AI for Meeting Transcription? Maybe Not.

At Ask a Manager, Alison Green fields a question (Item 2) from someone who wants to use AI for meeting transcription at work, but would have to convince his boss that it's a good idea.

Green's reply is pretty good, especially regarding why that might not be the best idea:

It's really your boss's prerogative to decide that the tool is a security or legal risk, even if AI transcription tools are allowed in the broader organization -- and it might be a very valid concern, particularly in a healthcare context. There have been quite a few problems with AI transcription, including making up entire sections of conversations that never happened and getting nuance wrong enough that the entire meaning is changed. [links in original]

This alone would give me reservations about this use of AI, but the letter generated lots of other good responses from commenters, one of which stood out:

AI may make things run more smoothly in a meeting but it adds work afterward because you absolutely MUST check it for errors and omissions.

An example from my own experience was a recent doctor's appointment. They've switched from a straight transcription app to an AI one. The AI transcribed A1C as ADHD and then invented an entire conversation that never happened -- that my father had some kind of dementia when we didn't even discuss my parents or dementia. I only discovered it because I happened to read the chart notes online. I like the transcription because it allows my doctor and I to really have a conversation. But the AI is dangerous and needs to be managed accordingly. [bold added]

The need to edit comports with my limited experience with AI-generated transcripts.

Quite a few other comments brought up regulatory, privacy, and legal concerns that the technology introduces when used for this purpose.

While transcription would seem to be a task screaming for an AI solution, it doesn't look ready for wide adoption just yet.

-- CAV