There is bias in AI. It might not be the bias you thought

Peter Mulford's blog reveals that human favoritism for human-authored content impacts credibility, suggesting transparency to mitigate bias.
May 28, 2024
5
min read
Subscribe to the BTS newsletter
Follow us on Linkedin
Follow BTS on Linkedin
Share

In the expansive dialogue surrounding AI systems, biases often take center stage, typically those woven into the fabric of the machines by their human creators.

Yet, an intriguing facet emerges when evaluating the biases rooted within humans, which are illuminated by the presence of AI. Recently, Yunhao Zhang and Renée Gosline of MIT embarked on an exploration of this phenomenon, probing how the identity of the author—be it human or AI—affects the perceived quality and persuasiveness of content. The verdict? Human Favoritism.

Human favoritism

The experiment:

Zhang and Gosline engineered a series of experiments comprising four distinct conditions to unravel the impact of authorship on content perception:

  • Content crafted exclusively by human experts.
  • Content generated solely by AI.
  • Content initially created by AI, followed by human refinement.
  • Content initially authored by humans, subsequently polished by AI.

In instances where evaluators remained unaware of the authorship (a form of blind evaluation), AI-generated content garnered commendable ratings. However, upon disclosure of the four experimental conditions, a discernible uptick surfaced in the perceived quality and persuasiveness of content intertwined with human involvement.

The insight:

Human favoritism, characterized by a cognitive bias, manifests prominently when individuals are cognizant of human participation in content creation. This predisposition extends its influence beyond evaluators, shaping the perceptions of employees and customers alike. The mere presence of human input infuses content with a heightened sense of value and credibility.

Charting the path forward:

  1. Transparency and disclosure: Embrace transparency by openly disclosing the involvement of AI in content creation. This fosters trust and informs consumers, employees, and stakeholders about the collaborative nature of content production.
  2. Blind evaluations: Implement blind evaluation procedures where possible to mitigate the influence of human favoritism. By withholding information about the authorship of content during assessment, evaluators can provide more objective judgments.
  3. Diverse authorship: Promote diversity in content creation teams, encompassing both human experts and AI systems. By leveraging a diverse array of perspectives, biases can be minimized, resulting in more inclusive and balanced content.
  4. Continuous education: Educate stakeholders about the capabilities and limitations of AI systems. By enhancing understanding and awareness, individuals can make more informed judgments, reducing the impact of biases on content perception.

Navigating the unfolding narrative in the Iron Age of AI has revealed unseen aspects of human behavior. Addressing biases entrenched in AI-generated content demands a candid acknowledgment of human favoritism. Transparency emerges as the critical instrument for navigating this intricate landscape, requiring humans to confront uncomfortable realities to ensure that technological progress is both positive and equitable for people and machines.

Learn how to design conversations that actually move decisions forward.
Download the report

Related content

Four professionals interacting with a table projecting a 3D digital model of a cityscape, with one person wearing augmented reality glasses.
Blog
October 2, 2025
5
min read
A brave new world: What AI means for leadership and culture
Discover how AI is reshaping leadership and culture. Why jazz leadership, simulation, and re-skilling are essential to unlock the full value of AI across teams.

At BTS, we’re constantly challenging ourselves to innovate at speed. And right now, it feels like we’re standing at the edge of something massive. The energy? Electric. The velocity? Unprecedented. For many of us, the current pace feels a lot like the early days of the pandemic: disorienting, high-stakes, and somehow exhilarating. And honestly—it should feel that way. Our teams have been tinkering with AI, specifically LLMs, for the past 2.5 years and it has really been in the last eight months that I can see the profound impact it is going to have for our clients, for our services and our operating model.

The opportunity isn’t about the technology. The world has it and it’s getting better by the minute. The issue is people and people’s readiness to adopt it and be re-tooled and re-skilled. It’s about leadership. AI is deeply personal, it’s surgical. In fact, that’s its genius. So, getting full scale adoption of AI, re-tooling everyone in the company by workflow, so that they can invent new services, unlock new customer value, unlock new levels of productivity, even use it for a better life, is the current race. The central question I’ve been wrestling with, alongside our clients and our own teams, is this:

What does AI actually mean for leadership and culture?

