There is a question I think every working professional should be asking themselves today: If my organisation had access to a technology that could do a significant part of my work in a fraction of the time, what would happen to my role? It is not the most comfortable question to ask, especially when we have spent years building our careers, gaining experience and developing expertise. But perhaps that is exactly why we need to ask it. Artificial Intelligence is no longer something that belongs only to technology companies or research laboratories. It has quietly entered everyday work. We use it to write emails, prepare reports, analyse information, create presentations, screen CVs, answer customer queries, conduct research and even support decision-making. The pace at which this is happening is what makes the situation worth paying attention to.
The impact of AI on employment may not necessarily come in the dramatic form we often imagine. It may not be a situation where thousands of people walk into their offices one morning and are told that their jobs no longer exist. It could happen much more gradually. A company may introduce an AI tool that saves a few hours of work every day. Another system may reduce the time required to analyse data. Recruitment software may screen applications that previously had to be reviewed manually. Customer service teams may automate questions that once required several employees. Individually, these changes may seem harmless. But when similar changes happen across different departments, organisations may start asking a very different question: Do we still need the same number of people to achieve the same results? That is where the real concern begins. AI does not necessarily have to replace an entire job. If it can take away enough tasks from a role, the role itself can eventually change.
And this brings us to something I believe we need to discuss much more openly: the future of entry-level jobs. Most people do not begin their careers as experts. We start somewhere. We prepare basic reports, organise information, make calls, assist senior employees, respond to routine queries and sometimes make mistakes along the way. Those ordinary tasks are part of how professional maturity is developed. Over time, we learn to handle more complicated situations and take greater responsibility. But what happens if many of those starting-level tasks are increasingly handled by technology? Where does a graduate get the opportunity to learn? We could potentially find ourselves in a situation where organisations want experienced professionals, while the number of opportunities available to gain that experience becomes smaller. For young people entering the workforce, that could be one of the biggest challenges created by AI.
This is why I don’t think the conversation should simply be about whether AI will “take our jobs.” That question is too simple. A better question is: Which parts of our jobs can AI do, and what value can we bring beyond those tasks? Every professional should be asking this about their own role. What work do I spend most of my time doing? Which parts are repetitive? Which parts could be automated? Where do I add judgement, creativity or human understanding? These questions can be uncomfortable because they may force us to recognise that some of the work we consider valuable today may become easier to automate tomorrow. But recognising that early gives us an advantage. We have time to learn rather than waiting until change is forced upon us.
Learning to use AI will certainly be important. But I don’t think simply knowing how to write a good prompt will be enough to protect someone’s career. The more important question is what we can do with the time and capability that AI gives us. If a machine can prepare a first draft of a report, can we interpret what that report means? If AI can shortlist candidates, can we understand whether someone will genuinely fit into an organisation? If a system can analyse customer data, can we understand the human reason behind the numbers? If technology can give us ten possible solutions, can we decide which one makes sense for our situation? These are areas where professional judgement becomes increasingly important.
This means that the skills we sometimes describe as “soft skills” may become some of our strongest professional assets. Communication, critical thinking, emotional intelligence, leadership, negotiation, creativity, relationship building and problem-solving are not just nice additions to a CV. They influence how people handle uncertainty, work with others and make decisions when there is no perfect answer. Technology can provide information, but information alone does not always tell us what to do with it. A person who understands both their profession and the technology supporting it could become far more valuable than someone who knows only one side.
However, the responsibility should not fall entirely on employees. Organisations also need to prepare for this transition. If a company introduces AI simply to reduce headcount, it may gain short-term efficiency but lose valuable knowledge, experience and employee trust in the process. Instead, organisations should think about how technology can redesign work and help people move into higher-value responsibilities. Reskilling should not be treated as a one-time training programme. Employees need opportunities to experiment, learn new tools, take on different responsibilities and understand how their roles are changing. Leaders also need to communicate honestly. People are much more likely to embrace technology when they understand why it is being introduced and how it will affect their work.
There is also an important responsibility on educational institutions and young professionals. A degree may open the door to a first opportunity, but it may no longer be enough to remain relevant throughout an entire career. Continuous learning is becoming less of a choice and more of a necessity. Professionals may need to update their technical knowledge, understand new tools, develop business awareness and become comfortable learning things they were never taught in college. The idea of finishing education and then simply applying the same knowledge for the next twenty years may become increasingly unrealistic.
At the same time, I don’t think we should look at AI only through fear. Every major technological shift has changed the nature of work. New roles have emerged alongside roles that disappeared or changed. AI will probably do the same. There will be opportunities we cannot yet clearly see. The challenge is that the transition may not be comfortable for everyone, and the people who are slow to adapt may feel the impact before they see the opportunities.
So, should we be afraid of AI?
I don’t think fear is going to help us. Preparation will.
We need to understand the technology, but we also need to understand ourselves. We need to know where our strengths lie, where our skills are becoming outdated and what we need to learn next. Most importantly, we need to stop thinking of learning as something that ends when we receive a qualification.
We cannot predict exactly what the job market will look like five or ten years from now. Some jobs will change. Some may become smaller. New roles will appear. And some roles may disappear altogether. But one thing is within our control: our willingness to keep learning and adapting.
AI may not replace every employee.
But employees who know how to use AI, think critically, understand people and bring judgement to their work may increasingly have an advantage over those who choose not to adapt.
That is why preparing for AI should not begin when our job is at risk.
It should begin while we still could prepare.
And perhaps the question we should all be asking ourselves is a simple one:
If my job changes tomorrow, will I have the skills to change with it?
