AI is often blamed for the homogenisation of creative work, the erosion of craft and the threat to jobs. But a new publication from creative production partner MikeTeevee argues that AI did not create these problems. It exposed and accelerated weaknesses that were already embedded in the creative industry.
That is the provocative premise of Brand Perspectives 2026, which draws on interviews with senior in-house creative and marketing leaders at brands including HelloFresh, Wayfair, DoorDash, Intuit, O2 and Verizon. One of its central findings is that, as creative teams gain the ability to generate an almost limitless number of ideas, variations and assets, they are finding it harder to decide what is genuinely worth making.
Decision paralysis and the volume trap
"Some teams are suffering from real decision paralysis," said James Hurst, executive creative director at HelloFresh, "because they can now create an almost infinite number of variations at almost zero cost and in zero time." Hurst also described creatives losing conviction in their own thinking as ideas pass through more rounds of testing, input and consensus.
Mike Pearson, head of creative and promotions at Wayfair, raised a related concern: "In a world where everyone can create more with the same tools, and often with the same inputs, how do you stop everything looking the same?" The report argues that the industry's traditional creative filter was weakening long before AI became mainstream. The ability to generate widely, filter ruthlessly and commit to a strong idea is now under greater pressure because technology has made it cheaper and easier to avoid making a choice.
Ellen Utrecht, founder of MikeTeevee, said the question for creative teams is no longer how many options they can produce. "It's how they decide which ideas deserve to exist. The leaders we spoke to are finding valuable uses for AI, but they're also clear that speed and volume cannot replace taste, judgement or the confidence to make a choice." For those developing this judgement, targeted AI for Creatives training can help teams build the discernment that automation alone cannot provide.
The hidden cost of cutting junior roles
The publication warns that using AI to eliminate junior roles could weaken the future creative leadership pipeline. Those roles are not simply about producing work. They are where people develop the taste, instinct and judgement that take years to build. Removing them saves money in the short term but risks leaving no one ready to lead when senior creatives move on.
It also challenges the assumption that greater speed amounts to genuine transformation. While AI is helping teams produce assets more efficiently, many are still operating within outdated processes. As Thomas Ranese, chief marketing officer at Intuit, observed: "We're all saying AI is making us more efficient, but everyone's working twice as hard as they've ever worked."
What the strongest teams do differently
Despite these concerns, the publication is optimistic about what AI can make possible. The leaders interviewed are using it to reduce operational friction, explore ideas more freely and reclaim time for creativity and craft. They treat AI as a tool that handles repetitive production tasks, not as a replacement for creative direction. The same principle applies to AI Design Courses, which focus on augmenting rather than replacing the designer's eye.
The report's conclusion is that the organisations most likely to thrive will not necessarily be the fastest or most automated. They will be the ones that continue to develop talent, defend standards and trust human judgement.
Why this matters for creatives
The core threat to creative work is not the technology itself. It is the temptation to let speed and volume override taste and conviction. Creatives who can articulate why one idea deserves to exist over a thousand alternatives will become more valuable, not less, as AI tools spread. Your judgement is the filter that automation cannot replicate.
Your membership also unlocks:
