Menu

leadership

The Human Side of the Algorithm: Why Personality Dictates AI Adoption

by

March 23, 2026

The Human Side of the Algorithm: Why Personality Dictates AI Adoption

By Adam Stamm, Co-Owner, Online DISC Profile

The rapid integration of Artificial Intelligence into the modern workplace is often discussed in terms of technical capability, processing power, and economic disruption. However, as we move past the initial novelty of generative tools, a more nuanced reality is emerging: the success of AI adoption depends less on the software itself and more on the psychological makeup of the people using it.

In a recent study of over 4,000 employees conducted by Online DISC Profile, we found that 76% of workers are now comfortable using AI in their daily roles, and perhaps more surprisingly, given the headlines regarding automation, is that 71% of respondents feel secure in their positions and are not worried about AI taking their jobs. Yet, despite this general comfort, there remains a significant friction point: one in five employees (22%) indicated they would likely leave a job due to “excessive” AI use.

To understand this mixture of attitudes towards AI, we must look at the workplace through the lens of personality. Using the DISC methodology, we can see how different behavioral types perceive AI not just as a tool, but as a digital colleague.

  • The Efficiency Paradox: The Dominant (D-Type)

Individuals with a “Dominant” personality type are driven by results, speed, and control. For a D-type, AI is a natural ally. Because these tools work instantaneously, they allow D-types to complete tasks at an accelerated pace, enabling them to stay in control while managing a multitude of complex projects.

However, this relationship is not without its tensions. The D-type’s inherent need for autonomy means they may view AI with caution if the tool begins to dictate how they work rather than simply assisting them. If the AI becomes a bottleneck or operates in a way that feels restrictive, the D-type may reject it in favor of maintaining their own methodology.

  • The Social Conundrum: The Influence (I-Type)

“Influence” types are characterized by their social nature and need for interaction. On the surface, Large Language Models (LLMs) appeal to I-types because they are inherently conversational and often programmed to provide “cheery” or high-energy responses.

The risk for I-types is rooted in social approval. These employees are highly attuned to the culture of their peer group. If a team’s prevailing sentiment is skeptical of AI, an I-type is likely to avoid using it to maintain social cohesion and alignment with their colleagues. For them, AI adoption is a communal decision rather than a technical one.

  • The Systematic Teammate: The Steadiness (S-Type)

Employees who fall into the “Steadiness” category value systems, processes, and consistency. They often gravitate toward AI because of its systematic nature; they view the technology as a reliable, process-oriented teammate that can handle repetitive structures.

But the S-type is also the most empathetic of the personality groups. They place a high emphasis on the needs of others. If they perceive that increased AI usage is leading to staff reductions or harming the well-being of their colleagues, they are likely to opt out of using the technology as a matter of principle. Their loyalty lies with the people, not the process.

  • The Risk Manager: The Conscientious (C-Type)

The “Conscientious” personality type is defined by a desire for accuracy and a deep-seated aversion to risk. For a C-type, AI is a double-edged sword. It can be an invaluable asset for identifying human errors and performing “extra steps” in quality control.

Conversely, the well-documented tendency for AI to “hallucinate” or provide confidently incorrect information is a deal-breaker for many C-types. Because they fear being associated with incorrect data, they may avoid AI entirely rather than risk the fallout of a machine-generated error.

  • The Managerial Mandate: Transparency and Choice

As businesses navigate this transition, leaders must recognize that a “one-size-fits-all” AI mandate will likely backfire. 

Jeannie Bril, industrial/organizational psychologist, says that if a person feels forced to use AI, this may challenge their identity and impact their psychological well-being: “Individuals in creative jobs may experience negative impacts on their psychological well-being if they are forced to use AI tools at work because they previously had the freedom to choose how to do their jobs.”

To manage a workforce with differing personalities, managers must prioritize two things: transparency and choice.

