A couple of weeks ago we published an article in which threw out the question of comfortability and the possible de-humanisation of HR due to AI interventions. This article is also kind of a follow up to the previously published one but from a slightly different angle.
Today, we are trying to explore (and would gladly welcome your reviews) if it is really jobs within HR that are at threat of AI (i.e. job loss) or actually how it is about a change in "how" things are done. However, this is not the first time that there has been a "change" seen as a threat to how organisations/industries perform.
Back in 1760 to sometime between 1820 and 1840, the industrial revolution began in Great Britain. One could most certainly see the similarities between the change in working approaches/job roles and people's perceptions to "machinery" just as we now view AI. But as history shows, although how people worked changed and many job roles became redundant, likewise workers/employees picked up new skills, for newly created job roles to work in compatibility with industrialisation and also there are other technological interventions such as the traditional typing pool being "removed", which has not led to typists becoming redundant but rather they have evolved into more complex (skills wise) job roles/functions. More now than ever, there are technological advances that make information relating to both individuals and market/business trends previously not available. in short we now have the BIG DATA in addition to TALENT ANALYTICS that is revolutionising how we make business decisions in HR (according to CIPD) e.g. from recruitment and retention to upscaling Only time will actually tell how seamless that of HR and AI will be.
What do you think? Do you think that technological intervention within HR is a threat to jobs or otherwise? Please share your views with us.
