Table of Contents
Dubai: Employees worried about AI replacing parts of their jobs may need to pay closer attention to how they use the technology, with experts warning that handing over too much of the thinking can weaken the very skills that keep people valuable at work.
Sign up for our daily business newsletter, Cheques & Balances.
AI can take on repetitive work, sift through large amounts of information, prepare first drafts and automate routine processes, but judgment, accountability, relationships and decisions affecting other people should remain firmly human-led.
Get updated faster and for FREE: Download the Gulf News app now – simply click here.
Three technology and workplace executives told Gulf News that employees who use AI to strengthen skills they already have, question its answers and spend the time saved on higher-value work could be better positioned as jobs change.
Alexandre Depret-Bixio, SVP International at Anomali, said dependence on technology is hardly new, with calculators, spellcheck and GPS having raised similar questions about how much people should hand over to a tool.
AI makes that temptation considerably easier because it can now complete larger portions of a task.
His advice is to use AI more freely on work an employee already understands and more carefully when learning something new.
Someone learning to code, for example, risks missing the fundamentals if AI writes everything from the start. The output may arrive faster, but the employee may lack the knowledge needed to spot mistakes or explain why the solution works.
Employees still need enough knowledge of their field to challenge an AI-generated answer instead of assuming speed or confidence means accuracy.
Ergul Hemmingsen, Chief Human Capital Officer at Core42, said productivity improves when AI removes friction from work while employees retain responsibility for the thinking and final outcome.
Domain expertise therefore becomes more valuable, because employees who understand their subject deeply can identify where AI is useful and where human intervention is required.
What can you safely hand over?
Summarising lengthy documents, organising data, producing an initial draft, conducting routine research, processing repetitive information and surfacing patterns are among the tasks the executives believe can increasingly be supported by AI.
Arturo Buzzalino, Chief Product Officer and Chief Innovation Officer at Epicor, also sees opportunities in industrial workplaces, where AI can monitor operations, identify anomalies and surface recommendations more quickly.
The common feature is that these activities benefit heavily from speed and scale while leaving room for a person to assess the result.
The equation changes when trust, empathy, ethics or accountability enter the picture.
Client relationships, negotiations, employee decisions, organisational culture, business strategy and difficult conversations still require people to understand the circumstances and take responsibility for the consequences.
Depret-Bixio said AI can help someone prepare for a difficult conversation with a colleague, but it should not conduct that conversation on the employee’s behalf.
Hemmingsen suggests another test. Employees can ask whether they simply need an output or whether the task requires understanding why a decision is being made, whom it affects and what could happen next.
The greater the consequences, the stronger the case for keeping human ownership.
Skills that become more valuable with AI
Technical expertise alone will not determine who adapts best.
AI fluency, critical thinking, communication, curiosity, adaptability and deep knowledge of a person’s own field repeatedly emerge across the three executives’ responses.
AI fluency means understanding what the technology can do, where its limitations lie, how to give it useful instructions and how to validate what comes back.
Hemmingsen said capabilities such as judgment, contextual understanding, creativity and accountability become increasingly valuable when AI handles more routine execution.
Core42 is using role-based learning pathways and a sandbox environment where employees can experiment with AI, refine prompts and gain practical experience. Teams can also explore AI agents aimed at solving day-to-day workplace challenges with support from internal experts.
Buzzalino places special emphasis on critical thinking because the ability to generate an answer is becoming easier, making the quality of the question and the ability to challenge the response more important.
“As AI gets better at generating answers, the ability to ask the right questions becomes even more valuable.”
Communication, collaboration, leadership and empathy are also likely to remain important because many workplace outcomes depend on how people understand and work with each other, not simply how quickly a task is completed.
Saving an hour should change what you do with it
One risk for employees and companies is treating productivity purely as the amount of work AI can remove.
Buzzalino argues that the more important question is what happens to the time that technology gives back.
“AI should help people spend less time on mechanical work and more time on meaningful work. If it gives you back an hour, use that hour to solve problems, collaborate with colleagues, innovate, or engage with customers, not simply to do less thinking.”
That puts pressure on employers to rethink jobs as well.
Depret-Bixio said companies often add AI to an existing job description without reconsidering what the role should become once repetitive work takes less time.
If AI takes over a large portion of routine activity, companies can cut the role or redirect that capacity towards work requiring greater judgment, expertise and interaction with customers or colleagues.
Training also needs to happen while jobs are changing, giving employees an opportunity to develop the skills required for the higher-value parts of their roles.
Employees need a role in redesigning work
Hemmingsen said workers themselves should be involved when companies redesign processes around AI because employees closest to a workflow often know where time is being lost and where technology could help.
Success should then be judged by whether AI improves the quality of work, decisions and execution, with clear rules governing where the technology can operate independently and where people must remain responsible.
Using AI well does not mean handing over everything it can technically perform. Employees still need to understand their work, question the output and decide what deserves human attention.
The people who can combine those skills with AI may find the technology takes tasks away from their day without taking away the value they bring to their job.
