#491 Will AI Take Your Job Away? What Business Leaders Must Understand About Artificial Intelligence and Work - article by Niels Brabandt

Will AI Take Your Job Away? What Business Leaders Must Understand About Artificial Intelligence and Work

Article by Niels Brabandt

Artificial intelligence has become one of the defining topics of modern leadership and management. Boardrooms, executive briefings and strategy sessions increasingly revolve around a single question: will AI take our jobs?

In the latest episode of the Leadership Podcast and Leadership Videocast, leadership expert and management adviser Niels Brabandt examines this question through the lens of scientific research and organisational reality. The conclusion is far more nuanced than the popular narrative suggests.

Artificial intelligence is unlikely to eliminate most jobs outright. What it will do is reshape work, change the composition of tasks and fundamentally alter how organisations operate.

For decision makers in business, the critical challenge is therefore not technological adoption alone. The real challenge lies in leadership.

Understanding the Real Exposure of Jobs to AI

A widely cited analysis by the International Monetary Fund suggests that roughly sixty percent of jobs will experience some degree of exposure to artificial intelligence. Exposure does not mean disappearance. It means change.

Approximately forty percent of roles may experience little or no impact from current AI technologies. The remaining roles are likely to see certain tasks automated, accelerated or supported by algorithms.

This distinction matters enormously for business leaders. Public discourse often presents artificial intelligence as a binary phenomenon: either jobs disappear or nothing happens. Reality is far more complex.

Most roles will evolve rather than vanish.

AI as an Accelerator Rather Than a Replacement

Scientific research, including publications referenced in Science Magazine, increasingly points to a pattern described as boost over replace.

In practical terms, artificial intelligence tends to enhance human performance rather than substitute it entirely. Organisations frequently deploy AI to reduce administrative workload, accelerate analysis and eliminate repetitive processes.

The reason is straightforward. Modern organisations already operate under severe pressure. Teams are frequently understaffed, workloads continue to grow and even minor absences can create significant operational backlogs.

AI can reduce these pressures by increasing productivity and allowing employees to focus on higher value tasks.

For leadership, the implication is clear. Artificial intelligence should be approached as a capability multiplier, not merely as a cost reduction instrument.

Which Roles Face the Highest Level of Change

Not all roles are affected equally. Certain types of work are structurally more susceptible to automation.

Administrative tasks, repetitive support functions, junior analytical roles and routine processes are among the areas most likely to experience significant technological augmentation.

Algorithms perform predictable, repetitive tasks with extraordinary efficiency. In such contexts, organisations may require fewer people performing the same activities.

However, even here the picture is not one of simple replacement. More often, roles evolve and employees transition into more complex or relational responsibilities.

Which Jobs Remain Relatively Secure

Research consistently highlights three categories of work that are significantly less exposed to artificial intelligence.

The first category is physical work. Many forms of physical labour require adaptability, dexterity and contextual judgement that current technologies struggle to replicate at scale.

The second category is relational work. Sales, leadership, negotiation and many forms of consulting depend heavily on trust, credibility and human interaction.

When organisations make significant investments or strategic decisions, they rarely rely on algorithms alone. They rely on relationships and accountability.

The third category is high accountability roles. When the consequences of a mistake are severe and difficult to reverse, organisations remain cautious about delegating decision making entirely to automated systems.

Leadership decisions, strategic planning and high impact organisational design fall squarely into this category.

Why Many Employees Fear Artificial Intelligence

Research by Pew Research indicates that more than half of workers express concern about the impact of artificial intelligence on their jobs.

This concern does not necessarily stem from technological misunderstanding. Often it reflects deeper anxieties about long term job stability.

Many employees value what economists sometimes describe as long running jobs: roles that provide stability, predictability and a sense of long term professional security.

When leaders dismiss these concerns with simplistic motivational statements, they risk alienating their workforce.

Effective leadership requires acknowledging these concerns while offering credible strategies for adaptation and development.

The Leadership Responsibility in the Age of AI

The success or failure of artificial intelligence in organisations rarely depends on technology alone. It depends on leadership decisions.

One of the most decisive factors is qualification. Organisations that systematically train their employees to work with AI frequently see positive results. Employees experience reduced workload, improved productivity and greater job satisfaction.

In contrast, organisations that introduce AI tools without structured training often encounter resistance, confusion and ineffective implementation.

The leadership principle is simple yet powerful.

