“As a work futurist, my perspectives are centered on AI and the complex evolution of the workforce. The next decade will exponentially rewire the structure and composition of the workforce, as enterprise AI implementation accelerates in breadth and scope with minimal guardrails. This rewiring will not only impact the architecture and texture of workflows and jobs but also influence the identity, purpose and dignity of workers navigating the dual reality of intensified augmentation and accelerated displacement. Workers may resist this change for two profound reasons. First, due to deeply human concerns that are tied to threats and challenges in regard to professional identity, from fear of being surveilled for productivity to worries about co-authoring decisions with AI, to meeting rigid performance requirements for driving creativity and demonstrating impact.
“The humanity and resilience of workers can be further compromised by having to balance new demands for productivity and performance tied to AI while dealing with the threats associated with AI overreliance and the risk of cognitive atrophy. These deeply human reasons can cause workers to feel simultaneously less secure, less capable and less resilient and lead to significantly compromised levels of psychological safety.
Addressing job displacement, contraction and loss cannot be reduced to simply telling workers to upskill and learn AI or be left behind. A deeply human-centered societal response is needed now. It will require employers, governments and institutions of higher learning to work together to bridge the gaps in skills, time, resilience and governance.
Second, economic uncertainty is a driver of resistance, perhaps the most powerful. When workers perceive AI implementation as an early warning that their jobs, income and stability are at risk and when access to retraining, financial safety nets or realistic pathways back to comparable employment is marginal or unavailable, resilience erodes and resistance becomes a rational and radical response.
“Worker resistance may surface in multiple and complex forms. Research has emerged pointing to the connections between worker behavior, threats to identity and psychological safety and barriers to deep, scalable AI adoption. So forms of worker resistance may range from AI minimalism to shallow adoption in an effort to slow implementation. Resistance may come in the form of pushing back against algorithmic management and synthetic professional experiences.
“To mitigate cognitive risks, workers may resist by reducing AI offloading and by incorporating more metacognitive practices into and around their work. The ultimate show of resistance could be to opt out of the AI-driven workforce and seek out human-first or analog-only employment experiences.
“The impact of AI on the workforce will be profoundly transformative for organizations and workers. There are no simple answers. Addressing job displacement, contraction and loss cannot be reduced to simply telling workers to upskill and learn AI or be left behind. A deeply human-centered societal response is needed now. It will require employers, governments and institutions of higher learning to work together to bridge the gaps in skills, time, resilience and governance.
“Three key fronts must be addressed:
- “The first is accelerating the preparation of workers for AI-augmented roles and for new, adjacent internal and external roles before displacement.
- “Next, we must acknowledge and address the psychological support that workers will need in navigating AI-driven anxiety, identity disruption and reimagined purpose and meaning as core societal pillars.
- “And third, it is crucial to anchor these efforts with robust economic support so that workers are truly able to move into the next chapter of work in the age of AI.”
This essay was written in January 2026 in reply to the question: “AI systems are likely to begin to play a much more significant role in shaping our decisions, work and daily lives. How might individuals and societies embrace, resist and/or struggle with such transformative change? As opportunities and challenges arise due to the positive, neutral and negative ripple effects of digital change, what cognitive, emotional, social and ethical capacities must we cultivate to ensure effective resilience? What practices and resources will enable resilience? What actions must we take right now to reinforce human and systems resilience? What new vulnerabilities might arise and what new coping strategies are important to teach and nurture?” This and 200-plus additional essay responses are included in the 2026 report “Building a Human Resilience Infrastructure for the AI Age.”