Build a Thriving Culture—AI-Powered Strategies for Today’s Leaders

This entry is part 9 of 29 in the series Artificial Intelligence for Writers
TL;DR: Every few months a new article tells executives to use ChatGPT for internal communications. Draft your all-hands with AI. See why AI writing is soulless. Let it write your performance reviews. Have it generate your crisis memos. The advice sounds efficient. It is also dangerous. After ghostwriting 54 books for executives, I see the same communication problems in manuscripts that plague their companies, and they are rarely about word choice. Here is how to build a thriving culture without outsourcing your voice to a machine.

Every few months, a new article appears telling executives to use ChatGPT for their internal communications. Draft your all-hands speech with AI. Let it write your performance reviews. Have it generate your crisis memos. The advice sounds efficient. It’s also dangerous.

I’ve ghostwritten over 54 books for executives, and the communication problems I see in manuscripts are the same ones that plague their companies. The issue is rarely word choice or grammar. It’s that executives don’t know what they actually want to say, and no AI tool fixes that.

The Real Communication Problem

Most executive communication fails for one of three reasons: the leader hasn’t clarified their own thinking, they’re avoiding the hard part of the message, or they’re performing authority instead of exercising it.

AI makes all three worse.

When a CEO doesn’t know what they think about a layoff, asking ChatGPT to “draft an internal memo addressing layoffs with sensitivity and clarity” produces something that sounds thoughtful without containing any actual thought. The memo lands in inboxes, employees read it, and they feel exactly what they felt before: that leadership is hiding behind polished language instead of being straight with them.

Employees can smell ghost-written corporate communication. They’ve been reading it their entire careers. Adding AI to the process just makes the emptiness arrive faster.

Where AI Actually Helps

AI is useful for executives in the same way it’s useful for writers: as a tool that handles mechanical tasks so you can focus on the work that requires judgment.

Summarizing meeting notes so you can write a focused follow-up instead of reconstructing the conversation from memory. Organizing survey responses into themes so you can see patterns before crafting your response. Pressure-testing a draft by asking what objections employees might raise, then deciding which ones to address. Catching inconsistencies between what you said in Monday’s email and what you’re about to say in Friday’s town hall.

None of this is authorship. It’s preparation. The executive still has to decide what to say and stand behind it.

Where AI Fails

AI cannot tell you what you believe. It cannot navigate the specific political dynamics of your leadership team. It doesn’t know that your VP of Engineering will read “we’re exploring restructuring” as a direct threat to her department, or that your CFO will interpret “innovative approaches to efficiency” as code for the budget cuts he’s been fighting against for six months.

Context is everything in executive communication, and AI has none of yours.

AI also can’t do the thing that matters most in a crisis: be honest when honesty is uncomfortable. The best crisis communication I’ve seen from executives was blunt, specific, and clearly written by a human who was willing to own the situation. The worst was smooth, empathetic-sounding, and obviously generated by someone who wanted to appear caring without actually committing to anything.

The Performance Review Problem

Using AI to draft performance reviews is particularly risky. A review is one of the few moments where an employee gets direct, personal feedback from their leader. If that feedback reads like it was generated from a template, the employee knows it, and whatever trust existed between them erodes.

“Draft feedback for an employee who met goals but needs to improve teamwork” produces generic advice about collaboration and communication skills. What the employee actually needs to hear is that they talked over three colleagues in the Q3 planning meeting and that two people have asked not to be assigned to their projects. That specificity requires a human who was in the room and cares enough to say the hard thing.

What Executives Should Actually Do

Clarify your thinking before you write anything. If you can’t explain your message in two sentences to a trusted colleague, you’re not ready to communicate it to the company. No tool fixes unclear thinking. It just decorates it.

Write the hard part yourself. The sentence you’re most tempted to hand off to AI is almost always the sentence that matters most. I keep the rest of this together in my Leadership Hub. If you’re announcing layoffs, the employees being laid off deserve to hear the reason in your words, not words that sound like yours.

Use AI for preparation and mechanics, not for voice and judgment. Let it organize your notes, check your facts, and flag inconsistencies. Then write the message yourself, or work with a human who can capture your voice and push back when your thinking is fuzzy.

Accept that good communication takes time. The executives who communicate well aren’t faster than everyone else. They’re more willing to sit with discomfort, think through implications, and say what they mean instead of what sounds safe.

The Bigger Picture

The rush to automate executive communication reflects a misunderstanding of what communication is for. It’s not about producing polished text. It’s about building trust, and trust comes from specificity, honesty, and the willingness to be accountable for what you say.

AI can help you get there faster by handling the tasks that don’t require your judgment. It cannot replace the judgment itself. Leaders who understand this distinction will communicate better than leaders who hand their hardest conversations to a prompt.

If your communication challenges go deeper than word choice, if you’re trying to articulate a vision, document a legacy, or tell a story that matters, that’s a conversation worth having.

Frequently Asked Questions

Should executives use AI to write internal communications?
Carefully, and never as a full replacement for their own voice. AI can help organize thoughts or draft a first pass, but all-hands speeches, performance reviews, and crisis memos carry trust and tone that employees read closely. Outsourcing those wholesale to a machine produces communication that feels hollow exactly when authenticity matters most.
Why is AI-written leadership communication risky?
Because culture is built on the sense that leaders mean what they say. AI-generated messages tend toward smooth, generic language that reads as evasive or impersonal, and employees notice. In sensitive moments, a crisis, a review, a major announcement, that hollowness erodes the trust the communication was supposed to build.
How should leaders actually use AI for communication?
As a thinking aid, not a ghost. Use it to brainstorm structure, test clarity, or get unstuck, then write or heavily rework the message in your own voice. The goal is communication that is clearly yours, informed by the tool but not authored by it, especially anywhere trust and culture are on the line.

📝 Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this blog post are solely those of Richard Lowe and are based on personal experience and research. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as professional legal, financial, accounting, or business advice. Always consult with qualified professionals before making important business or legal decisions. Richard Lowe is not a lawyer, accountant, or licensed professional advisor, and this content does not establish any professional relationship.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *