The generation of advertising people who once learned their craft by spec'ing type, attending press checks and being told their headlines were terrible now faces an unfamiliar problem: there may be no one coming up behind them who has had the same experience.

That, in essence, is the warning from D&AD, the London-based organization that has been giving out pencil-shaped awards for creative excellence since 1962. In a report released this week with the somewhat ominous title "AI & Creativity Report 2026: The Cost of the Shortcut," the group argues that the industry is "cutting off its own supply" of future talent by eliminating the entry-level positions where young people traditionally learned what the report calls "human judgement" — the ineffable quality that separates good work from work that is merely competent.

The report, based on 197 conversations with creative leaders in 30 countries and an analysis of more than 10,000 D&AD Award entries, found that the proportion of entries declaring the use of artificial intelligence more than doubled in the past year, reaching 27.6 percent in 2026. (One imagines the proportion that did not declare it is also worth considering.) Generative AI appeared in 56.2 percent of AI-declaring entries overall but in only 44.7 percent of actual winners — a gap the organization interprets as evidence that the tools alone do not produce excellence.

"AI can accelerate execution, but it doesn't replace taste, judgement, curiosity or craft," said Lisa Smith, the D&AD president and global chief design officer at Uncommon Creative Studio. "Those remain the things clients actually pay for."

The report also noted that 70 percent of agencies have not adjusted their pricing despite AI reducing the hours required to complete work, meaning the efficiency gains have flowed largely to clients in the form of faster turnarounds at the same price. Whether this constitutes a business model or a slow surrender was left to the reader.

David Patton, the chief executive at D&AD, put the problem succinctly: "AI has changed what bad work looks like. It's no longer lazy or derivative in any obvious way — it's competent, polished and generic."

The question of how to teach someone the difference between competent and excellent, when competent now arrives by default, is one the industry has not yet answered. But at least someone is asking.

Original story published in campaignlive.com: "D&AD report calls on industry to teach junior talent ‘human judgement’ in wake of AI | Campaign US"