Half of Aussie managers use AI for sensitive leadership tasks
SHARE THIS ARTICLE
New research shows that more than one in two Australian managers who use artificial intelligence at work have applied it to at least one sensitive people management responsibility.
A new survey, commissioned by Dynamic Leadership Programs Australia (DLPA) and conducted by Pureprofile, has found that 53 per cent of Australian managers who use AI have used it for at least one sensitive management task. These include preparing for or managing difficult feedback, performance reviews, conflict and employee complaints.
Where managers are using AI
Among AI-using managers surveyed, 22 per cent had used the technology for performance reviews. Another 19 per cent had used it to respond to complaints, and 19 per cent had used it for difficult conversations. A further 18 per cent had used it to deliver difficult feedback.
Some 15 per cent of managers using AI said they used it to help manage conflict, while 12 per cent cited avoiding difficult conversations as a reason for using AI at work.
The research also found that senior leaders and managers were significantly more likely than other AI users to rely on the technology for workplace communication tasks.
‘Support’ v ‘substitute’
DLPA chief executive Karlie Cremin said that the findings raised a key question for workplaces: where AI assistance should end and where human accountability and judgement should take over.
“Difficult conversations are not an inconvenience of leadership – they define leadership,” Cremin said.
“AI can be a highly valuable tool to help managers prepare, structure their thinking, and check their tone. However, we risk weakening the very human skills effective leadership requires if technology is increasingly used to outsource uncomfortable interactions.
“While AI is an excellent supporting tool, organisations must clearly distinguish between AI supporting leadership and AI substituting for leadership.”
Cremin said judgement, emotional intelligence, courage, and accountability are capabilities managers build by practising them.
“AI can help prepare a manager for a difficult conversation, but it cannot assume the responsibility for actually leading it,” she said.
“When managers avoid these moments, performance problems, conflict, and distrust compound.”
Employee attitudes and training gap
The data also points to scepticism among workers about AI’s role in management. Some 84 per cent of the Australian workforce said they would rather be managed by a person than by AI. Among those who have a manager, 35 per cent said they would be uncomfortable knowing AI had written their performance review.
The research suggests organisational capability has not kept pace with adoption. Some 75 per cent of the Australian workforce said they had received no formal workplace AI training.
Cremin said employers must urgently establish clear guardrails, and should treat AI adoption not only as a technology exercise but as a leadership challenge.
“Organisations need to train managers to use AI as a tool for preparation only, ensuring they remain personally accountable for decisions that affect their teams.
“The ultimate goal of using AI in the workplace must be to make leaders better prepared for human conversations, ensuring human empathy, judgement, and accountability remain firmly in the driver’s seat,” she said.
The survey was commissioned by DLPA and conducted by Pureprofile among 1,008 Australian business leaders and workers, representing the total Australian workforce, in mid-August of this year. The total sample was nationally representative by age, gender and location.
Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?Make HR Leader a preferred news source on Google.