And the answer is clearer by the day: AI isn’t just a new toolset. It’s a new mindset. It demands that we rethink how we lead, how we learn, and how we build thriving organizations that can compete, adapt, and grow.

The productivity paradox revisited

Let’s start with the elephant in the boardroom. There’s been a lot of buzz around AI and its promises. But many leaders have quietly wondered: Will any of this actually move the needle? A year ago, we were asking the same thing. We had licenses. We had curiosity. We had early experiments. But the results were modest, a 1% productivity gain here or there. But by April, we were seeing:

  • 30–80% productivity gains in software engineering
  • 9–12% gains in consulting teams
  • 5%-20% improvements in client success and operations

Just as importantly, the innovation unlock and creativity across our platforms due to vibe coding along with new simulation layers, is leading to new value streams for our clients. This isn’t theoretical. It’s not hype. It’s real. The difference? Adoption, ownership, and a shift in how we lead in order to energize the AI innovation within our teams. The challenge now isn’t whether AI creates value. It’s how to unlock and scale that value across teams, geographies, and business units—and do it fast.

Two Superpowers of the Agentic AI Era

In working with leaders across industries, I’ve come to believe in two superpowers (there are more as well) that will unlock the potential of this AI era: Jazz Leadership and a Simulation Culture.

1. Jazz Leadership

Forget the orchestra (although personally I am a big fan.) The successful team cultures that are innovating with AI feel more like jazz. In jazz, there’s no conductor. There’s no fixed sheet music. There are core bars and then musicians make up music on the spot based on each other’s creativity, building off of each other’s trials, riffs and mistakes, build something extraordinary together. This is how experimenting with AI today, in the flow of work, feels like.

For each activity across a workflow, how can new AI prompts, agents, and GPTs make it better, codify high performance, drive speed and quality simultaneously? How can we try something totally different and still get the job done? How might we re-invent how we work? That’s how high-performing teams operate in the AI era. The world is moving too fast for command-and-control leadership, a perfect sheet of music with one leader who is interpreting the sheet music and directing. What we need instead is improvisation, trust, shared authorship, courage and a playful spirit because there are just as many fails as breakthroughs.Jazz leadership is about creating the conditions where:

  • Ideas can come from anywhere
  • People see tinkering and testing as key to survival and AI failures mean your team is at the edge of what’s possible for your services and ways of working
  • Leaders say, “I don’t have all the answers, but I’ll go first, with you”
  • People feel “I’m behind relative to my peers in the company” and the company sees this as a good sign because the pace of learning with AI means higher chance of success in the new era

At BTS, we recently promoted five new partners who embody this mindset. They weren’t the most traditional leaders. But they were the most generative. They coached others. They experimented and are constantly re-tooling themselves and others. They inspired movement. They are keeping us ahead, keeping our clients ahead and driving our re-invention. Jazz leaders make teams better, not by directing every note—but by setting the stage for breakthroughs. It is similar to the agile movement, similar to how it felt in Covid as companies had to reinvent themselves. It’s entrepreneurial, chaotic and fun.

2. Simulation Culture

The ability to simulate is a super-power in this next agentic, AI era. Simulation has always been part of creating organizational agility, high performance and leadership excellence. But AI and high-performance computing have transformed it into something bigger, faster, and infinitely more powerful. It means that building a simulation culture is within all of our grasp, if we tap its power.Today, companies simulate:

  • Strategic alternatives - from market impact all they way to detailed frontline execution
  • New business, new markets and operating models
  • Major capital deployment e.g. build a digital twin of a factory before breaking ground
  • Initiative implementation
  • Workflows current and future
  • Jobs to assess for talent and critical role readiness
  • Customer conversations and sales enablement motions

With a simulation culture, where you regularly engage in scenario planning and expect preparation and practice as a way of working, billions in capital is saved, cross-functional teams are strengthened, high performance gets institutionalized, win rates increase, earnings and cash flow improves.

