New essay in @ForeignAffairs with James Manyika and @elerianm on steps that can be taken to help AI deliver on its economic promise, drawing on lessons from cooperative game theory as a guide. Most conversations treat AI as a general-purpose technology (GPT), and some compare it to the Industrial Revolution. But we think it is more than that: it is also a method for creating new inventions, like the microscope or the scientific method. Economist Zvi Griliches famously called such discoveries IMIs--inventions of a method of invention. Seen this way, AI carries the potential of the Industrial Revolution and the Enlightenment combined. Yet realizing this potential is a coordination problem. Delivering on the promise of AI requires progress not just on furthering its capabilities, but on building out infrastructure, deep adoption across the economy, and buy-in from many different groups. This is unlikely to happen if people do not feel they have a stake in the upside of the technology. Promises of abstract scientific and medical breakthroughs in the future won't change this when anxieties about near-term disruption are running hot. Rather than treating AI like a zero-sum game, we argue that it is useful to look to cooperative game theory as a guide. Because models, compute, organizational change, and human upskilling are strong complements, AI has the structure of a "convex game": Each group that joins makes everyone else's contributions more valuable. That makes it possible to form stable coalitions of workers, communities, firms, and developers where incentives are aligned and everyone has a stake in the gains. The cooperative approach will of course not be easy, but we will make the case that coalitions can start small and grow as the mutual gains become tangible. We provide concrete examples of how this can be done in practice and at scale. Link to essay here: foreignaffairs.com/guest-pas…