What We’re Trying to Learn From This Study on AI, Roles, and Work Redesign

There is no shortage of content about AI right now.

There are product launches, policy debates, market predictions, and endless commentary about what AI might do to jobs.

But inside organizations, the more useful questions are often much more practical.

What work is actually changing?

Which roles are being reshaped already?

Where are leaders still unclear?

What decisions now belong to AI, and which still need human judgment?

How are hiring, performance, and workforce planning adapting, if at all?

That is what this study is trying to understand.

We are not approaching AI as just a technology rollout.

We are approaching it as a work redesign question.

That distinction matters because current research shows two things at once.

First, the scale of change is real. The World Economic Forum says employers expect 39% of workers’ core skills to change by 2030. LinkedIn says 70% of the skills used in most jobs are expected to change by 2030. Microsoft and LinkedIn have shown that AI use is already widespread among knowledge workers.

Second, clarity is lagging. McKinsey’s research shows that many organizations are still struggling to turn AI activity into meaningful operational value, and workflow redesign remains one of the clearest differentiators. Deloitte’s latest human capital research points to the same conclusion from a people perspective: intentional redesign matters.

So this study is built around a simple belief:

The biggest unanswered questions in AI adoption are not only technical. They are organizational.

We want to understand things like:

• Where companies are seeing the biggest shifts in work

• Which roles are changing most visibly

• How leaders are deciding what should be automated, augmented, or left human

• Whether role definitions are being updated in practice

• How this is affecting hiring, capability building, performance, and team design

• Where the biggest bottlenecks still are

  
  

We are especially interested in responses from:

• CHROs and Chief People Officers

• Heads of Talent and talent acquisition leaders

• HR transformation and org design leaders

• Business and functional leaders managing AI-affected teams

• Technology leaders working closely with workforce change

  
  

The goal is not to produce generic commentary.

The goal is to surface patterns that help leaders make better decisions about work, roles, and the systems around them.

That is also why this research matters beyond HR.

If roles are changing, hiring changes.

If decision ownership is changing, performance changes.

If workflows are changing, org design changes.

If capability requirements are changing, workforce planning changes.

That is why we believe role clarity is becoming a more important leadership issue in the AI era, not a less important one.

A lot of organizations are investing in AI right now.

Far fewer have a clear, shared answer to a more basic question:

What does this role now require?

This study is one way of getting closer to that answer.

If you are involved in AI adoption, people strategy, org design, or work redesign, we would value your perspective.

What participants get: early access to findings before public release, participant credit on published research, and, for those who contribute especially rich insights, a complimentary team capability analysis.

Survey link: https://tally.so/r/oboDdx

Sources: World Economic Forum, Future of Jobs Report 2025; LinkedIn Economic Graph, Work Change Report 2025; Microsoft and LinkedIn, Work Trend Index 2024; McKinsey, The State of AI 2025; Deloitte, 2026 Global Human Capital Trends.