline's work and would like to support it, here are a few things she's created 🛒 Track Changes On Shop - Coffee mugs for corporate rebels 📖 Do Give Up Your Day Job - Guide to corporate exits and transitions to self-employment Subscribe Subscribe to Track Changes On for weekly conversations about the future of corporate work, AI, careers and organisational change. Connect with Caroline 📸 Instagram | 🧵 Threads | 🔗 LinkedIn This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.trackchangeson.com

    The AI Industry Wants You to Be Afraid of Falling Behind
  2. 2 Sept

    When Looking Busy Becomes the Job

    Episode summary: When looking busy becomes the job Do you ever feel like corporate work is sometimes one big performance? Being visible, staying online, attending meetings and keeping that little Teams dot green can all become evidence that you are working. Some jobs genuinely require presence and activity. But for knowledge workers hired for their expertise, judgement or creative thinking, visible activity can be a poor measure of the value they produce. In this episode of Track Changes On, Caroline Warnes explores the difference between a performance culture and a performative culture, and what happens when organisations confuse activity with productivity. Drawing on her own experience of having some of her best ideas away from her computer, she looks at research into walking, creative thinking and the incubation effect to explore why valuable cognitive work does not always look like work. She also examines research into electronic performance monitoring and asks whether increasingly sophisticated employee surveillance actually improves performance. The episode also looks at return-to-office mandates and the performance of collaboration. If an organisation can measure how many people came into the office, does that tell it whether meaningful collaboration happened or whether the work improved? As AI changes how quickly knowledge workers can produce certain outputs, Caroline asks whether management practices built around visible activity are becoming increasingly disconnected from the work organisations actually need people to do. In this episode * Why visible activity can be a poor proxy for knowledge-worker productivity* What research into walking and incubation tells us about creative thinking* Why employee monitoring can change behaviour without improving performance* How return-to-office mandates can confuse physical presence with collaboration* Why AI makes the distinction between activity and outcomes increasingly important Research referenced in this episode Ravid, D. M., White, J. C., Tomczak, D. L., Miles, A. F. & Behrend, T. S. (2023). A meta-analysis of the effects of electronic performance monitoring on work outcomes. Meta-analysis of 94 independent samples involving 23,461 workers. The study found no evidence that electronic performance monitoring improved worker performance and found an association with increased worker stress. Oppezzo, M. & Schwartz, D. L. (2014). Give your ideas some legs: The positive effect of walking on creative thinking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(4), 1142–1152. DOI: 10.1037/a0036577. Sio, U. N. & Ormerod, T. C. (2009). Does incubation enhance problem solving? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135(1), 94–120. DOI: 10.1037/a0014212. Bloom, N., Han, R. & Liang, J. (2024). Hybrid working from home improves retention without damaging performance. Nature, 630, 920–925. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-024-07500-2. The randomised controlled trial of 1,612 employees found that hybrid working reduced attrition by one-third without damaging performance. Companion article This episode is accompanied by a full article on Track Changes On, where the ideas, research and practical reflections are explored in greater depth. Supporting the show If you enjoy Caroline's work and would like to support it, here are a few things she's created. 🛒 Track Changes On Shop - Coffee mugs & insulated tumblers for corporate rebels 📖 Do Give Up Your Day Job - Guide to corporate exits and transitions to self-employment Subscribe Subscribe to Track Changes On for weekly conversations about the future of corporate work, AI, careers and organisational change. Connect with Caroline 📸 Instagram | 🧵 Threads | 🔗 LinkedIn This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.trackchangeson.com

    When Looking Busy Becomes the Job
  3. 26 Aug

    When Did Companies Stop Valuing Our Time?