Where to get started

Below are a few examples of what leading organizations are doing. Consider testing these in your own organization:

  • Conversational AI bot platforms used to scale performance expectations and the company’s unique culture.
  • Agentic simulations built into tools so people can prepare and practice with 100% perfect context and not a wasted moment.
  • Digital twins of the job created so that certifications and hiring decisions are valid.
  • Micro-simulations spun up in hours to align 50,000 people to a shift in the market or a new operational practice.

Final Thoughts

  • Lead like a jazz musician. Embrace improvisation, courage and shared creativity.
  • Build a simulation culture. Because in a world that’s moving this fast, practice isn’t optional—it’s how we win.

This is a brave new world. Not five years from now. Right now.Let’s shape it—together.

Blog
May 5, 2025
5
min read
BTS acquires Nexo to strengthen its position in Brazil and Latin America
BTS has agreed to acquire Nexo Pesquisa e Consultoria Ltda., Nexo, a boutique consulting firm headquartered in São Paulo, Brazil.

PRESS RELEASE

Stockholm, May 5, 2025

STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN — BTS Group AB (publ), a leading global consultancy specializing in strategy execution, change, and people development, has agreed to acquire Nexo Pesquisa e Consultoria Ltda. (Nexo), a boutique consulting firm headquartered in São Paulo, Brazil.

Nexo has been growing continuously since it was founded in 2017. With revenues of approximately 12 million Brazilian Reales (about 2.1 million USD) in 2024, and a highly capable team of 21 members, Nexo has built a strong reputation for delivering transformative projects in strategy, innovation, leadership, and culture.

Nexo collaborates with a diverse portfolio of clients across sectors such as financial services, consumer goods, and technology, assisting both local and global companies in navigating uncertainty, unlocking creativity, and activating strategy through people. Their work encompasses culture transformation, leadership development, employer value proposition, innovation culture, and vision alignment—supported by proprietary methodologies and frameworks.

BTS currently operates in Brazil, servicing both local and multinational clients with a team of 13 employees. By acquiring Nexo, BTS not only increases the Group’s footprint in Brazil but also adds significant capabilities in culture and transformation services. Nexo’s client base has limited overlap with BTS, creating strong growth potential and synergy opportunities.

“Nexo is known for helping leaders and organizations tackle some of the most complex, human-centered challenges with creativity, empathy, and strategic clarity, and the Nexo team is loved by their clients,” says Philios Andreou, Deputy CEO of BTS Group and President of the Other Markets Unit. “Their products and services complement and elevate our existing offerings, especially in culture transformation, and we are thrilled to welcome the Nexo team to BTS.”
“We’re excited to join BTS. We’ve long admired BTS’s approach and unique portfolio to support large organizations and leaders in connecting strategy with culture across the organization,” says Andreas Auerbach, co-founder of Nexo. “Becoming part of BTS allows us to scale our impact and bring more value to our clients while staying true to our values and culture,” adds Mariana Lage Andrade, co-founder of Nexo.

Upon completion of the transaction, Nexo’s business and organization will merge with BTS Brazil. Nexo’s founders will assume senior management roles in the joint operation.

The acquisition includes a limited initial cash consideration. Additional purchase-price considerations will be paid between 2026 and 2028, provided Nexo meets specific performance targets. A limited portion of any such additional considerations will be paid in newly issued BTS shares. The transaction is effective immediately.

BTS’s acquisition strategy continues to focus on broadening its service portfolio, expanding geographic reach, and enhancing capabilities to support future organic growth in a fragmented market.

