Every week, Diamandis publishes his Metatrends newsletter with his predictions about what lies ahead in the next decade. The latest newsletter talks about “the dematerialization of white-collar jobs.”
Is AI coming for your job?
The CEO of Anthropic, Dario Amodei, thinks so. He has issued a blunt warning to the American government and businesses: AI could wipe out half of all entry-level white collar jobs in the next five years.
As evidence to support his argument, look at over 40% of Microsoft’s most recent layoffs involving white-collar software engineers, including directors in AI-related positions.
Metatrends forecasts that by 2030, about 30% of white-collar jobs will be fundamentally transformed by AI.
Recently, OpenAI introduced Codex, a cloud-based software engineering agent capable of handling various tasks simultaneously for coders. Similar trends are happening with customer service jobs, and it is only a matter of time before humanoid robots with onboard AI take on manual labour. Right now, those jobs are temporarily spared because of the speed these robots do the job that humans can do. That, too, is changing with companies like Toyota and BMW reporting improvements in both production speed and quality on assembly lines. These robots are also capable of continuous work, 24/7, unlike their human counterparts.
Diamandis argues that white-collar job displacement is here and now as AI redefines productivity.
As AI displaces human capital across industries, we’re heading toward some version of government-issued UBI. A way to fund this could be to tax the profits of companies adopting AI. The taxes raised could pay for UBI and the retraining of displaced workers.
By 2030, expect AI systems to create entire autonomous businesses. AI-run law firms, marketing agencies, and medical offices will operate 24/7. The Bradley Sacks Semafor chart appearing above tells the story of revenue-per-employee at S&P 500 companies, which has plummeted from eight employees to generate $1 million in the 1980s to just two today. Expect a future of one-person companies with entrepreneurs conceiving a vision and using AI to orchestrate and handle everything rather than trying to compete with it.
Here’s what most miss. As jobs transform, so will living costs. Healthcare, education, therapy, and childcare will undergo radical demonetization. UBI will be part of this demonetization, while AI will make quality services more abundant and dramatically less expensive. This will help offset job displacement.
Diamandis talks about discovering the Massively Transformative Purpose (MTP) of your existence in many talks he gives at Singularity University. MTP refers to the ambition and fundamental reason for a company’s existence. Entrepreneurs who leverage AI will thrive in this new economy as company formation and acquisition cycles accelerate beyond anything previously seen. As businesses replace employees with AI, efficiency metrics will skyrocket. What Diamandis advocates is to stop thinking about looking for another job and, instead, start finding your MTP and creating value by solving problems that you care deeply about.
In a world of ubiquitous AI, the quality of the questions you ask has more value than memorization and rote learning. When I was teaching people how to sell in my previous existence working at an educational publishing company, I stated that those who excel in their jobs learn to ask “W5 and How” questions. All these open-ended questions unlock a future of possibilities. Not familiar with W5? These are questions that begin with “Who? What? Where? Why? and How?” They are essential to developing a Curiosity Mindset. They allow the questioner to approach the unknown with wonder rather than assumptions. In a world where AI disrupts those who are just rote learners, the Curiosity Mindset will become your ultimate competitive advantage, as it has been for top-performing salespeople through the years.
Amodei states in the Axios interview that, “We, as the producers of this technology, have a duty and an obligation to be honest about what is coming. I don’t think this is on people’s radar.” He outlines three strategies for society and governments to adopt to pre-empt the AI threat. They are:
Amodei, like Diamandis, suggests an AI surtax. Amodei sees a 3% “token tax” on company earnings coming from the use of AI as a way to fund programs to deal with transitioning to a super-intelligence-dominated economy. Diamandis’ ideas, UBI, developing a Curiosity Mindset, and identifying a person’s MTP could all benefit from programs receiving money from an AI surtax.
In February of this year, an artificial intelligence (AI) summit with technology developers in attendance was held in Paris, France. Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Alphabet whose AI is called Gemini, spoke there and described AI as being “the most profound shift of our lifetimes.” Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, predicted AI would cause the “largest change to the global labour market in human history.” Sam Altman of OpenAI and ChatGPT stated, “In a decade perhaps everyone on Earth will be capable of accomplishing more than the most impactful person can today.”
