The integration of AI requires accountability, in addition to innovation.

      Artificial intelligence has already woven itself into the fabric of contemporary life, influencing decisions in ways that often go unnoticed. Amy Trahey, founder of Great Lakes Engineering Group, views this integration as a source of both strength and risk. From her engineering perspective, she recognizes AI as a direct factor in outcomes related to public safety, funding, and long-term trust.

      Trahey's understanding of AI originated outside formal educational frameworks. It surfaced through everyday interactions with technology, such as predictive recommendations and intuitive voice-enabled tools, leading to a significant realization.

      She states, “I recognized how AI is embedded in all aspects of life. Whether I’m watching something on streaming services or talking on the phone only to find ads for those discussions popping up, it’s an integral part of our existence, and it’s advancing faster than we can keep pace with.” In her opinion, this rapid development results in a leadership gap. Organizations are embracing AI on a large scale, and Trahey believes many leaders fail to grasp how quickly their teams are starting to depend on it.

      She references studies indicating that nearly three-quarters of companies now utilize AI in some form, interpreting this as evidence that passive oversight is no longer effective. “You must recognize that your team will use it. This is no longer a question. Therefore, it’s your duty to understand AI and ensure it’s utilized correctly,” Trahey elaborates.

      Education was her initial step towards accepting that responsibility. She took part in a five-week intensive course on AI prompting, applying the same diligence that she brings to her engineering endeavors. This experience transformed her perspective. “It truly is transformative technology. It's analogous to the World Wide Web, but evolving at an even faster rate,” Trahey explains. “It holds tremendous potential for positive change, yet it can also be misused. It ultimately depends on intent and the integrity of the actions taken.”

      At Great Lakes Engineering Group, Trahey emphasizes the importance of balancing efficiency gains with responsibility. She stresses the use of AI to convert complex engineering briefs into clear communication for clients and to produce organized meeting documentation in minutes rather than hours. She believes that the true value lies in enhancing human capability rather than replacing it.

      Nonetheless, oversight remains crucial in her approach. She asserts that no output generated by AI should proceed without human assessment, especially in high-stakes contexts. In her role, which focuses on managing bridge and transportation infrastructure projects, due diligence is paramount.

      “It acts as my assistant and occasionally as an advisor,” Trahey clarifies. “But everything still comes back to me. I review it before it goes anywhere. It’s known to hallucinate, and it often caters to what it thinks you want to hear. This is where human responsibility is key. You cannot take your hands off the wheel.”

      Responsibility also permeates the organizational culture, as Trahey realized early on that AI adoption within her team needed structure rather than limitations. Noticing that younger engineers were already incorporating these tools into their work, she felt compelled to establish formal guidelines. “We design bridges. We’re tackling technically complex projects tied to safety,” she points out. “If people are utilizing AI, I need to understand it to establish policies on what’s acceptable and what isn’t. This is part of leadership; you don’t ignore it. You outline how it should be used.”

      Her framework clearly differentiates between ethical efficiency and misuse. Automating administrative tasks or organizing extensive datasets is seen as appropriate use. In contrast, misrepresenting AI-generated work or exploiting time savings for financial gain indicates a lapse in professional integrity, a point she addresses directly.

      “There are individuals who will use AI and then bill for five hours for work that took five minutes. That’s not innovation; that’s a lack of integrity. When managing taxpayer funds or public safety, this is critical.”

      Her concerns extend to the societal implications as well. Trahey believes that the accessibility of AI introduces new risks necessitating coordinated oversight. “When this powerful technology is available to everyone worldwide, there must be some level of legislative involvement. We need guidelines and accountability. This is no longer just for the technically adept; it’s for everyone,” she remarks.

      Personal experiences also enrich her viewpoint. Observing her son Quinn, who has autism, interact with AI has underscored both its potential and complexities. She appreciates its ability to aid communication for those who struggle to express themselves while remaining conscious of how that interaction is presented. “He views it as something to converse with, and there is value in that,” she notes. “But it’s my role to ensure he understands what it is and isn’t. It’s a tool, not a person. That distinction is crucial.”

      Trahey's approach to AI embodies a consistent principle: innovation should be pursued thoughtfully, supported by education, and regulated by clear standards. She believes that organizations that engage with AI mindfully will be better set to leverage its advantages without risking trust. As the world moves into a new era