This is the first in a series exploring what it means to be a human-centered organization when artificial intelligence is reshaping every aspect of work, society, and even humanity itself.
We stand at an inflection point unlike any in human history. Not because we haven’t faced technological revolutions before — I’ve witnessed several in my four decades observing how technology reshapes society — but because the speed and scale of AI transformation completely overwhelms our ability to adapt. Winston Churchill captured this dynamic perfectly in 1943: “We shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us.” This insight reflects a persistent historical truth: we’ve never really chosen how we want to be transformed; technology has always transformed us, often in unintended ways.
A glance at the history of technologies, their intended uses and actual effects, confirms this pattern. I had a front-row seat to Web 2.0 and the rise of social media, watching as platforms designed to connect us instead amplified division, undermined democratic discourse, and damaged individual mental health in ways their creators never intended. Time and again, technology has transformed us more than we’ve managed to shape it, leaving us to manage the unintended consequences after the damage is done.
We cannot let this happen again — especially when the stakes with AI are exponentially higher and the potential for negative impact so much greater. But there’s reason for hope: it isn’t necessarily too late. Forward-thinking organizations and governments can learn from our past mistakes and make conscious decisions that support their primary obligations of making profits and ensuring the well-being of their citizens.
The question is whether we’ll seize this moment or repeat the same pattern of reactive damage control. My recent conversation with Andrew McLuhan, grandson of media theorist Marshall McLuhan and director of The McLuhan Institute, crystallized something I’ve been wrestling with since my days as a futurist with IBM: instead of letting technology happen to us, we need to consciously design how we want to live AND work with it.
The Speed of Change is the Danger
Andrew shared a powerful observation that cuts to the heart of our current crisis. Throughout most of human history, he explained, all culture and knowledge were transmitted orally — from mouth to ear. The Odyssey, hundreds of typed pages that would take days to recite, was composed and preserved entirely through oral tradition. The constraints of this medium shaped not just how information was shared, but how we thought.
“We speak at around 200 words a minute,” Andrew noted. “I type at about 80 words a minute. I write by hand at about 40 words per minute. These different speeds of words are very tied to your speed of thought. And the speed of thought is very much tied to the quality of thought.” In short, we need to go deeper, not faster.
Now, for the first time in human history, we’re freeing the word from humans entirely — handing it over to algorithms and machines. We don’t yet understand what this fundamental shift will do to how we think, communicate, and relate to each other. We need to slow down.
The printing press took centuries to spread around the world. Today, new AI tools gain millions of users overnight. As Andrew put it, “We don’t have the time to adjust.”
We’ve Seen This Show Before—But Never Like This
Every major technological revolution in my lifetime—the personal computer in the 80s, the internet in the 90s, social media in the 2000s—has followed a similar pattern: tremendous innovation and possibility, followed by widespread displacement, economic upheaval, and social fragmentation. Each time, we’ve eventually bounced back, found a new equilibrium, and created new opportunities.
But this time feels different. This time, we’re not just automating manufacturing or streamlining communication. We’re automating thinking itself. We’re potentially replacing human creativity, judgment, and wisdom with algorithmic efficiency.
And we’re doing this in the context of what many recognize as late-stage extractive capitalism — a system already showing signs of unsustainability. The combination of these two revolutions — technological and economic — creates an existential challenge that demands more than our usual pattern of reactive adaptation.
As Pope Leo XIII understood during the Industrial Revolution, and as Pope John Paul II later emphasized, there is inherent dignity in human work itself. Whether we’re digging ditches or producing television programs, our labor connects us to purpose, community, and meaning. The misuse of AI without concern for human dignity represents a greater threat than any technological revolution we’ve faced.
The Amish Are Right About Something Important
In our conversation, Andrew referenced the Amish communities that made conscious decisions to wall themselves off from certain technologies. “They realize that they have a way of life that is not compatible with a society that’s growing up around it,” he explained.
Most of us can’t make such radical choices. As Marshall McLuhan once told poet W.H. Auden when Auden boasted about not owning a television: “You merely suffer the consequences without enjoying any of the benefits.” Try living without a smartphone today—you’ll quickly discover how technology shapes society, whether you participate or not.