    Episode summary: When did companies stop valuing our time? Time is the one resource we can't replace. Yet at work, we have become remarkably comfortable with the idea that companies can ask for more of it without paying for it. Unpaid overtime, expanding workloads after workforce cuts and increasingly drawn-out recruitment processes all rely on a similar assumption: when the cost of someone's time sits with the individual rather than the company, that time can start to look free. In this episode of Track Changes On, Caroline Warnes explores how becoming a parent and then a business owner changed the way she thinks about the value of her time. She looks at how the industrial model of work gave employers defined periods of workers' time, what happens when modern knowledge work removes those boundaries and whether AI-driven productivity gives us an opportunity to rethink the bargain. In this episode * Why time has become one of the most valuable things we give to work * How modern knowledge work has blurred the boundaries of the working day * Why workforce cuts can turn productivity into work intensification * How lengthy recruitment processes can become extractive of candidates' time * Who gets the time dividend when AI makes us more productive * Whether knowledge work should move towards a more outcome-oriented model Companion article This episode is accompanied by a full article on Track Changes On, where the ideas, research and practical reflections are explored in greater depth. Supporting the show If you enjoy Caroline's work and would like to support it, here are a few things she's created 🛒 Track Changes On Shop - Coffee mugs & insulated tumblers for corporate rebels📖 Do Give Up Your Day Job - Guide to corporate exits and transitions to self-employment Subscribe Subscribe to Track Changes On for weekly conversations about the future of corporate work, AI, careers and organisational change. Connect with Caroline 📸 Instagram | 🧵 Threads | 🔗 LinkedIn This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.trackchangeson.com

    When Did Companies Stop Valuing Our Time?
  4. 19 Aug

    Are Companies Cutting the Expertise They’ll Need Later?

    Episode summary: AI needs specialists. So what happens if we stop creating them? Generative AI is already changing the economics of specialist work. Organisations are looking at where AI can reduce their reliance on writers, designers, developers and other people with deep expertise. In the short term, the productivity argument can make sense. But what happens over the longer term if fewer people can make a living developing specialist skills? In this episode of Track Changes On, Caroline Warnes looks beyond the immediate impact of AI on jobs to ask what happens to human expertise five, ten or twenty years from now. Drawing on her own experience as a writer, she explores how professional practice develops specialist knowledge, what organisations risk losing when they reduce that capability and why this could create problems for AI itself. She also looks at emerging research into human knowledge and model collapse, and asks whether organisations focused on today's efficiency gains are paying enough attention to where tomorrow's expertise will come from. In this episode * Why specialist expertise depends on years of sustained professional practice * What happens to the talent pipeline when fewer people can make a living from specialist work * Why reducing specialist capability could affect continuous improvement inside organisations * What emerging research says about AI, human learning and knowledge collapse * Why AI's continued reliance on human-generated knowledge raises a longer-term question about who will create that knowledge in the future Research referenced in this episode Acemoglu, D., Kong, D. & Ozdaglar, A. (2026). AI, Human Cognition and Knowledge Collapse. NBER Working Paper No. 34910. DOI: 10.3386/w34910. Read the NBER working paper Shumailov, I., Shumaylov, Z., Zhao, Y. et al. (2024). AI models collapse when trained on recursively generated data. Nature, 631, 755–759. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-024-07566-y. Read the Nature paper Companion article This episode is accompanied by a full article on Track Changes On, where the ideas, research and practical reflections are explored in greater depth. Supporting the show If you enjoy Caroline's work and would like to support it, here are a few things she's created. 🛒 Track Changes On Shop - Coffee mugs & insulated tumblers for corporate rebels 📖 Do Give Up Your Day Job - Guide to corporate exits and transitions to self-employment Subscribe Subscribe to Track Changes On for weekly conversations about the future of corporate work, AI, careers and organisational change. Connect with Caroline 📸 Instagram | 🧵 Threads | 🔗 LinkedIn This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.trackchangeson.com

    Are Companies Cutting the Expertise They’ll Need Later?
  5. 12 Aug

    What Happens When AI Makes Everyone a Specialist?