For more information, please contact:

Philios Andreou
Deputy CEO
BTS Group AB
philios.andreou@bts.com

Michael Wallin
Head of Investor Relations
BTS Group AB
michael.wallin@bts.com
+46-8-587 070 02
+46-708-78 80 19

Blog
June 27, 2023
5
min read
BTS joins HRC and GLAAD’s “Count Us In” Pledge supporting LGBTQIA+ rights
BTS has signed the Human Rights Campaign and GLAAD’s “Count Us In” Pledge, which affirms support for LGBTQIA+ inclusion and equality.

STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN and SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, June 2023 – BTS has signed the Human Rights Campaign and GLAAD’s “Count Us In” Pledge, which affirms leading businesses and employers’ support for LGBTQIA+ inclusion and equality in the workplace and beyond.

BTS is committed to creating a professional environment that is inclusive, safe, and supportive of people of all gender identities and sexual orientations.

“We stand with the LGBTQIA+ community in the fight for equality,”

says Kathryn Clubb, CEO of BTS North America.

“We loudly celebrate LGBTQIA+ diversity and resilience. As an organization and brand, we are committed to demonstrating this support in publicly visible ways. PRIDE month has given us the opportunity to celebrate, learn, appreciate, and understand the LGBTQIA+ community. We are emboldened to take action, speak up, and be better allies.”

In signing this pledge, BTS commits to taking a stand for its LGBTQIA+ employees and clients. Through advocacy, in partnership with lawmakers on the front lines, BTS is committed to supporting broader social change that will shape the world for the better. In tandem with this pledge, BTS has formed an internal taskforce to lead its ongoing discussion and commitment by identifying opportunities for additional advocacy efforts.

I’m so proud of BTS and the ways in which we are taking a stand to create a better world for our clients, our communities, and our employees,”

said Kathryn Clubb.

“In the words of P. T. Barnum, ‘Comfort is the enemy of progress.’ May we never get too comfortable.”

BTS stands alongside more than 75 other leading businesses, including many clients, in taking this pledge. To learn more about the Pledge and what it stands for, click here.

Related content

Blog
August 14, 2026
5
min read
Every candidate looks like a great hire now. AI made sure of it.
Polish is no longer a hiring signal. See how organizations use role-relevant simulations and predictive validity data to hire for high-stakes roles.

Candidates now arrive at interviews pre-coached by AI, with their resumes optimized to pass every checkpoint. Polish has stopped being a signal. The traditional hiring process was built to read exactly the cues that AI is now best at producing, and the signals hiring managers once relied on have weakened as a result. And for roles where the wrong hire carries real business consequences, losing the ability to tell who will actually perform is not a minor inconvenience. It is a material risk, and it exposes the business to unnecessary turnover, reduced performance, and heavier investment for talent growth and development.

So how do you observe the behaviors that matter most, before someone is in the role?

Not by asking better questions, but rather by putting candidates in situations designed to elicit that behavior.

The limits of predicting from paper

Credentials tell you what someone has done. Structured interviews tell you what someone says they would do. Neither lets you observe what they actually do in the moments that count.

This distinction matters most in client-facing, relationship-driven roles, where the performance gap between a strong hire and a weak one plays out in real business outcomes (revenue, retention, client growth). Organizations that hire at scale in these roles carry that gap across hundreds of decisions at a time.

The better approach is to watch candidates do the work before you hire them. Put them in simulated, role-relevant scenarios, and pair the simulation with a second, different kind of measure so no single method carries the whole decision. That combination is what lets you evaluate real performance before anyone is in the role. Organization-specific simulations provide a clear read on who is ready and capable of performing on day one. In a world of AI-supported candidate signals, the use of simulations makes the process harder to prep for. It is harder to fake. And, when designed well, it is substantially more predictive than other hiring methods.  

What counts as evidence

Claims about predictive power are easy to make. Evidence for them is rarer than you would expect.

A predictive validity study, the kind that links pre-hire assessment scores to how someone actually performs once hired, is some of the hardest evidence to produce and the rarest to see. Many assessments are validated against proxies: another test, or a theoretical model of the role, rather than real results on the job. Connecting scores to concrete business outcomes and doing the statistical work to show the link holds, takes years of shared data and a level of commitment from both the assessment provider and the client that most partnerships never reach. That is precisely why it is worth asking for. A provider who can show how assessment scores track to training completion, retention, and first-year output is offering something categorically different from one who can only show a correlation with another test.

