In this Productivity like a Pro Podcast Episode by the Paperless Movement®, Tom Solid and Paco Cantero dive deep into the ongoing debate of AI-driven versus manual note-taking during meetings. Drawing from years of firsthand experience with AI meeting assistants like Fireflies, MeetGeek, Granular, and built-in tools from ClickUp and Loom, they evaluate the real-world effectiveness of these tools compared to traditional, human-led note-taking.
The Promise and Pitfalls of AI Meeting Assistants
AI meeting assistants have become ubiquitous in professional settings, with tools offering automated summaries, timestamps, and even action point extraction. While promising in theory, Tom and Paco reveal that these tools often create friction instead of reducing it. In many cases, AI-generated summaries miss crucial context or fabricate action items that were never discussed—leading to confusion, miscommunication, and wasted time.
ClickUp and Loom now offer native AI note-taking, and apps like Granular attempt to combine live notes with transcripts for more accurate summaries. However, the technology still falls short when nuance, tone, and meeting context are critical. The duo warns that relying solely on AI to capture and interpret meeting content can be counterproductive, especially when errors go unnoticed or action items are inaccurately identified.
The Value of Manual Notes and Contextual Thinking
Paco emphasizes the mental clarity and control that comes with manual note-taking. By jotting down points that make sense in real time, professionals retain better understanding and can confirm important items on the spot. Manual notes also carry implicit context that AI tools can’t replicate—like interpreting tone, gestures, or subtext in conversations.
Rather than trusting AI blindly, Paco advocates for a balanced approach: use AI tools to complement—not replace—your Personal Knowledge Management and Business Knowledge Management systems. This hybrid strategy ensures that critical information is captured accurately and stored in the right system, whether it’s Task Management or Project Management.
Why a System Must Come First
Both Tom and Paco agree: a well-structured productivity system must precede the implementation of AI or automation. Without a reliable foundation, AI tools merely scale inefficiencies. They reference the ICOR® methodology as the backbone of their productivity setup—ensuring that actions, information, and outcomes are captured and executed flawlessly.
The illusion that AI can build and manage a pro-level productivity system without human oversight is, as Tom bluntly states, a marketing scam. From auto-scheduling to task prioritization, AI features often introduce more noise than signal—especially for those who haven’t yet mastered their workflows manually.
When AI Becomes Useful
Despite the skepticism, there are use cases where AI shines. Recurring workflows, such as discovery calls or form-based data capture, can benefit from structured AI-driven data extraction. When paired with the right templates and predefined expectations, AI can automate the mundane and free up human bandwidth for strategic thinking.
Still, these tools are most effective when used by professionals who understand their systems deeply and can guide AI accordingly. As Paco notes, trust is everything in a productivity system. If you can’t trust the AI to be accurate and context-aware, it’s better to rely on your own optimized processes.
If you’re ready to take control of your productivity and build a reliable, end-to-end system with the right balance of automation, AI, and human insight, join the Paperless Movement® Membership. Inside, you’ll gain access to expert-led courses in Note-Taking, Task Management, Project Management, and Personal Knowledge Management built around the ICOR® framework.
