Why Employees Prefer AI Over Their Managers: The Impact On Leadership

Why Employees Prefer AI Over Their Managers: The Impact On Leadership

getty

I once had a boss who believed he communicated clearly. Each week on Zoom, he laid out what he wanted us to work on. I listened closely, yet I often felt unsure about what he actually meant. When I asked for clarity, he would respond with, “If you had just listened to what I said in the meeting…” His snarky tone annoyed me, especially since I had listened. The problem was that his words were vague. I started typing everything he said word for word so I could review the notes later and try to make sense of them. Before long, the rest of my team asked me for those notes, because they were also confused. If I had access to AI back then, I could have uploaded my notes and asked, “What in the world does he mean by this?” That would have saved hours of frustration. So, it doesn’t surprise me that nearly half of Gen Z workers say they rely more on AI tools like ChatGPT for guidance than on their managers. That supports what I have experienced, and when employees prefer AI, it is a signal for leadership to make changes.

Why Do Employees Prefer AI Instead Of Their Managers At Work?

Employees choose AI because it offers something they are missing in their human interactions. They want clarity, speed, and a judgment-free space to ask questions. AI gives them an answer without the fear of being ridiculed for asking. In many workplaces, people hesitate to raise their hands because they do not want to look unprepared. With AI, they can ask anything, at any time, without worrying about what their boss will think.

When employees describe AI as easier to approach than their leaders, it reflects a cultural issue. It tells us that organizations may have unintentionally created environments where questions feel unsafe. Managers may be too rushed, too defensive, or too unclear to create trust. AI exposes where culture is broken.

What Does It Say About Leadership When Employees Prefer AI?

When people bypass their managers to ask AI, they are sending a message that their leaders are not accessible or that the cost of asking feels too high. This shows whether leadership has created a relationship where employees feel comfortable being uncertain.

A strong leader recognizes that clarity is listening more than speaking, and ensuring that people can repeat back what they heard to feel confident about what they heard. If leaders notice that their teams are going elsewhere for guidance, they should ask: Am I approachable? Do I invite questions? Do I make people feel safe when they need clarity?

The problem is, I doubt my leader who was not clear would answer those questions the same way I would. I believe he would say yes to all three. Therefore, it is important to get an outside perspective as well. Daniel Goleman, a psychologist known for popularizing the concept of emotional intelligence, told me he believed the best results come from a 360 evaluation. Self-assessment does not always reveal what we need to know. By seeking feedback from someone outside of the team, leaders can gain a perspective that is different from their own.

How Can Leadership Respond When Employees Prefer AI Over Managers?

Leaders can take practical steps to address the shift from relying on them to relying on AI. The first is to normalize questions. A simple thing to say to their team could be, “I realize you have a unique perspective regarding this issue, so is there any part of this that needs more explanation?” That makes it easier for people to admit confusion. Instead of assuming silence means agreement, leaders can create space for clarification.

The second step is to communicate with structure. Instead of giving a long list of vague tasks, leaders can summarize key points at the end of meetings. This not only reinforces clarity, but also reduces the reliance on employees having to scribble notes word for word to decode later.

The third step is to replace defensiveness with curiosity. When someone asks for clarification, the instinct to say, “I already explained that” closes the door. The instinct to say, “Let me try again” opens it. That small shift signals to employees that their manager values understanding over their ego.

It is important to teach teams to paraphrase back what they believe they heard. Even if they think they understood, if they stop assuming and start rephrasing what they believed they heard, it solidifies understanding. It’s a skill I teach my students, and it works just as well in the office as it does in the classroom. Help them learn to say things like, “what I believe you want from this project is XYZ, is that correct?”

Can Leadership Rebuild Trust If Employees Prefer AI For Answers?

Trust can be rebuilt through consistent effort. Leaders who show vulnerability by admitting when they could have been clearer send a powerful message. Saying, “I realize I was not as clear as I should have been” demonstrates humility. Over time, these small acknowledgments accumulate into trust.

Leaders can also rebuild trust by modeling what they want from their teams. When an employee takes the risk to ask for help, the leader’s response shapes whether that risk will be taken again. If the response is dismissive, the risk will not be repeated. If the response is respectful and encouraging, that leads to building a culture that embraces getting out of status-quo thinking.

Another way to rebuild trust is through follow-up. After giving instructions, leaders can check in a day later with, “How is this project going? Do you have what you need?” That gesture gives employees a second chance to raise questions they may have been reluctant to ask in the group setting.

How Should Leadership Adapt When Employees Prefer AI For Guidance?

Leaders must embrace what makes them human. AI can provide facts, summaries, and interpretations, but it cannot offer empathy. It cannot notice the expression on someone’s face that says, “I am lost.” It cannot sense the tension in a room after unclear instructions and potentially give incorrect instructions. Leaders can provide these human strengths.

One way to adapt is to become more curious. Instead of focusing only on telling, leaders should practice asking. Questions like, “What challenges are you experiencing?” or “What would make this easier?” invite conversations and signal interest in the person.

Another adaptation is to create time for clarity. In busy organizations, leaders rush through instructions without pausing. Building in a few minutes at the end of meetings for clarifying questions shows that understanding is a priority. It also models patience, which reduces the fear of judgment.

Finally, leaders can position AI as a partner rather than a competitor. Instead of worrying that employees will prefer AI, leaders can say, “If you use AI to get ideas, bring them back so we can discuss how they fit into our work.” This approach gives permission to use AI as a supplement to leadership rather than a substitute.

Bringing It Back To Leadership When Employees Prefer AI

Employees are going to go to AI for quick answers, and that can be okay as long as they are accurate answers and still involve managers and leaders. If people feel safe, clear, and valued, they will see AI as a helpful tool and not a replacement for leadership. Rather than looking at when employees prefer AI as a threat, look at it as a call for stronger, clearer, and more human interactions. The leaders who respond with openness, patience, and curiosity will build teams that value human connection. If you are a leader who finds yourself saying, “If you had just listened to what I said in the meeting…” you have already sent your people to look elsewhere for answers.