Won’t AI just make employees lazy?
This was a question that a business leader asked me last week and it reflects a nuanced reality.
Like most technological advances, AI's impact depends largely on how we implement and govern it. And — if we’re being honest — we don’t have a great track record of doing that well in our workplaces, which gives rise to the negative viewpoint (despite, I might say, organisations being in a rush to implement AI tools!).
Yet, when deployed thoughtfully, technology (in this case, AI) has the potential to eliminate mundane tasks, freeing employees to focus on complex problem-solving and creative work that requires uniquely human capabilities. Historical parallels suggest technologies that augment human potential typically elevate work rather than diminish it.
However, legitimate concerns exist about AI not only making swathes of roles redundant, but also becoming a thinking shortcut, which is an issue in the education system right now.
When employees outsource cognitive heavy lifting without critical evaluation, skills can atrophy, and there’s a danger that work quality, over the long-term will suffer. The ‘copy and paste’ mentality could indeed foster intellectual laziness and requires discipline from employees not to just ‘skip to the end’.
The dichotomy here is that the more employees rely on AI to do their work, the more replaceable they will become as AI will simply ‘machine learn’ their knowledge and voice.
The critical factor is whether an employee's contribution sits primarily in the realm of what AI can readily replicate. Knowledge workers who simply serve as intermediaries between AI tools and final outputs are at higher risk than those who apply uniquely human capabilities that AI cannot replicate.
The most effective workplace cultures will establish clear boundaries — distinguishing between tasks where AI should accelerate productivity and those requiring critical thinking and deep human engagement.
Rather than making employees universally lazy or universally enhanced, AI has the potential to amplify existing tendencies, making thoughtful implementation essential for positive outcomes. But only if AI implementation is part of a broader evolution of the existing culture and guardrails and good practice principles are agreed in advance.