  • Transparency: If a company uses an automated note-taker in meetings, this must be communicated clearly. Some employees may feel uncomfortable being recorded or monitored by an algorithm, and their privacy concerns must be respected.
  • Choice: Employers should evaluate which AI applications are “imperative” and which are “optional”. Giving employees the agency to decide how AI fits into their workflow, rather than mandating its use, preserves their sense of identity and prevents the “AI burnout” that leads to turnover.

Ultimately, the goal of integrating AI should be to augment human capability, not to override human personality. By understanding personality types within a team, businesses can move away from a “tech-first” approach and toward a “people-first” strategy that respects the diverse ways we think and work.

About the Author

After spending seven years in various Advertising and Marketing positions, Adam Stamm left his corporate job and joined his family’s business.

Here he regularly has opportunities to support products and services that focus on professional development, self-awareness, and improving workplace culture.

Adam is passionate about connecting with others and solving problems. Outside of his day job, he serves on the board of directors of the Greater Philadelphia Chapter Association of Talent Development where he works to provide educational programming around talent development to chapter members.

Do you wish to contribute to the next HR Spotlight article? Or is there an insight or idea you’d like to share with readers across the globe?

Individual Contributors:

Answer our latest queries and submit your unique insights: https://bit.ly/SubmitBrandWorxInsight

Submit your article: https://bit.ly/SubmitBrandWorxArticle

PR Representatives:

Answer the latest queries and submit insights for your client: https://bit.ly/BrandWorxInsightSubmissions

Submit an article for your client: https://bit.ly/BrandWorxArticleSubmissions


Please direct any additional questions to: connect@brandworx.digital

From Friction to Feedback: Leaders on Turning Policy Pushback into Progress

by

From Friction to Feedback: Leaders on Turning Policy Pushback into Progress

In the evolving landscape of work, where flexibility once felt like a hard-won victory, certain HR policies continue to stir quiet (and sometimes loud) resistance from employees. 

Why do rules that seem logical on paper—return-to-office mandates, rigid performance reviews, mandatory tech adoption—often land like unwelcome intrusions? 

On HRSpotlight, candid executives, CEOs, HR advisors, and culture builders open up about the single policy that reliably generates the strongest pushback in their organizations, and the thoughtful, human-centered ways they’ve turned friction into alignment. 

From return-to-office mandates met with pleas for autonomy, to annual reviews that feel disconnected from daily reality, to AI tool rollouts that threaten professional identity—these leaders reveal how resistance rarely stems from laziness or entitlement. 

Instead, it signals a deeper need for trust, voice, and purpose. 

Their shared strategies—transparent “why” conversations, employee co-creation, flexible compromises, continuous feedback models, empathy-led transitions—demonstrate that the most resisted policies can become the most embraced when handled with clarity, inclusion, and genuine care. 

Explore which approaches are quietly reshaping compliance into commitment.

Read on!

Najeeb Khan
Head of Training & Events, Teamland

At Teamland, where we collaborate with HR leaders to improve engagement and team performance, one of the policies employees often push back against is the annual performance review process.

Many employees find it outdated or anxiety-inducing, especially when feedback feels one-sided or disconnected from their daily work.

The resistance usually reflects a deeper desire for ongoing feedback and recognition, not opposition to accountability.

We recommend addressing this by shifting to continuous feedback models supported by regular team check-ins and coaching sessions.

This approach helps HR foster transparency, strengthen trust, and turn performance reviews into growth conversations rather than evaluations.

Continuous Feedback Ends Annual Review Dread

Rebecca Trotsky
Chief People Officer, HR Acuity

Policies that try to control where or how people work are the ones employees push back on the most.

But there’s nuance here: Our people aren’t resisting work; they’re resisting a loss of trust and autonomy.

The way to address that resistance is to give teams agency. Let them define their own moments that matter for collaboration, strategy and connection, whether virtual or in person. Back it up with clear intent and make the experience meaningful.

When presence is purposeful, not mandated, employees feel trusted and engaged.

The future of work isn’t hybrid or remote—it’s human.

When we design work around trust and autonomy, people don’t just show up, they show up with purpose.

