Quick Takeaways
- A flashy AI debut: Macmillan introduced NOA (“No Ordinary Assistant”) with balloons, banners, and doughnuts—an entrance some human assistants found offensive.
- Use it, but check it: Staff were encouraged to use NOA for writing, research, ideas, and even performance goals, despite warnings it could hallucinate.
- Trust and usefulness concerns: Employees questioned how much manuscript content to enter, and several said NOA was unreliable and largely unused.
- NOA is gone; Gemini is next: Macmillan ended NOA in 2025 and began exploring Google Gemini, but staff found its submission-letter evaluations unhelpful.
A festive launch, with a mixed message
In January 2024, Macmillan welcomed NOA, short for “No Ordinary Assistant,” with balloons, banners and doughnuts at its Lower Manhattan headquarters. The celebration struck some human assistants as offensive. The name seemed to cast their work as ordinary.
The company described NOA as a private workplace chatbot built by Chaptr, a German software firm backed by Macmillan’s parent company. Staff heard that they could enter company information without sharing it with outside parties. Yet trainers also warned that NOA could invent facts and that people must check its work.
Useful ambitions, uneven results
Macmillan encouraged employees to try NOA for emails, marketing research, copy and brainstorming. It also urged staff to use the tool to draft performance-review goals. Workers could adjust its tone, from lighthearted to sarcastic.
The promise was broad. The results, several employees said, were not. Some found the chatbot unreliable and unhelpful, and one described its quality as poor. Staff also received guidance to paste only a portion of authors’ manuscripts into the system. That limit reflected a real concern: Publishing depends on protecting creative work.
What adoption requires
In October 2025, Macmillan told staff that Chaptr would end NOA. Since then, leaders have worked to bring Google Gemini into publishing tasks. Some editors tested Gemini on literary-agent submission letters, but one editor called the evaluations useless.
The episode offers a practical lesson. A lively launch can draw attention, but it cannot guarantee trust or daily use. AI tools may help with routine tasks, provided they protect sensitive material and save time. In publishing, however, human judgment remains essential—and the tool must prove its value in the work itself.
Discover More Technology Insights
Learn how the Internet of Things (IoT) is transforming everyday life.
Discover archived knowledge and digital history on the Internet Archive.
AITechV1