Qualify your people.

AI should enhance human capability, not replace it.

Strategic Implementation Matters

Leadership decisions around AI implementation also shape organisational culture.

Some organisations adopt a cautious strategy, allowing natural retirement to reduce headcount while gradually integrating AI support systems. This approach often preserves trust and organisational stability.

Others pursue aggressive automation strategies that remove employees prematurely. The short term financial gains may appear attractive, but the long term damage to trust, morale and employer reputation can be substantial.

Leadership therefore requires a broader perspective than pure efficiency calculations.

Trust is an organisational asset that cannot easily be replaced.

What Business Leaders Should Do Now

For decision makers, several principles emerge from the current evidence.

First, develop a realistic understanding of artificial intelligence. Avoid both technological hype and unnecessary fear.

Second, invest heavily in training and capability development. The organisations that thrive in the age of AI will be those that empower their people to work effectively with new technologies.

Third, communicate openly. Employees need clarity about how technology will affect their roles and what opportunities exist for growth.

Finally, remember the central principle articulated by Niels Brabandt throughout the discussion.

Enhance. Do not replace.

Artificial intelligence will undoubtedly reshape the world of work. Yet its ultimate impact will depend far less on algorithms than on leadership.

Niels Brabandt

---

More on this topic in this week's videocast and podcast with Niels Brabandt: Videocast / Apple Podcasts / Spotify

For the videocast’s and podcast’s transcript, read below this article.

Is excellent leadership important to you?

Let's have a chat: NB@NB-Networks.com

Contact: Niels Brabandt on LinkedIn

Website: www.NB-Networks.biz

Niels Brabandt is an expert in sustainable leadership with more than 20 years of experience in practice and science.

Niels Brabandt: Professional Training, Speaking, Coaching, Consulting, Mentoring, Project & Interim Management. Event host, MC, Moderator.

Podcast and Videocast Transcript

Niels Brabandt

When AI is around the corner, many people ask me, "Is AI going to take my job?" And as I for a way too long time now said, "Okay, I'm not going to make a single episode only dealing with 'Is AI going to take your job?'" it's now the time to talk about "Is AI taking your job?" I got my AI education—that's very important to say—because the speed of light might be really quick, but not as quick as people today think they're experts in AI. I got my AI qualification from the University of Pennsylvania, Wharton Business School, Vanderbilt University, so not the worst universities. So I think I reasonably know what I'm talking about when I talk about AI. And also, today, I will talk about "Is AI going to take your job?" Who is going to be exposed in, or to which extent? And of course, we're going to talk about what are the sources confirming my views here and confirming my points. So you don't get an opinion; you get scientific evidence. Very important: I'm going to tell you and show you real-world sources here. Very important: under fair dealing, fair usage in the UK and the US, I'm allowed to do so. And in German, citierrecht—quotation rights—I'm allowed to show you these kinds of sources.

Niels Brabandt

So is AI going to take your job? There's quite a number of people out there who say, "I'm reasonably worried that my job in the future is not going to be there at all, or not in the same way, to the same extent as I have it right now." And of course, we need to address that. When we talk about "Is AI going to take away your job?" it is a multifaceted aspect. There is no simple yes or no. So when you have someone who only gives you a one-word answer, very clearly that person does not have a clue.

Niels Brabandt

So what is the situation? The situation is there is going to be an exposure. And the exposure is scientifically proven—roughly, according to the International Monetary Fund—roughly 60% of jobs will be exposed to any kind of change—not threat, not deletion, not extinction—any kind of exposure towards AI. Which already means 40%. Almost half of all jobs will have little to no exposure to AI—at least to AI as we know it as of yet—because that technology, of course, is evolving rapidly. Very heavily affected of it is information work. And when now people say, "Well, Niels, isn't information work exactly what you do?" Yes, it is what I do. However, I'm not worried about AI for a simple reason you will know at the end of this episode why I'm not worried about what AI is going to do to my job.

