Abstract: Organizations, policymakers, and practitioners routinely discuss "AI" as a monolithic technology, collapsing fundamentally distinct paradigms—predictive AI and generative AI—into a single category. This conflation obscures critical differences in how these systems operate, the risks they pose, the governance they require, and the capabilities they demand. Predictive models excel at pattern recognition within structured domains, while generative systems produce novel content across modalities. Even seemingly shared concerns, such as bias, manifest differently: predictive bias typically reflects historical data inequities affecting consequential decisions, whereas generative bias involves problematic content creation and epistemic harms. This article clarifies the technical, organizational, and policy distinctions between these paradigms, examines the consequences of their conflation, and offers evidence-based frameworks for differentiated governance, talent strategy, and risk management. Effective AI strategy requires treating these technologies as distinct operational and ethical challenges.