Across industries, firms have begun tying the use of Artificial Intelligence to their performance evaluations and promotion decisions. Regardless of opinions, this direction represents a broader shift in the workplace: augmenting your work with AI is no longer optional; it is an expectation.
However, this expectation may put many individuals who are hesitant to adopt the technology into a conflict of interest.
I was chatting with a close friend of mine, a project manager and a writer. For years, she has been strongly opposed to AI from her perspective as an author. Recently, her work introduced this expectation, and, like many companies, she has begun integrating AI into day-to-day operations.
This created a conflict of interest that companies ought to be mindful of when switching to these AI-enabled models. This article aims to outline a mutually beneficial strategy for both firms and individuals.
Firm Strategy
Seek to understand why employees are hesitant about AI adoption. For firms that have already adopted these performance metrics, you must have collected data already about who is and isn’t using AI. Though it’s worth noting, even if an employee is scoring well on this metric, it may not mean that they agree with or are happy with the direction. For that reason, I suggest opening the survey or meeting to everyone who has or will have AI utilization tied to their performance management.
Ask your employees: “For what reasons are you for and/or against the adoption of AI at {insert company name here}?”
It’s most likely that you are going to hear some predictable responses. The hesitancy or dissatisfaction I have observed can often be traced to either of these root causes.
- Efficacy Root-Cause: This is any hesitancy due to barriers that inhibit an employee’s ability to meet their expectations. Some employees may need additional assistance to succeed.
Solution: Firms ought to invest in practical AI-enabled solutions. This may include training sessions, internal workshops, mentoring programs or curated learning resources that demonstrate how AI can augment existing workflows.
- Value Conflict Root-Cause: Independently, an employee at any performance level may have values that conflict with any of AI's implications. If so, your employees may be experiencing cognitive dissonance and are at increased risk of burnout due to these AI expectations.
Solution: There is a growing number of certifications for responsible AI use available on the market. These are great ways to signal responsibility to stakeholders, but they might also be what individuals need to feel comfortable using AI. While there isn’t a single, universally applicable certificate, I recommend coordinating with the relevant employees to select the certification that best suits them. Including employees in decision-making is a strong driver of organizational commitment and change acceptance.
Employee Strategy
As professionals, it is important that we maintain the agent-to-principal relationship. If your employer is forcing you to use AI, we still have a duty to the principal to perform. This doesn’t mean you have to do so blindly. While a certificate is effective, we must educate ourselves on the implications of AI and focus on being stewards of responsible AI usage. I suggest that ethical AI use should also be continuously learned to address the rapidly expanding scope of AI.
The hard truth is that to stay competitive, you need to resolve any internal conflicts around using AI. The productive way forward is engagement, not avoidance. Doing so thoughtfully and responsibly will help you identify the boundaries with AI you need to align your work process with your individual values.