Niels Brabandt

The most important point here, however, immediately, is when we look into the next publication, which is Science Magazine. I know when you hear Science Magazine where you think, "That is boring already in the title, isn't it?" No, science isn't boring; it's important. Not everyone's cup of tea, I agree, but that's why we're here, so you get the gist of it and you get the shortcut. So Science Magazine says there is a boost over replace. Boost over replace means when you do AI correctly, things are going to become smoother, quicker—because let's face it, how is work today? Staffing levels, no matter where you go—and I do not even talk about between social enterprises or organizations of free enterprise—anywhere where you are, they always say, "We do not have enough staff." As soon as anyone calls in sick, only for a couple of hours or half a day, we immediately have a backlog of work. So the boost over replace means with AI we can get back to the level of not pushing a tremendous amount of overhours—which, depending on in which country you work and what the regulation says—either you have to pay it to your employees—in Switzerland, for example, with up to 25% more payment or even more depending on the agreement you have, or you have to give them time off, and the time off, of course, immediately causes the issue of someone not being to be there to do the work, and then others complaining, and when you stress everyone out, people will call in sick sooner or later, or they become very ill for a long term, for a long time. So the boost over replace is a good aspect.

Niels Brabandt

The question always is, who are the people who are worried the most? Because as a leader, you have to know. As a leader, you have to know which are the jobs that are affected the most. And when we look into Pew Research—and Pew Research did research on this, especially in the so-called working class—about half of the people there—52% of all workers, according to Pew Research—are worried about what happens to their job with AI. And very important: step number one here as a leader, when you now come along with your, I don't know, quadruple PhD from Harvard, Princeton, Yale—which hopefully you worked hard for, and I assume you did—this is not judging your education. Education is great. But when you come from a privileged position and you tell people, "Change is always positive," you have to see the positives here. Hear the news: people are not waiting—people who just get fired from their jobs or they are afraid of being fired, they are not waiting for a motivational quote. And they're especially not waiting for your motivational quote. So be aware that as soon as you do that, many people will turn away from you. 52%. Every other worker in the workplace is worried about what does the future hold regarding AI. And the fear is not about losing the job itself, but the fear is about losing what they call in the US the long-running jobs, where you can stay with a certain company for 5, 10, 15, 20 years—peace of mind—you do your work, and you're just a happy person doing it. And that is something where this job safety and security, the feeling is this is going to be affected.

Niels Brabandt

The question is which roles might be affected. And there are certain roles which run a higher risk. Higher risk does not mean that these jobs go extinct by tomorrow, but due to automation, because the task is probably repetitive, it is predictable. So basically, it pretty much means that any kind of algorithm is just quicker doing it than a human being is. And usually, algorithms don't call in sick. They say, "Don't call in sick," which is another issue where, of course, humans think, "Maybe this job is going to be gone." And these jobs are admin, number one, anything which is repetitive admin; support jobs, which are often repetitive; even junior analyst jobs are there; and any kind of routines. And that all is based on the publication Science Magazine again. So admin support, junior analysts—junior analysts, not analysis—junior analysts and routines are the ones which are going to be replaced the quickest. And replaced does not mean they are gone, but probably not as many will be rehired as there were before because now you have technology.

Niels Brabandt

The question is, what do you do now when you say, "Hey, I think in our organization this is going to affect quite a number of people. What should I do as a leader?" Let's talk about the implementation. Because in this podcast, we do not only want to talk about what is probably not going too well; we always want to talk about what is going better when we act the right way. So of course, you have to ensure some people that their job might not be affected. And there are certain jobs, according to science as we know it today, as of yet, certain jobs will be affected less. And these are jobs which are especially physical, relational, and high accountability.

Niels Brabandt

And I give you a very important aspect here. So physical means any kind of physical work. When you, for example, say care work—care work can be done by robots—well, try to do that. Try to get robots in the workplace, and then you need one thing to run this care home. It's called insurance. Try to get an insurance when you say, "These robots are just purchased off the market, and they are going to deal with humans." And then the insurance is going to say, "How are we sure that they are not going to break their bones next day?" Well, here we are. So this is still quite some way ago. Physical can be helped with AI and robotics, but usually it's not going to be replaced. So physical jobs are still—especially when you create something which is tailored—physical jobs are extremely important there and less exposed to AI. Support, yes, but replacement, no.

Niels Brabandt

Relational job, I give you a very simple example. If you're going to buy a house, if you're going to buy an expensive car, if you're going to buy an expensive plane ticket, anything where you need a higher level of trust. You're implementing a new software. Are you going to buy the software from another human being who you can hold accountable, or are you going to buy from an algorithm? And some people say, "Well, most likely I'm going to buy it from a human being," especially when you have a higher investment, you meet in person, you want to know who the person is, you want to gain trust. The relational jobs—sales jobs, marketing jobs, especially sales jobs—are the ones who are affected less.

