AI won't give you time back. Here’s the proof.

Something happened on a coaching call last week I want to share with you.

A client told me their team started using AI tools—copilots, summarizers, automated workflows—and their output had genuinely improved.

Faster research.

Cleaner documentation.

Less time on repetitive tasks.

Cool, right?

You’d be surprised to learn how many PMs are wishing they could have all this stuff.

Because these sound like good wins!

Except that they aren’t entirely a win.

My client’s leadership team saw the allure of improved output and raised expectations.

More initiatives.

More ownership.

More scope—with the same headcount.

The AI didn't buy them time. It bought them more work.

This is part of my leading hypothesis for the increase in PM and Engineering job listings we’ve seen in 2026 so far.

There are companies who are betting they can do more with less.

Companies betting they can do more with what they’ve got.

And then there are companies betting they can do a lot more with more.

Here’s the problem, though:

Teams experimenting with AI outside of work hours.

Leaders assuming output can scale without cost.

PMs absorbing scope creep because "you've got the tools now."

And this assumption that because you’ve got access to these tools you’re magically 10x more productive overnight and have it all figured out.

Wrong.

The expectation trap

Here's the pattern:

AI tools make certain tasks faster. That's real.

But instead of using that efficiency to go deeper on strategy, build better relationships, or think more clearly about trade-offs, the time gets backfilled quickly.

More features. More documents. More "quick wins" that somehow never end (and still aren’t always ‘quick’).

The assumption from leadership is simple: if the tool saves 5 hours, you now have 5 more hours of capacity**.**

But that's not how good product work works.

The best PMs don't need more hours. They need clarity on which work actually matters.

And that's the part AI can't do for you.

Not well, at least.

It certainly will try if you ask it to (don’t do that).

The skill AI can't replace

AI is brilliant at structure, synthesis, and speed.

It's not brilliant at knowing when to push back on a priority. Or how to run a trade-off conversation with your VP. Or when to say, "If we do X well, here's what we need to stop, slow down, or delegate."

Those are PM skills.

Specifically, they sit in the territory of stakeholder management, strategic thinking, and prioritization.

Most PMs have never formally assessed which of these skills they're strong on and which ones are gaps.

They feel it. They sense something's off when a conversation doesn't land or a roadmap gets challenged.

But they can't name the gap.

So they default to what they already know: ship more, move faster, learn the latest tool.

That's not growth. That's just volume.

What to work on

Career growth comes down to targeted skill development—not doing more of the same.

Once you can see what skills matter to your own situation, you can build a proper plan.

You stop saying yes to everything because you know what really builds your career.

You stop waiting for vague feedback because you've already got a plan.

And you stop confusing "busy" with "growing."

I wrote about stacking your impact a few weeks ago. Having a targeted skill development plan is the foundation underneath it.

You can't stack impact if you don't know which skills to build it on.

Here's how to find out

I'm putting together my next workshop where we'll do exactly this.

Let me know if you want to hear about it when spots open up.

AI might be raising the bar but you get to decide which skills clear it.