    Episode summary: AI, specialists and the empathy gap Generative AI has changed the way we work, but it has not changed work equally. For generalists, AI has opened up new possibilities, making it easier to write, design, analyse and create. For many specialists, the experience has been very different. Their life's work, often developed over decades, has become part of the knowledge that powers these systems. In this episode of Track Changes On, Caroline Warnes explores the empathy gap emerging between specialists and generalists in the age of AI. Drawing on her own journey as a lifelong writer, she asks why provenance suddenly seems to matter less in conversations about AI than it does in almost every other part of our lives, and makes the case that acknowledging where AI's capabilities come from is not about rejecting the technology. It's about recognising the people behind it. In this episode * Why AI is creating an empathy gap between specialists and generalists * Why many specialists see their craft as a calling, not just a career * How generative AI was built on decades of accumulated human expertise * Why "it doesn't matter where it came from" can feel dismissive to the people behind that expertise * Why provenance, transparency and empathy should be part of the AI conversation Companion article This episode is accompanied by a full article on Track Changes On, where the ideas, research and practical reflections are explored in greater depth. Supporting the show If you enjoy Caroline's work and would like to support it, here are a few things she's created 🛒 Track Changes On Shop - Coffee mugs & insulated tumblers for corporate rebels📖 Do Give Up Your Day Job - Guide to corporate exits and transitions to self-employment Subscribe Subscribe to Track Changes On for weekly conversations about the future of corporate work, AI, careers and organisational change. Connect with Caroline 📸 Instagram | 🧵 Threads | 🔗 LinkedIn This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.trackchangeson.com

    What Happens When AI Makes Everyone a Specialist?
  6. 5 Aug

    The Case for Empathy in Corporate Leadership

    Episode summary: When did workplace empathy become a deadly sin? Empathy has become an unexpected target in leadership circles. A growing number of books and commentators argue that it makes leaders weak, clouds judgement and prevents organisations from making difficult decisions. But what if that argument is based on a misunderstanding of what empathy actually is? In this episode of Track Changes On, Caroline Warnes explores why empathy is not the opposite of decisive leadership, but one of the foundations of good judgement. She examines the growing backlash against empathy, what history tells us about some of our most respected leaders, and why organisations should treat empathy as a core leadership capability rather than a personality trait. In this episode - Why empathy has become one of leadership's most controversial topics - The difference between empathy, agreement and good judgement - What history teaches us about empathetic leaders making difficult decisions - Why empathy should be considered a prerequisite for leadership - What your organisation's attitude towards empathy reveals about its decision-making culture Companion article This episode is accompanied by a full article on Track Changes On, where the ideas, research and practical reflections are explored in greater depth. Content referenced in the episode Caroline's recent Substack article on leadership and empathy Supporting the show If you enjoy Caroline's work and would like to support it, here are a few things she's created 🛒 Track Changes On Shop - Coffee mugs & insulated tumblers for corporate rebels📖 Do Give Up Your Day Job - Guide to corporate exits and transitions to self-employment Subscribe Subscribe to Track Changes On for weekly conversations about the future of corporate work, AI, careers and organisational change. Connect with Caroline 📸 Instagram | 🧵 Threads | 🔗 LinkedIn This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.trackchangeson.com

    The Case for Empathy in Corporate Leadership
  7. 29 July

    Why Two Different Truths Can Exist at Work

    Episode summary: What's happening to trust at work? Employee engagement has been falling since 2022, yet the latest Edelman Trust Barometer suggests most employees still trust their employer. So how can both be true? In this first episode of Track Changes On, Caroline Warnes explores the difference between institutional trust and the psychological contract, and why employees may be spending more mental energy trying to reconcile the organisation they believe they work for with the one they experience every day. In this episode - Why one Instagram Reel sparked an unexpected conversation about trust - What Gallup and Edelman reveal about the modern workplace - The difference between institutional trust and the psychological contract - Why conflicting workplace signals create invisible cognitive work - What psychological contract breach might explain about declining engagement Companion article This episode is accompanied by a full article on Track Changes On, where the ideas, research and practical reflections are explored in greater depth. Content and research referenced in the episode - Caroline's Instagram reel on trust - Gallup employee engagement data - 2026 Edelman Trust Barometer - Research on corporate employee burnout Supporting the show If you enjoy Caroline's work and would like to support it, here are a few things she's created 🛒 Track Changes On Shop - Coffee mugs & insulated tumblers for corporate rebels📖 Do Give Up Your Day Job - Guide to corporate exits and transitions to self-employment Subscribe Subscribe to Track Changes On for weekly conversations about the future of corporate work, AI, careers and organisational change. Connect with Caroline 📸 Instagram | 🧵 Threads | 🔗 LinkedIn This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.trackchangeson.com

    Why Two Different Truths Can Exist at Work

About

Musings on the future of work, corporate accountability and burnout from an office escapee who thinks we can and should expect better www.trackchangeson.com