Niels Brabandt

And the difference between high accountability and low accountability is how quickly can you fix the error. I give you a very simple example. Let's say you replace—no, you don't replace—you support your pizza workers who create pizzas by a robotic arm who simply can put the toppings on the pizza way quicker than any human being could ever do. So the humans are going to create the dough, and then someone's rolling it out, and then a robotic arm is going to just put the toppings on there. And when this robot arm does things wrong, the error can be handled pretty quickly. A customer is going to complain, so you give them either a new pizza, a coupon, a free drink, or all of the three—all of the above. So quite quickly, it can be done that you say, "Hey, we saw the error. We fixed it. Everything's going to be fine from here." Customer happy, we are happy, it's all good, and we fixed the error.

Niels Brabandt

When you, for example, as it happened with one of my client organizations—in a project where I have not been involved—they decided that the AI data is going to decide how do they shape the districts in the future where their salespeople go. And after three months, they wonder why all the numbers went down. And then someone manually checked—by coincidence, without getting the task to do so—they just decided by themselves. They checked the data and found out that the AI was hallucinating. And by the way, the AI is hallucinating about one-tenth of what humans are hallucinating. This is a high accountability job, so you cannot catch the error quickly. Redesigning, reshaping districts for a whole sales organization is tremendously expensive, tremendous amounts of effort. People probably have to be removed or relocated because now you have different travel routes. Some people will leave on their own will. Some people say it's not interesting anymore. You need to hire new people. They might not be interested. The whole thing starts from scratch, basically. So the high accountability jobs will be affected less.

Niels Brabandt

And by the way, I can tell you, even some low accountability jobs do not simply work because they are relational. I give you a very simple example. I listen to electronic music, and I do so since I'm 14 years old. So I go clubbing, yes, at my age. So when I go clubbing, at one club, they had a robotics arm which served drinks. And the robotics arm was way quicker than any barkeeper in that location. So I order with the robotics arm. The most absurd thing I was asked if I want to tip: "Do I want to tip a robotics arm?" "No." "Why should I?" "Tip goes to, I don't know, the IT department? I have no idea." So the robotics arm was way quicker. However, it's just not the same. You have a barkeeper who knows what you like, a bit of chit-chat, smiling, having a nice evening, wishing you a nice evening. You just bond with people in different ways when you have a human being around. So after having two drinks, getting my amazing Coke Zero from a robotics arm, I went back to the barkeeper, who, by the way, I tipped, as I always do. When I go, for example, in London to XOYO, a Coke Zero is £5, and I tip £1, so it's £6, just to give you a simple example. Or when I go to Heaven in central London, where a Coke Zero is £4, I tip £1, so it's £5. Here you are, a pound of drink, or 10%. I always do one of the two.

Niels Brabandt

So when it's relational, physical, high accountability, people will have less exposure. Support, great, but it's not going to be that they simply say, "Okay, all of these jobs are going to be massively affected." No, that's not the case. Physical, relational, high accountability—tell them. Tell them immediately. And of course, who are the people who are not afraid of AI? These are the people who actually use it. I have clients who, in their workforce, have workers in the so-called working class who are not afraid of AI. Why not? Because they were professionally trained to use AI. They see it as a chance. They see it as an enhancement. They see it as a tool to get less stress into the workplace and simply have a better job. And on top of all of that, that is an important mantra you have to live by. You need to qualify your people to actually do the job properly. Qualify, qualify, qualify, because you want to enhance, not replace.

Niels Brabandt

And I give you two examples: one of how to do it, one of how to not do it. Let's say you have someone like one of my clients where they say, "Hey, we have a reasonably overage staff level, and we are going to see when someone goes for retirement if we replace them or if AI can take over." And within one year, 17 people retired at the regional large organization, and out of 17 jobs, they rehired 13. 13 out of 17 were rehired. The other four were not necessary anymore because AI could help out. And by the way, these 13 can now do their jobs without the tremendous amount of overhours, which is also a positive thing. So anyone said, "Okay, look, no one's going to be fired. It's all cool." And replacing—because anyone said, "Look, we have a couple of jobs," which were simply there because these people were just there for a long time. Today, no one would create such a role. People just said, "Look, you have two years to retirement, and we just give you the time, so have a happy retirement, and then we take it from there."