Why simulation holds up where other methods do not

When a candidate sits across from a trained assessor (someone playing the client or prospect on the other side of the conversation) and has to work through a real situation, they cannot rely on a rehearsed answer. The scenario is specific. The stakes feel real. What you see is close to what you would get on the job.

That is the value of simulation-based assessment: it does not test what candidates know about the role.

It shows how they use what they know when a real person is on the other side of the conversation, before the stakes are real.

For roles that carry significant business responsibility, this distinction is the whole game. The cost of the wrong hire in a high-stakes client-facing role is not just a missed quota for a quarter - It plays out in relationships that do not develop, clients who leave, and productivity losses that compound over time. Getting those hiring decisions right, at scale, with consistency, requires methods that are built for predictive accuracy, not just candidate experience or hiring speed.

What this means for how organizations think about hiring

Most organizations are still optimizing the wrong things in their hiring process. They invest heavily in employer branding, application flow, and interview structure, all of which matter, but less in the core question: does our hiring process actually predict who will succeed in this role?

AI has sharpened the stakes here. If every candidate can present as polished and prepared, screening based on presentation becomes less useful. What holds up is direct observation of the behaviors that the job requires.

A few principles worth building from:

  • Measure what the job requires, not what is easy to measure. Cognitive tests and personality questionnaires have their place, but they do not look much like the job. The closer the assessment is to the actual work, the better it predicts performance in it.
  • Ask what your assessment predicts. Training completion? Retention? First-year output? Most organizations cannot answer that question today, largely because providers have rarely been asked to prove it. It is a fair thing to ask for.
  • Take the human element seriously. In a simulation, a candidate is having a real conversation, responding in real time, navigating a situation that requires judgment. Even with the help of AI, that is hard to game. And it remains one of the strongest predictors of on-the-job performance available.

The data exists to make hiring decisions more accurate, fairer, and more directly tied to business outcomes. For organizations operating in high-stakes roles at scale, there is too much on the line to rely on methods that cannot hold up to that standard.

You may be interested in BTS’ thought leadership in the five talent shifts AI is forcing now.  

Blog
July 31, 2026
5
min read
El GPS no maneja el auto. La IA cambió el mapa, no el viaje…(ES)
La IA ya no es una ventaja competitiva en ventas. Descubre por qué el verdadero diferencial está en el criterio comercial, el conocimiento del negocio y la capacidad de construir relaciones de confianza.

La IA ya forma parte del día a día de las ventas. Hoy cualquier asesor puede llegar a una reunión con datos, tendencias e insights generados en segundos. Sin embargo, disponer de más información no garantiza conversaciones de mayor valor.

A través de una experiencia real con un consultor comercial, este artículo explica por qué la inteligencia artificial funciona como un GPS: ayuda a interpretar el entorno, pero no conduce la conversación ni entiende las prioridades del cliente.

En este artículo descubrirás:

  • Por qué el acceso a la información ya no supone una ventaja competitiva.
  • La importancia del business acumen para interpretar los datos con criterio.
  • Cómo hablar el lenguaje del cliente genera credibilidad y diferenciación.
  • Por qué las relaciones B2B evolucionan hacia relaciones P2P basadas en la confianza.
  • Qué capacidades consultivas seguirán siendo exclusivamente humanas incluso en la era de la IA.

La tecnología seguirá evolucionando, pero la ventaja competitiva estará en quienes sean capaces de combinar inteligencia artificial con conversaciones centradas en el cliente, pensamiento estratégico y relaciones de largo plazo.

Blog
July 15, 2026
5
min read
Why leadership needs less jargon
Why do leaders rely on business jargon? The answer may surprise you. This article explores the hidden ways leadership language shapes how others understand, trust, and respond to leaders.