Agency Over Control Sparks True Engagement

Marcus Denning
Senior Lawyer, MK Law

As the CEO of MK Law I have experienced both the legal aspects of managing an organization as well as the human element of managing a diverse group of professional staff members.

Combining my experience of Commercial Leadership and my knowledge of Criminal Law provides me with a unique understanding of how to handle employee complaints and develop successful methods for removing obstacles that are present at the workplace.

One of the primary reasons that employees resist implementing many HR policies is due to the strictness of the annual performance evaluation process.

Employees typically believe that they are separate from their daily job and therefore will be frustrated by the evaluations.

There is a disconnect between the type of feedback employees receive during their annual evaluation and the employees’ work over the course of the entire year within the traditional model.

Continuous feedback is the best method to reduce or eliminate the resistance to implementing a new HR policy such as a shift to a continuous feedback model.

Managers must continuously communicate with employees regarding their performance and recognize employees for their accomplishments on an ongoing basis.

This continuous communication results in an employee who is more engaged, motivated and productive in their role.

Ongoing Feedback Replaces Stressful Yearly Reviews

David Weisselberger
Entrepreneur, Erase The Case

A common area of resistance among the workplace policies developed by Human Resource departments has been the long-standing, rigid performance evaluation process.

Due to the fact that these reviews are traditionally conducted annually, employees view them as being separate from their daily work responsibilities, which can lead to frustration and a disengaged workforce.

In response to this, I suggest moving away from the traditional performance evaluation model and toward a continuous feedback model.

Under this model, instead of waiting until formal performance review times, managers will provide employees with continuous, timely feedback based on each employee’s performance.

Early recognition of accomplishments and identification of opportunities for growth and development creates an environment where employees feel comfortable communicating openly about their job, while also allowing employees to make proactive changes to their work assignments as needed.

Timely Feedback Stops Annual Review Pushback

Nathan Wadding
CEO, Kindling Culture Agency

One HR policy employees often push back against is mandatory technology adoption—especially around AI tools.

While these policies are intended to increase efficiency, they can feel threatening to people whose expertise and identity are tied to their work. The resistance isn’t really about technology; it’s about purpose, pride, and security.

To address this, leaders need to focus on how the change happens, not just the outcome.

Start by defining what AI means to your organization and connect it clearly to your mission. Identify early adopters to model success, provide extra support for those less comfortable, and create forums for open conversation.

Most importantly, honor the experience people bring.

If you respect their value and invite them to help shape the transition, they’ll be far more likely to embrace it.

Honor Expertise to Ease AI Adoption

Hassan Elbiali
Owner, Agendapedia

One HR policy that consistently encounters pushback is mandatory return-to-office requirements after extended remote work periods.

Many employees value the flexibility and autonomy of remote work; sudden shifts can feel restrictive or dismissive of individual needs.
To address this resistance, HR leaders should prioritize transparent communication—clearly outlining the business rationale and listening to employee concerns.

Incorporating flexible hybrid options, gathering regular feedback, and actively involving staff in policy discussions builds trust and fosters buy-in.

By demonstrating empathy and a willingness to adapt, companies can ease the transition and maintain morale.

Empathy + Options Soften Return-to-Office Pushback

James Bernard
Principal Owner, Alcatraz Escape Games

I run haunted attractions and escape rooms in Utah, so I’ve dealt with plenty of team resistance–especially around our actor training requirements and safety protocols.

The biggest pushback I’ve seen is against time restrictions during team activities.

When we introduced the 5-minute rule at Alcatraz Escape Games (if your team is stuck for 5+ minutes without progress, you must ask for a hint), corporate groups initially hated it. They saw it as admitting defeat. But when I showed them completion data–teams using hints strategically had an 87% escape rate vs. 34% for teams who refused help–the resistance melted away.

People want to win more than they want to be stubborn.

My approach is to frame policies around success metrics, not compliance.

Instead of “you have to ask for hints,” I positioned it as “here’s how winning teams manage their 60 minutes.”

At Castle of Chaos, when we mandated that actors complete improv training, I didn’t sell it as a requirement–I showed them footage of guest reactions when actors adapted in real-time versus following scripts. Suddenly everyone wanted that training.