But the Amish example illustrates something crucial: it’s possible to make conscious choices about technology based on values rather than simply accepting whatever innovation offers. What if we could apply this kind of intentional decision-making at organizational and societal levels?
Introducing the H Corp Concept
This is why we’re kicking off a conversation about what we’re calling an “H Corp” — not as a competitor to B Corp certification, but as a framework for defining human-centered organizations in the age of AI.
An H Corp isn’t a legal structure. It’s a commitment to principles, policies, and practices that prioritize human flourishing alongside technological advancement. It’s about drawing clear lines between acceptable, ethical, responsible uses of AI and crossing into territory that leads toward economic collapse.
Think of it like Canada’s “CanCon” regulations—Canadian content requirements that preserve cultural values in broadcasting. What if we could establish similar guidelines for preserving human value within organizations and society in the age of artificial intelligence? I believe we can, and we must.
Some of the questions we need to answer together include:
- What percentage of organizational resources should be dedicated to human labor versus automation?
- Where do we draw the line between responsible and irresponsible uses of AI?
- What regulations should we implement to protect everyone while still allowing for technological advancement?
- What are the values, governance structures, and activities of an organization committed to a human future?
- What will it take to ensure the technological revolution doesn’t leave any human behind?
Why This Conversation Matters Now
Andrew made another crucial point in my interview with him: “Human flourishing is hard to scale.” The meaningful relationships, the quality experiences, the sense of purpose we all crave — these don’t naturally expand with organizational growth or technological efficiency.
But perhaps that’s precisely where AI could help. Instead of using artificial intelligence to replace human judgment, what if we used it to identify patterns of human flourishing at scale? What if we designed systems that enhance rather than diminish our capacity for meaningful work and genuine connection?
The Canadian content model suggests this isn’t naive idealism. When societies decide certain values matter enough to protect, they find ways to build those protections into their systems. We still know this to be true, despite instances where those systems temporarily fail.
An Invitation, Not a Manifesto
I’m not presenting this as a completed framework or final answer. Like the collaborative efforts that defined early internet standards or social media best practices which I helped steward in 2006, this needs to be a collective conversation.
We’re seeing fragments of this dialogue happening already — in responsible AI initiatives, ethical technology movements, academic institutions like Stanford Human AI, local business forums, and at events such as the Artificiality Summit. But these conversations remain scattered. We have a chance to be a unifying force, bringing together diverse voices around a common framework that amplifies, resonates, and raises awareness of our shared concerns and interests.
In September, we’ll be hosting our first live conversation using Thinkscape technology that allows us to harvest wisdom from both prominent voices and everyday people in real-time. We want business leaders and workers, technologists and philosophers, optimists and skeptics, all contributing to the development of the standards and practices that will guide us together into a more prosperous human-led future.
The Choice Before Us
We can continue letting technological change happen to us, remaining reactive and fragmented, and suffer through another painful transition period. Or we can try something different: consciously choosing how we want to be transformed. Consciously choosing how we will use this technology to the benefit of all people instead of a few.
This isn’t about stopping AI development or returning to some romanticized past or even leading to a utopian future (though I believe we can head in that direction). This is about ensuring that as we augment human capabilities with artificial intelligence, we do so in ways that enhance rather than diminish human dignity, creativity, and flourishing.
The stakes couldn’t be higher. But neither could the opportunity. For the first time in history, we have tools powerful enough to address humanity’s greatest challenges — if we’re intentional about how we use them.
What do you think? Let’s co-design what it means to be an H Corp: a human-centered organization. What would be the principles, policies, and practices of such an organization?
Join the Conversation, Support the Movement:
• Participate in our September dialogue – Request an invitation to join business leaders, technologists, and everyday people in defining human-centered organizations within an online conversation
• Follow the series – Subscribe to the Substack for ongoing conversations with leading voices on AI, society, and human flourishing. Read the story of our mission and vision
• Get involved – Join our community working to ensure no human gets left behind in the AI revolution.
Watch the full interview with Andrew McLuhan on our YouTube channelAre they all gonna nail to your upload and promote that I can promote anything that I do anything to help me know that’s kinda what they’re doing what comes down, and stay tuned for upcoming conversations with other thought leaders exploring what it means to keep humanity at the center of technological progress.
