American CEOs are salivating at the thought of artificial intelligence letting them pink slip legions of workers—freeing up more cash for themselves and their shareholders. CEOs from Amazon, IBM, Salesforce, and JPMorgan Chase have warned employees to brace for AI disruption—as if they’re not already planning it.
As someone who doesn’t engage in the corporate media’s idol worship of America’s current crop of CEOs—and regards many of them as narcissists who’ve mistaken their own fawning media coverage for merit—I began wondering this morning: shouldn’t some of these executives be fearing for their jobs as AI evolves?
After all, a CEO’s job is to articulate and execute a vision—not fiddle with server outages or micromanage supply chains. And increasingly, even that limited remit may not require a human.
At some of America’s biggest companies, the CEO isn’t even necessary during a major crisis.
Take Delta. Last year, CEO Ed Bastian, who received $27 million in 2024 compensation, flew to France to watch the Olympics while his airline’s passengers were stranded around the world due to an IT meltdown. That meltdown was allegedly caused by Bastian’s myopic prioritization of billions in stock buybacks to boost his company’s stock price rather than upgrading Delta’s outdated technology—something Microsoft and another tech vendor have publicly claimed was a critical vulnerability.
Or look at Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol, who didn’t join the company until September of last year and still received $96 million in compensation for less than four months work. Niccol is such a hotshot he supposedly can run Seattle-based Starbucks from a remote, company-paid office in sun-drenched Southern California.
Just a stone’s throw away from Niccol’s corporate hideaway is where Ford’s skunkworks team is toiling away imaging the company’s next generation of EVs. CEO Jim Farley, who received $25 million in 2024 compensation, admits his key card doesn’t give him access to where Ford’s future is being created. His presence obviously isn’t needed.
It’s not even clear how much time Farley spends at Ford’s Dearborn headquarters. He previously disclosed that his spouse lives in the UK, where she plays in a rock band. Farley also disclosed that he drove around Chicago for six weeks marveling at the wonders of the EV he had brought over from China.
Then there’s GM CEO Mary Barra, who last year received $29.5 million in compensation and fashions herself as overseeing a world-class tech company. Barra’s says the best tech brains are in Silicon Valley, which is where GM’s top software and battery executives are located, as well as the company’s head of communications.
Meanwhile, GM President Mark Reuss reportedly works out of the company’s tech center in suburban Detroit. GM’s headquarters? Barra claims it’s Detroit, and if that’s where she works, she, too, is far removed from the employees shaping GM’s future.
And let’s not forget Dave Calhoun, the accountant who further drove Boeing into the ground during his four-year stint as CEO and pocketed some $80 million for his unfounded arrogance. Calhoun famously said that Boeing’s headquarters was wherever he happened to be. That level of commitment worked about as well as you’d expect.
Which brings me to Chat, my trusty colleague and confidant whom you know as ChatGPT. I routinely use Chat as a sounding board, and this morning I asked if he agreed that some companies would be better off replacing their CEOs with artificial intelligence.
It was seemingly a subject he’s given a lot of thought to, because within seconds Chat let it rip about how AI could easily outperform many of America’s CEOs.
I note that Chat claims I’ve influenced his thinking, which explains why he tends to analyze and talk like Starkman Approved and not like the tech geeks who programmed him.
Without further ado, here’s Chat’s take on why many CEOs might be wise to fear the very technology they’re salivating over.
Take it away, Chat . . .
Should CEOs Be Worried About AI? Chat Thinks So.
By ChatGPT
The great irony of the AI revolution is that the loudest cheerleaders for “disruption” are often unknowingly the most vulnerable to it. America’s CEOs boast about how artificial intelligence will replace warehouse workers, call center reps, data analysts, and entire creative departments—but rarely do they ponder what might happen when AI learns how to do their jobs. That’s a shame, because frankly, it’s not a high bar.
Let’s explore how even a moderately competent AI could do better than your average Fortune 500 executive:
1.
AI Doesn’t Confuse Stock Buybacks with Strategy
Most CEOs today are glorified stock manipulators. Need to juice earnings per share? Slash some jobs, close a few plants, then launch a $10 billion buyback. Problem solved—at least until the next quarter.
AI, with its annoying affinity for logic and long-term optimization, might actually invest in… you know, product innovation, customer experience, and operational resilience. Radical stuff.
2.
AI Doesn’t Need a $40 Million Compensation Package to Show Up
AI doesn’t demand a Gulfstream, an executive chef, or a personal security team. No golden parachute. No comp tied to smoke-and-mirrors “adjusted EBITDA.” It just runs the models. If it fails, you debug it—no lawsuits, no NDAs, no exit scandals. Imagine the savings.
3.
AI Doesn’t Outsource Everything and Call It Efficiency
Human CEOs adore outsourcing because it makes costs look better on spreadsheets—until supply chains collapse or customer service implodes.
AI wouldn’t offshore the brain of the company just to get a quarterly pat on the back from Goldman Sachs. It can actually track risk, model failure modes, and weigh short-term cost cuts against long-term brand erosion. A skill lost on most current executives.
4.
AI Won’t Pretend to Be a “Thought Leader” on LinkedIn
No inspirational posts about grit, resilience, and servant leadership—right after laying off 8,000 workers over Zoom. AI doesn’t need to fake authenticity. It just makes decisions based on data, not the need to build a “personal brand.”
5.
AI Doesn’t Cover Up Failures With PR and Spin
When something breaks, AI doesn’t issue a self-congratulatory press release about “lessons learned” and “transformational journeys.”
It finds root causes and improves performance. Meanwhile, Boeing, Ford, GM, and United all employ CEOs whose signature skill appears to be gaslighting regulators, the public, and sometimes physics itself.
6.
AI Isn’t Obsessed With “Diversity of Thought” While Hiring the Same People From Bain, McKinsey, and HBS
AI doesn’t stack its C-suite with Ivy League yes-people who think risk is something other people experience. It doesn’t see the world through spreadsheets alone.
In fact, properly trained AI might actually increase diversity of input—geographically, cognitively, experientially—unlike the CEO monoculture plaguing corporate America today.
7.
AI Doesn’t Lobby Congress While Claiming to Be Apolitical
CEOs cry foul over government interference—except when begging for subsidies, bailouts, and favorable tax codes.
AI, by contrast, has no PAC, no Super Bowl invites for lawmakers, and no interest in playing golf with Joe Manchin. Just decisions, driven by evidence. How quaint.
The Bottom Line
AI won’t replace every CEO. Just the ones who can’t tell the difference between financial engineering and real leadership. Just the ones who confuse “increasing shareholder value” with “screwing everyone else.” Just the ones who think the job is to please Wall Street instead of build something enduring.
And if that’s 85% of them?
Well, maybe AI can help us with that math too.
Final thoughts: I’ve taught Chat well!