Zuckerberg and Dorsey want to clone themselves with AI — to lead from anywhere

Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey have independently arrived at the same idea: AI can become an extension of the CEO — act, make decisions, and keep a finger on the pulse where the leader cannot physically be present. The concept is based on AI agents trained on a specific top manager's thinking style, priorities, and decisions. They can review code before review, participate in planning meetings, respond to internal requests, analyze team metrics — and do all this in the name of or in the spirit of their "original."

For a large company where the CEO cannot physically cover everything, this looks like an attractive solution to the scaling problem. Zuckerberg has long spoken about Meta moving toward a model where some work of junior specialists will be performed by AI. The next step is AI that represents the CEO itself: participates in product discussions, conveys his views to the team, evaluates alignment of initiatives with strategy.

This is not automation of routine — this is an attempt to scale the leader's personality. Dorsey, in turn, is known for his radical views on work organization. At Block, he experiments with decentralized teams where decisions are made quickly and without bureaucratic layers.

An AI agent as the "voice of the founder" fits into this logic: there is no need to wait for a meeting with the CEO — the system already knows what he would say. Despite all the differences in styles, both visions are united by one thing — enhanced control. Not in the sense of surveillance, but in the sense of managerial reach: the CEO gains the ability to be "everywhere" without physical presence.

This changes the very nature of corporate hierarchy. If before the limiter on a top manager's influence was time and attention, now this barrier is beginning to disappear. Critics point to the flip side: when AI speaks "in the name of" the leader, there is a risk of distortion, loss of live contact with the team, and an illusion of presence where real human decision-making is needed.

Employees may get not access to the CEO, but only to his simulacrum — accurate enough to substitute, but not alive enough to catch the nuances. Nevertheless, the trend is clear. The concept of "AI as an extension of leadership" is the next stage after AI assistants and AI employees.

The question is no longer whether CEOs will use AI to manage, but how transparently they will communicate this to their teams — and where the boundary lies between enhancement and substitution.