Every company is trying to get better at prompt engineering. Better prompts, better outputs, better workflows, better AI agents. That matters, but it’s only half the conversation. The bigger leadership question is this: how do we get better thinking from the humans? As AI becomes more embedded in the way we work, one of the biggest risks is not that people will use it too much. It’s that human judgment will quietly go unused. Meetings get faster. Memos get cleaner. Strategy decks look more polished. But fewer people stop to ask: What did the AI miss? What did it get technically right but contextually wrong? What human experience, intuition, or moral judgment is being left out? That’s why I’ve been thinking about a concept I call Human Prompting. If prompt engineering is the art of getting better outputs from machines, Human Prompting is the art of getting better thinking from people. It means asking questions that activate the things AI cannot do: disagree when the room is wrong, use lived experience, make ethical judgments, tell the uncomfortable truth, bring real empathy, take ownership, and slow down when speed creates bad decisions. A few questions every leader should be asking in AI-enabled work: Where did you disagree with what AI produced? What did the AI get technically right but contextually wrong? What are we optimizing for that we actually shouldn’t be optimizing for? Who gets hurt if we’re wrong about this? What are we treating as an abstraction that is actually someone’s livelihood? What would a 20-year veteran know that the model would never know? AI will make organizations faster. That does not automatically make them wiser. The companies that win won’t simply be the ones with the best AI tools. Most organizations will have access to similar technology. The real advantage will belong to the companies that keep human judgment alive inside AI-powered decisions. This comes from a paid piece I published on Future Ready Leadership. Read full version here: greatleadership.substack.com…