Dive Brief:
- The rapid adoption of workplace artificial intelligence means companies are evolving too quickly to understand how technological changes could affect their organizational future, according to new research from the Coqual Global Lab, which is part of the nonprofit Center for Talent Innovation.
- Just 2 in 5 leaders said they had “an expert understanding of their organization’s strategic priorities for the coming year,” and only 35% said they strongly understood their organizations’ workforce priorities. Less than a third said they strongly understood their customer base, per the report.
- The study suggested that some of the progress companies are making today “could come at the expense of the human capabilities” organizations will need in the future — a rising concern amid the HR space.
Dive Insight:
The study, titled ‘Borrowing from Tomorrow: How to Fight the Hype and Design the Future of Work on Purpose,’ was based in part on responses from 173 organizational decision-makers.
Almost half (49%) of leaders surveyed said that AI governance never, rarely or only sometimes intentionally takes into account “a broad range of human perspectives, experiences, and needs.” Leaders said these needs were also not consistently considered in workflow redesign (47%) and workforce restructuring (44%).
“Organizations are making thousands of choices right now about what to automate, which roles to redesign, what people should continue to do, and what capabilities they will need,” said Emily Gawlak, lead researcher and executive director of CTI’s Global Lab. “Those choices aren’t just changing how work gets done. Together, they’re building the organization that comes next. Leaders have an opportunity to make sure they’re building it on purpose.”
The report discusses what it calls a human talent deficit, meaning “the gap between the human capabilities and contributions an organization will need to create future value and what its operating model enables people to develop, sustain and contribute.”
As more companies implement AI, that disparity can be harder to define, the report added. For example, when a company eliminates an entry-level task or gives that task to AI, that company may also be eliminating the necessary steps an employee needs to develop sound judgment. When a company decides to automate certain processes or speed up managerial decision-making, it could also be removing learning opportunities and getting rid of critical institutional knowledge.
“An entry-level task may be inefficient,” the report said. “It may also be how expertise develops.”
As a result, companies that rush to scale their AI systems may be allowing their organizational futures “to emerge by default,” per the study.
The report also suggested that redesigning workflows involved rethinking which employees were allowed to develop skills and advance their careers into leadership positions. As a result, it found that leaders needed to understand their current organization’s processes before replacing or automating them, so they could intentionally build the next stage of development.
A recent study from The Harris Poll for the University of Phoenix found that only 43% of HR leaders had high confidence that employees had the skills they needed to operate in an automated workplace. In addition, that report found that less than half believed managers at their company could identify, assess and discuss skills gaps and development with their employees.