Leadership is the work of creating shared understanding, and language is the primary tool for doing it. Yet we spend remarkably little time examining our words. Every decision, expectation, priority, and piece of feedback reaches another person through words. If those words aren't doing the job, neither is the leadership.

The lighthouse

Some years ago, a large company hired a strategy consulting firm to rethink its leadership model. The firm came back with a beautifully produced framework built around a central metaphor: the lighthouse.

Leaders, the model declared, should be lighthouses.

The metaphor quickly found its way into playbooks, performance reviews, onboarding decks, and town halls. People repeated it with the confidence of those who had paid a lot of money for it.

There was just one problem: nobody could agree on what a lighthouse was supposed to do.

Was it warning people away from danger? Guiding them toward a destination? Standing firm while everything else changed?

Eventually, the company hired another team to translate the metaphor into specific, observable leadership behaviors.

It was an expensive way to discover that a word everyone confidently repeated wasn't creating nearly as much shared understanding asthey thought.

Why jargon prevails

  • Parking lot that
  • Double-click
  • Close the loop

Business jargon survives because it’s largely designed to manage social risk. Using it signals, I know how this world works. It demonstrates membership, competence, and credibility.

Business is messy, and leaders don't always have complete information. Abstract language lets us project confidence while preserving flexibility.

Altitude without traction

Specific language creates accountability. The more specific you are, the easier it is for people to disagree, question your thinking, orhold you accountable. That's part of the appeal of jargon. It creates distance between the speaker and the detail. The more abstract and elevated your language, the more strategic you sound.

A 2020 study by Harvard Business School professors Laura Huang and Andy Wu, published in the Academy ofManagement Journal, analyzed over 1,000 early-stage startup pitches and found that founders who spoke in abstract, visionary terms were significantly more likely to advance in the funding process.

A separate study, published in Applied Cognitive Psychology in 2025, found the other side: jargon raises how credible a speaker appears and lowers how much the audience retains.

The very language that helps people see you as a leader can make you less effective once you're leading.

The most trusted leaders tend to be the ones who resist impressive-sounding language and say the plainest version of what they mean.

In fact, four words probably do more for a leader's standing than any carefully crafted message: I made a mistake. Not "we encountered some headwinds," not "there were learnings from this experience," but the plain version.

The cost of comfort

When a conversation gets uncomfortable at work, it almost always feels easier to soften your message than to say exactly what you mean. You hedge, add qualifiers, cushion the point with extra reassurance, or leave the hardest part unsaid. Most of the time, you mean well. You don't want to discourage someone, damage the relationship, or create unnecessary conflict. The conversation becomes less uncomfortable for a moment, but the work often becomes harder afterward.

Amy Edmondson, Novartis Professor of Leadership and Management at Harvard Business School and author of The Fearless Organization, found that the fear of making a negative impression pushes people to stay silent exactly when clarity is most needed. According to her research, silence is one of the most consistent predictors of teams that miss problems early and never learn from them. The friction avoided in the meeting resurfaces later, at greater cost.

KimScott, former executive at Google and Apple and author of Radical Candor, calls this ruinous empathy: softening your message to protect someone's short-term feelings comes at the cost of the clarity they need. Her argument is simple and uncomfortable: clear, direct communication, even when it is hard, is an act of care.

The quiet power of saying what you mean

None of this is an argument for bland, colorless language.Vivid, precise writing does the opposite of jargon: it sharpens meaning instead of hiding it. Before reaching for a word, pause on two questions:

  • What do I mean by it? 
  • What will my audience hear? 

A surprising amount of corporate language wouldn't survive those two questions.

Leaders have more influence over language than they often realize. Whatever tone, vocabulary, and level of directness they model becomes the standard everyone else copies. Word choice is one of the quietest ways leaders shape culture.

This matters even more as we hand our language to AI. These tools can already learn to write in our voice. The question now is whether we've been deliberate enough about that voice in the first place to like what we see.