The word “democratization” comes up anytime you talk to AI technology buffs. Those who speak of democratization, describe a levelling of the job market where the expertise needed gets replaced by an AI companion. In the words of Jenssen Huang, CEO of AI chip maker, Nvidia, democratization makes all workers “CEOs of AI agents.”
I asked Marybeth how AI was being perceived by the management and employees of the companies with which she works. She volunteered to write what follows. Sundar, Dario, Sam, Jenssen and other AI experts need to take notice.
Will you lose your job to AI? Employees are increasingly concerned about the potential impact AI will have on their employment.
How can organizational leaders expect to maintain employee motivation and productivity if much of their workforce is unnerved by the potential threat AI represents to their job security?
AI is causing stress. Stress is based on a perceived threat, even though the object of concern may not be an actual threat. What we know about employees’ AI anxiety is that most of it is based on the unknown. Fear of the unknown in the present and future regarding how AI will infiltrate their workplace fuels negative speculation and uncertainty, which leads to worry.
Research informs us that at least 85% of what we worry about never materializes. That is seldom comforting for workers caught in fearful rumination loops about the repercussions of being replaced by technology or being unable to adapt to technology-related changes despite years of loyal high performance at their job.
Employees want transparency. If companies make clear to their workforce how incorporating AI into the business aligns with its purpose and goals by augmenting and assisting their work rather than replacing them, perhaps some of this internal tension around its introduction can be soothed. Clear and honest communication helps ensure the well-being of the individual employee by lowering stress and boosting organizational morale, which is especially important in rapidly changing environments.
Clear communication about how AI can be harnessed to assist employees with mundane work to enable more time for creative engagement helps shift the workforce from anxiety and resistance towards acceptance and engagement. To do this effectively, leaders need to collaborate with employees to co-create AI solutions for their specific organizational context. Here is what research tells us:
Deliberately including them in the conversation is key to an effective transitioning of some job tasks to AI. Aspects of the job that require ethical reasoning, human connections, and other tasks which AI cannot execute, would remain in the employee’s portfolio and guard against being declared redundant. That’s why employees included in the decision-making process promote buy-in for eventual decisions and implementations and help mitigate feelings of loss of control which play a significant role in occupational stress.
So far in implementing AI these facts stand out across the globe:
One can only conclude that a greater investment in AI education and training is needed. This instructional gap fosters misunderstanding. It impacts how AI is perceived. It limits AI’s potential to provide maximum benefits for the organization and employees. Training improves individual capacity and confidence and cultivates a culture where employees feel empowered.
To maximize the return on investment (ROI) in AI, training needs to be industry-specific and must begin well before the AI is implemented. Workers need to know in advance about the role of AI in their jobs. They need to receive assurance that sufficient AI training will be provided alongside AI strategies once implemented.
With the explosive expansion of AI across a wide range of industries, the rush to implement AI to remain competitive should not come at the expense of strategic integration in ways that support a company’s key priorities. It should adequately guide employees to meet AI challenges successfully.
Employee stress and anxiety about AI are on the rise. Recent surveys show:
What can an employee do to navigate these complex and evolving AI feelings or concerns?
For the employer, an AI worker comes cheap when compared to a human. The AI can work continuously. The human cannot. The AI doesn’t ask for a raise, doesn’t to take a vacation, won’t get sick, won’t strike, and won’t question company decisions.
Back at the beginning of the 19th in Great Britain, the textile industry began to mechanize. Formerly a cottage industry, textiles started being produced in factories which needed fewer workers and provided poor working conditions and low wages. Workers soon organized in opposition to mechanization. That’s when the term Luddite was used to describe a movement that smashed machines in protest. Luddites raided factories destroying automated looms and knitting frames that no longer required skilled labour.