The key is making the policy feel like a competitive advantage for them, not a restriction on them. Show the scoreboard, not the rulebook.

Show the Scoreboard, Not the Rulebook

Gerald Michaels
Owner, Adept Construction

I’ve been running a family roofing company in the Chicago suburbs since 1997, so I’ve seen my share of policy battles with crews.

The one that gets the most pushback? Mandatory pre-job site photos and documentation. When we required every team to spend 15 minutes before starting work photographing existing conditions–not just the roof, but landscaping, driveways, AC units–the complaints were instant. Guys saw it as wasted time when they could be setting up ladders.

I fixed it by showing them the insurance claim we avoided in Downers Grove.

A homeowner tried to say we cracked their driveway during a tear-off, but our pre-job photos proved that crack existed before we arrived.

That single documentation saved us a $3,200 repair bill and kept our insurance rates from spiking. I told the crew: “You’re not taking pictures for me–you’re protecting yourself from getting blamed for damage you didn’t cause.”

The real shift happened when one of our longtime foremen had a customer claim we damaged their gutter during a Villa Park job. He pulled up his time-stamped photos showing the gutter was already dented, and the complaint died immediately. Now the same guys who fought the policy are the ones who take the most thorough photos–they realize it’s 15 minutes of protection against weeks of headaches and disputes that could tank their reputation.

Fifteen Minutes of Photos Beats Weeks of Headaches

The HR Spotlight team thanks these industry leaders for offering their expertise and experience and sharing these insights.

Do you wish to contribute to the next HR Spotlight article? Or is there an insight or idea you’d like to share with readers across the globe?

Individual Contributors:

Answer our latest queries and submit your unique insights:
https://bit.ly/SubmitBrandWorxInsight

Submit your article:
https://bit.ly/SubmitBrandWorxArticle

PR Representatives:

Answer the latest queries and submit insights for your client: https://bit.ly/BrandWorxInsightSubmissions

Submit an article for your client:
https://bit.ly/BrandWorxArticleSubmissions


Please direct any additional questions to: connect@brandworx.digital

Recent Posts

Discover the latest HR Tips and trends with our weekly newsletters!

Employee Leave Isn’t the Problem. The Real Issue Is Lack of Planning.

by

March 09, 2026

Employee Leave Isn’t the Problem. The Real Issue Is Lack of Planning.

By Rachel Shaw

Leave management is one of the most frustrating and most predictable parts of human resources.

And that is exactly the problem.

Employers often feel caught off guard when an employee needs time away from work for a medical condition, family care or a personal matter. The process becomes emotional, reactive and operationally disruptive. But the reality is this: over the course of any employee’s tenure, leave is not an exception. It is an inevitability.

Every workforce will experience illness, injury, pregnancy, caregiving needs, mental health events and life transitions. These are not outliers. They are part of the employee lifecycle. Yet many organizations still treat leave as a one-off rather than building systems that anticipate it.

The issue is not that employees need leave. The issue is that too many organizations are not designed to handle it well when it comes up.

  • Leave Management Is a Systems Issue

Most employers have compliance mechanisms in place. They know how to issue an FMLA notice or respond to a doctor’s note. But compliance alone is not a strategy.

Where organizations struggle is in the absence of a clear, coordinated leave management program that addresses:

  • how leave is requested and tracked
  • how coverage is handled operationally
  • how supervisors respond in the moment
  • how leave interacts with ADA obligations and workplace accommodations
  • how employees are supported during and after the leave period

Without this infrastructure, every leave request becomes a disruption instead of a manageable workflow.

Proactive employers recognize that leave is a predictable operational reality and build programming around it.

  • Planning Reduces Stress for Everyone

When employers take the time to define their leave processes in advance, the experience changes dramatically.

Supervisors are no longer guessing what to do or reacting emotionally in the moment. HR is not reinventing the wheel with every request. Employees are not left feeling guilty, unsupported, or confused about their rights and responsibilities.

