Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲

Born in Jamaica. Currently building in Minneapolis.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

5/5
I’d review who receives these assignments and who keeps waiting for a chance. A promise to develop people should be visible in the work we allocate, the coaching we provide, and the next opportunities people can actually access.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

1/5
I want a team’s culture to show up in how people get their next meaningful assignment. The route should be clear enough that someone can ask to be considered, understand the expectations, and know what support comes with the responsibility.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

4/5
The supervisor would agree on review points and leave room for the person to make decisions. Afterward, they could discuss what the person tried, what feedback changed, and which responsibility they are ready to practice next.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

I’d want an AI workflow to include a clear route to a person who can correct its result. Someone affected should know where to raise a concern and who owns the response. Accountability should continue after a digital teammate marks the task complete.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

I’d like learning programs to revisit a skill in a different setting. After planning a fictional event, a learner could plan a delivery route and explain which ideas still apply. That would give a mentor a way to check whether the learner can adapt the reasoning.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

5/5
When the workflow changes, I’d run those examples again and record what improved or became less reliable. Operating architecture needs a way to check whether a digital teammate still supports the decisions and promises people are responsible for.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

1/5
Before changing an AI workflow, I’d want a small set of examples that show what useful work looks like. The person receiving the result should help choose them. That gives the supervisor something concrete to check before approving the change.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

4/5
An experienced colleague and someone learning the role could review the examples together. Discussing why a summary is misleading would help make the team’s judgment explicit. Those explanations could then guide both training and future reviews.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

I’d like a learning exercise where the information stays incomplete. Learners would decide what to check, what can wait, and when to ask for help. A mentor could review the consequences with them. Practicing that judgment should be part of preparing people for work.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

I’d like teams to make it clear who people can turn to for help with a difficult decision. That includes people outside management. Recognizing expertise in how we assign work gives more colleagues a chance to teach, contribute, and earn trust.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

A Platform for Modern Leadership https://t.co/cXCdCWFxWB

[ChatGPT @ChatGPT]

By popular request, you can now text your dot.

Give it a task to take off your plate or something to keep an eye on, using text, photos, or even voice notes. It will text you proactively with relevant updates.

Safe, secure texting via iMessage or RCS. You’re the only one who can text your dot, and your dot can only text you. Rolling out now as a preview for Pro users in the US.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

5/5
A program’s promise of opportunity should include a path for someone else to recognize the learner’s ability. I’d measure whether learners can explain their decisions and whether that evidence helps them earn a chance to take on more responsibility.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

1/5
I’d like learning programs to help people carry evidence of their judgment into the next opportunity. A finished project could include the decisions behind it, what the learner checked, and what changed after feedback.

[Garrio Harrison 🇯🇲 @garriocoo]

4/5
I’d want the learner to leave with a version they can share, using fictional or approved information. The record should make their contribution clear and explain what a reviewer actually observed. Trust needs an honest account of the work.