- Gartner finds that most companies use monitored AI, not fully autonomous agents
- AI-induced redundancies are probably just cost-saving efforts
- The changes seen from AI are not in contrast to previous shifts
Despite the hype, many IT leaders avoid fully autonomous agents and stick to monitored AI implementations, new research has claimed.
Gartner research found that only 15% are considering, pilots or implemented fully autonomous agents compared to about 75% for all AI agent types.
Early concerns AI could replace human workers appear to have been more or less negated, with only 7% strongly agree that agentic AI will replace people in the next two to four years.
AI agents are not here to take your job
Almost twice as many (12%) see them instead replace applications in the workplace, indicating a new way of working and interacting with data.
However, in an increasingly connected world where we hear about new cyberattacks on a daily basis, however, three -quarters (74%) concerned that AI is just giving a new attack vector. Half (53%) also said that although significant productivity gains could be unlocked, they do not really expect transformative gains.
However, the worker’s concerns about job security are not unjustified. Lufthansa and Salesforce have both committed to cutting about 4,000 workers each due to AI, but a separate Yale study challenges the narrative and claims that the evidence actually suggests that these headcount reductions are more a cost control problem.
“Overall, our measurements indicate that the wider labor market has not experienced a noticeable disturbance since Chatgpt’s release,” Yale’s researchers conclude.
The study recognized that previous technological disorders occurred over decades, but AI has shortened it to “months or years”, which has reinforced change and thus unrest among workers.
Still, “no significant acceleration in the change rate in the composition of the labor market” has been since Openai publicly launched chatgpt, and the 1940s and 1950s still have the record for the fastest changes.
On the whole, Yale called Job Anat “speculative” and lacks any compelling proof, noting that AI’s effects on labor will not be different from previous technological and industrial changes.