Clear programming allows organizations to respond consistently and with confidence. That includes:

  • clear expectations for how and when employees request leave
  • defined processes for job coverage and workload redistribution
  • structured communication points during leave
  • thoughtful return to work practices that support reintegration

This is not about eliminating the operational impact of leave. It is about managing it intentionally.

  • Flexibility Where It Works

One of the most effective ways to reduce the strain of leave is through thoughtful flexibility.

In some environments, that may mean remote work or modified schedules. In others, particularly in the public sector, healthcare or frontline environments, it may mean shift swapping, modified assignments, or creative scheduling.

Not every role can be done from home. But every organization can evaluate where flexibility is possible.

When employees can adjust schedules for medical appointments or caregiving needs without immediately moving into formal leave status, organizations often see reduced absenteeism and improved morale.

Flexibility, when structured well, becomes a pressure valve that supports both operations and employees.

  • Supervisor Frustration and the Culture of Leave

One of the most significant risks in leave management is not legal. It is cultural.

Supervisors often carry the operational burden when someone is out. That burden can lead to frustration, especially when leaves are extended, intermittent or complex.

Left unaddressed, that frustration can show up in subtle but damaging ways such as tone, comments, skepticism  or disengagement. Employees quickly pick up on this and it erodes trust.

At the same time, employers are right to be attentive to potential misuse. That is part of good program management.

The solution is not to ignore concerns or to assume the worst. It is to train supervisors to operate with professional judgment, to follow process, avoid assumptions, document appropriately, and escalate concerns through the proper HR channels rather than reacting emotionally.

Employees should not feel like they are doing something wrong when they use a benefit or protection they are legally entitled to.

The way supervisors respond in these moments defines the organization’s culture far more than any written policy.

  • ADA and the Continuation of the Conversation

Another common breakdown point is what happens when statutory leave ends.

When FMLA or state leave entitlements are exhausted, the conversation is not necessarily over. Employers may have additional obligations under the Americans with Disabilities Act to evaluate whether additional leave or other workplace accommodations are reasonable.

Too often, organizations treat the end of FMLA as the end of the process.

In reality, it is often the beginning of a different conversation, one that requires individualized assessment, interactive dialogue and thoughtful decision-making.

Organizations that build a coordinated ADA and leave management program, which I often refer to as programming the interactive process, are far better positioned to navigate these transitions consistently and defensibly.

  • Supporting Employees, Not Just Complying with the Law

At its core, leave management is not just a compliance function. It is a human one.

Employees request leave at some of the most difficult moments in their lives: a cancer diagnosis, a complicated pregnancy, a parent in decline, a mental health crisis or recovery from injury.

How an organization responds in these moments matters.

Employers that approach leave with clarity, structure and empathy see measurable benefits: higher engagement, stronger retention and increased trust in leadership.

Those that operate in crisis mode often see the opposite: burnout, resentment and turnover.

  • Mental Health and the Evolving Workforce

Mental health-related leave requests continue to rise across industries.

Employees are more willing to seek support, but they are still highly sensitive to how those requests are received. Stigma has not disappeared. It has just become quieter.

Supervisors need guidance on recognizing potential leave triggers, responding without prying into protected medical information and connecting employees with HR and available resources.

Organizations that treat mental health with the same seriousness and neutrality as physical health create a safer and more stable workplace for everyone.

  • The Cost of Not Planning

The cost of poor leave management extends beyond legal exposure.

It shows up in:

  • operational disruption
  • supervisor burnout
  • inconsistent decision making
  • employee disengagement
  • avoidable turnover

Replacing experienced employees is expensive. More importantly, it disrupts the organization’s continuity and culture.

When employees see that their colleagues are treated with fairness, respect and professionalism during leave, it reinforces their trust in the organization.

  • A Final Thought

Leave is not the problem.

The absence of planning is.

Organizations that move from reactive response to intentional design, build clear processes, train supervisors and align ADA and leave programming, are able to manage leave in a way that supports both operations and people.

That is the goal.

Not perfection. Not zero disruption.