Niels Brabandt

In another company where they are not clients of mine, they said that, "Yeah, we have someone who's going to retire in two years' time, but we're not going to wait." We give them a golden handshake and chuck them out. That was one person being chucked out with a golden handshake. So no financial suffering, just making them leave the company by golden handshake. Immediately, the rumor got across in the workforce they are going to replace people due to AI. A two-digit amount of people quit their jobs within one month, most of them working in production, who said, "I am going to go to other companies where I'm valued and appreciated more." And then all of these so-called savings by getting rid of someone two years early—and of course, you paid them, so the saving isn't that much—all of that had to be spent double, triple, quadruple, quintuple on recruiting, employer branding, and whatnot else to actually get hold of the damage they produced. So be aware that you need to enhance and not replace. And if you then do it the way, fully qualified, with a great work style, and amazing communication when you do it that way in your organization, then everything will go right with your AI approach and your implementation of AI because AI is going to enhance your job. It's not going to take your job away.

Niels Brabandt

I wish you all the best implementing this in your organization. And when you now say, "I think I have about 28 questions about that," very happy to chat with you. So first, of course, when you're now watching me on YouTube, one thing I have to say—I have to say a genuine thank you—because we just got the numbers in from 2025, how the podcast did internationally, globally. And we posted about that on LinkedIn just on Monday morning. And I was absolutely astonished how it went in the most positive way. We had a top 300 in the US as a non-native speaker, a top 50 in the UK, top 100 in the German-speaking market during the whole year, basically. Luxembourg, I think, the top five Malta number one. We had multiple number one rankings during the year. So it's absolutely amazing how many rankings we received during the year. Thank you very much for supporting this podcast and videocast. I hope you will support us for a long time in the future.

Niels Brabandt

I put a tremendous amount of work in this for the last five years. It's now running for six years, and I'm very rigid, very rigorous on selecting the guests. So thank you very much for appreciating what I do here. It's really, really appreciated. So when you now like this videocast, when you're watching on YouTube, please leave a like here and subscribe to the channel. Leave a comment here. Thank you very much for all support. When you're listening on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, leave a review there—five stars. Thank you very much for that. Recommend the podcast and videocast amongst friends and friends, colleagues, anywhere you like—online and offline, social media, wherever you like.

Niels Brabandt

And of course, we are back on the YouTube Shorts. They were a tremendous success. We now put a lot of work into YouTube Shorts. It really pays off to not only subscribe to the YouTube channel but also to put the little bell on there so you never miss a new episode. And of course, you can also follow me on Apple Podcasts, Spotify. I'll go to my website, nb-networks.biz, so you see what I do for a living and what I'm available for regarding AI and other leadership and soft skill topics. And of course, there are often quite a number of people who say, "Well, these are corporate issues and companies. I can't put them in a comment section on YouTube." Yeah, feel free to email me, nb@nb-networks.com. I'm always looking forward to hearing from you. If you need something very specific—you need training, speaking, coaching, consulting, mentoring, project interim management, or a speaker for your conference—just let me know. If you just want to have a chat, happy to do that as well. So I'm looking forward to hearing from you.

Niels Brabandt

If you want to have live sessions, we have live sessions as well. When you go to expert.nb-networks.com, you can put your email address in there. You only receive one email every Wednesday morning where you get full access to all the episodes, the videocast, the podcast in the English and German language—way more than 400 episodes out there, an internationally well-ranking podcast and videocast. So thank you very much for supporting me here. Really, really appreciate it.

Niels Brabandt

And of course, go on LinkedIn, connect with me. They don't do the follow thing. Connect with me properly. You can follow me on Instagram if you like, or you just like me on Facebook, or you subscribe to my channel on YouTube, or you do all of the four, which probably would be best. Thank you very much for doing so.

Niels Brabandt

The most important thing, however, is always the last thing that I say: apply, apply, apply what you heard in this podcast because only when you apply what you heard you will see the positive changes that you obviously want to see.

Niels Brabandt

And when you now want to go into more depth with all the sources—here are all the sources—so when you now say, "Hey, I want to read the full article," here are the full articles. Just stop the video here if you just want to take a note, and then you can get to the articles and read everything I talk about.

Niels Brabandt

I now wish you all the best implementing this in your organization. Get in touch with me. I'll answer any message within 24 hours or less. I'm looking forward to hearing from you. And at the end of this podcast, as well as at the end of this videocast, there's always one thing left for me to say: thank you very much for your time.