Leadership After Automation
Automation has not only influenced the work landscape but also made it utterly different. Systems nowadays can perform data analysis, process optimization, outcome prediction, and decision-making at a speed and scale that were unthinkable before.
The situation where machines more and more become our “thoughts” brings up the basic question for leaders: if intelligence is in the systems and not in the people, what is left of leadership? The reply is different leadership and not less leadership.
Automation will not drive away the need for leaders but will rather uncover what leadership has always been about.
When Thinking Is Automated, Judgment Becomes Central
The strengths of automation lie in performing logical operations, recognizing patterns, and carrying out tasks according to pre-set rules. However, it is still incapable of making decisions in cases that are unclear, associated with conflicting values, or totally new. While machines take over to help with routine thinking, the leaders’ role is relegated to the higher-order judgment that requires more thinking than the ordinary one.
It is becoming increasingly common for leaders to make decisions regarding what issues to tackle, what compromises to make, and what results are most important. These choices are connected with morality, sustainability, and human beings—areas that are not easily programmed.
Automation limits uncertainty; leadership decides on the way to go within what remains uncertain. One of the major skills that a leader of the future will have is the ability to make sound decisions.
Sense-Making in a World of Abundant Intelligence
One of the paradoxes related to automation is the issue of abundance. The heads of the organizations are not anymore limited by the unavailability of information but by the overabundance of it. The machines are constantly generating insights that are often faster than the organizations can process them.
After automation, one of the main tasks for leaders is to make sense of what is going on—interpreting the signals, putting the insights in context, and telling what is important from what is only measurable. The leaders have to link data with strategy, insight with intent, and intelligence with action. If there is no such interpretive layer, the automated intelligence will run the risk of turning into noise rather than an advantage.
Values and Ethics as Leadership Infrastructure
The involvement of automated systems in decision making that impacts human life—such as recruitment, credit provision, medical care, security—puts the ethical aspect of leadership into the spotlight.
The systems themselves are not ethical; the leaders are. The automation leads to the need for an ethical leader to be present in the organization. The leaders should set the limits within which the application is considered acceptable, determine the cases when fairness should prevail over efficiency, and make sure that human accountability is not obscured by the algorithms.
The trust that the stakeholders have in the organizations that rely heavily on automation is not primarily based on the technologies used but rather on the perceptibility of the human accountability. In situations when the systems take actions, the stakeholders still expect the leaders to take up the role of the accountable person.
Designing the Human–System Relationship
Automation not only alters the nature of work but also the workers’ attitude towards it. The functions move from doing to overseeing, from executing to choosing, from following the process to focusing on the goal.
The leaders should strategically plan this relationship. If automation is brought in without a consideration of the roles, it results in disengagement, loss of skills, or opposition. If it is accompanied with clear communication, it positively affects the human input.
The leadership after the robotization includes the task of making the people think only about what machines cannot do: imagination, compassion, analytical reasoning, and networking. It is not a technology hurdle; rather, it is a challenge related to the organization and culture.
Culture Matters More, Not Less
Automation does not wipe out culture but rather brings it out louder. In a culture of high trust, automation quickens the performance rate. In low-trust culture, it quickens the rate of malfunctioning. In the case that people are afraid of being punished, they will act defensively and override the systems.
If intuition is put ahead of evidence, the intelligent systems will be neglected. If learning is not supported, then automation will be like a rock. Leadership in the era of automation is a matter of culture. The leaders have to create the kind of environment where the systems are used with a lot of care, are subjected to constructive critiques, and are constantly improved.
Conclusion
Automation does not mean the end of leadership, rather it brings out the important features of it. When machines take over thinking and decision-making, leaders are required to make even tougher decisions and face ethical dilemmas, while being responsible for their choices.
The organizations that will come out on top are not the ones who do the most automation, rather, they are the ones who manage to lead better—the ones that comprehend that with machines thinking for us, leadership retains the appeal of being the human task of making the right choice, acting with care, and designing the future with purpose.