Today, a Luddite is an individual who resists technological change. For Luddites, AI is the ultimate enemy. Technological advances before AI such as the personal computer, smartphones, and the Internet were seen as tools for worker productivity improvement. AI, however, makes workers redundant. Giving AI human characteristics by calling them workers is no more than a marketing tactic by AI developers with little consideration for the human workers these algorithms will replace.
Could AI replace me as a blogger? I have no doubt that could happen. Today, when I research topics, I use AI tools to answer a list of questions I produce at the outset before starting to write. Before I had AI tools I used Google Search. Now my search is done through an AI tool that organizes and prioritizes results and provides a summary outline for me to review that includes links and suggested follow-up questions.
This is my new way of working and it is saving me preparation time. I haven’t, however, relied on an AI to write any of the articles you read here, and when I quote an AI, I always acknowledge it.
I am not a Luddite, but I am beginning to have an appreciation of the history at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution that led to the movement. AI is already taking away jobs, and not ones in manufacturing. Software coders who often have multiple university degrees are being replaced, and the trend is escalating.
Before there was the term gig worker, I was already one of them. I studied to be a history teacher and graduated with no teaching jobs. Instead, I sold textbooks, read many of them, became an editor, a technology hardware, software and systems designer, and finally a high-technology business and telecommunications consultant coaching startups and billion-dollar companies. When I retired I turned to writing this blog.
I have a friend in British Columbia, Nick Arden, who like me is a business veteran who has reinvented himself more than once. He is launching a new consulting practice focused on workers concerned about the impact that technology is having on their jobs. In his recent note to me, he describes the rationale for developing this new program stating:
“Why This Matters – In today’s rapidly evolving technological landscape, concerns about job security due to AI and other innovations are not only valid but pressing. While the timeline for disruption remains uncertain, the risks are undeniable. Despite this, these employees lack the attention and support they need, leaving them increasingly vulnerable in this fast-changing environment.
Preparing for Technology’s Impact on Jobs – Technology is transforming industries faster than ever, leaving many employees uncertain about their future. In 2024 alone, mass layoffs displaced 172,000 U.S. workers – 88% from tech roles. Generative AI alone is predicted to impact up to 300 million jobs globally. The question isn’t if change is coming, but how we can prepare.”
Nick isn’t wrong when looking at the growing disruption to the workforce from the adoption of AI by businesses. In factories, automation has been an accepted standard for doing business. In offices, PCs and software replaced secretaries. Smartphone apps are replacing personal assistants.
For business, AI is seen as the next automation tool. Just how far, however, will AI go in penetrating the business world and even the academic one? After all, if I can use it to help me organize research, why not the research being done by academics?
I recently read about a “hackathon” conducted at the University of Mannheim in Germany that included more than 20 academic researchers and students looking to see if using AI could produce quality research papers suitable for journal publication. Their inspiration came from a recent survey published in Nature.
The University assumed that many of its students and some researchers were already using AI. The next step was to use it to generate publishable research. Could articles written with AI help meet the quality standards required by reputable journals? Participants brought current research and some even entire dissertations to the exercise. A non-AI control group participated to provide a comparison. The conclusion noted that AI “collaborators…can help streamline the writing process,” but were not “substitutes for human creativity or intellectual effort.”
I would argue that the hackathon’s conclusions were self-serving and defensive. Why do I say that?
The progress of substituting humans with AI is fed by an accelerating arms race among technology giants who rapidly release new versions of their latest AI tools. They are “AI workers” to business not just as collaborators but as replacements.
Could AI replacing workers who write software code soon be capable of writing scientific and technology-focused original research? Is the fate of our science to fall to AI experts assisted by robots and a few humans in university and non-academic research laboratories?
Without sufficient regulation, the arms race will continue and although the hackathon participants concluded they were still needed to provide “oversight…to review and test the framing, sense and overall integrity,” the truth may be – NOT FOR LONG.
How far will companies like OpenAI, AIX, Google, Meta, Amazon and others go to propose “AI workers” in all types of workplaces? What are the ramifications for humanity and meaningful work in the 21st century? The impact on workers whether assembly lines or the hallowed halls of academia is likely to be profound.
]]>