But a workplace where employees can navigate life’s inevitable challenges without fear and where employers can respond with consistency, clarity and care.

That is what good leave management looks like.

About the Author

Rachel Shaw, founder of Rachel Shaw Inc., is a nationally recognized ADA and leave management expert and sought-after speaker known for helping organizations turn legal compliance into operational strength. With more than two decades of experience, she designs in-house systems that allow employers to manage accommodations with both legal precision and human-centered leadership. She is the creator of the ADA Interactive Process Hallway® protocol, now used by thousands of organizations to manage disability accommodation requests confidently, consistently, and with care.

Do you wish to contribute to the next HR Spotlight article? Or is there an insight or idea you’d like to share with readers across the globe?

Individual Contributors:

Answer our latest queries and submit your unique insights: https://bit.ly/SubmitBrandWorxInsight

Submit your article: https://bit.ly/SubmitBrandWorxArticle

PR Representatives:

Answer the latest queries and submit insights for your client: https://bit.ly/BrandWorxInsightSubmissions

Submit an article for your client: https://bit.ly/BrandWorxArticleSubmissions


Please direct any additional questions to: connect@brandworx.digital

Navigating the Aftermath: Expert Advice on Employee Grief and Anxiety

by

Navigating the Aftermath: Expert Advice on Employee Grief and Anxiety

In the wake of layoffs, when the office air thickens with unspoken fears and survivor’s guilt, a lingering question hangs: how can organizations mend the invisible fractures left among those who remain, rebuilding not just productivity but genuine trust and resilience? 

On HRSpotlight, empathetic founders, HR directors, professors, and consultants illuminate HR’s pivotal role in navigating this emotional terrain—offering compassionate, actionable strategies that go beyond platitudes. 

From preempting rumors with factual, positive narratives about departed colleagues and facilitating small-group listening sessions, to equipping managers with tools for one-on-one check-ins, promoting EAP resources, hosting open forums for venting, and fostering “future fluidity” through skill-building workshops—these experts emphasize empathy, transparency, and proactive support to restore psychological safety. 

Their insights reveal that true recovery stems from acknowledging loss while guiding teams toward shared purpose and stability, transforming a painful chapter into an opportunity for deeper connection and renewed commitment.

Read on!

Andrei Kurtuy
Co-Founder, Novorésumé

Layoffs spread through a company like fast-moving “bad memes.” Word travels quickly, and uncertainty fills the gaps. The best way to counter this is to get ahead of the narrative with positive, factual communication.

When someone is laid off, share something respectful and genuine about them, ideally right away. This could be a short post on an internal social channel or the company intranet.

If those channels aren’t effective, managers should bring up the positive context directly in their one-on-one meetings.

HR can also prepare brief, compassionate communications that highlight the employee’s contributions and send them shortly after the layoff announcement.

This helps the team remember their colleague positively and reduces unnecessary anxiety.

Positive Tributes Counter Layoff Rumors Fast

Dan Zautis
Director, Korn Ferry

Human Resources teams that help with offboarding following layoffs can provide support and inspiration by offering direction to explore short- and long-term income opportunities, as well as career paths.

Organizations throughout the marketplace focus on placement of roles including blue collar, white collar, and entry level through senior executives.

Directing employees to appropriate, proven firms is a smart and considerate offering, allowing them to review interim, interim-to-hire, and permanent roles.

Several national and global organizations welcome talent to inquire about opportunities and submit resumes.

In today’s gig economy, the interest in short-term engagements across all industries and functions has never been higher.

Examples of experts in the space include Korn Ferry, Heidrick & Struggles, Adecco, and Manpower.

Guide Laid-Off to Proven Career Paths

Tina Schust Robinson
CEO, WorkJoy

In the aftermath of layoffs, HR’s role is to help employees regain trust, stability, and focus.


Start by communicating with empathy and transparency.


People need to understand what’s happened and what’s next. Equip managers to hold steady, human conversations that acknowledge loss while reinforcing connection and purpose.


Create space for reflection and recovery, whether through coaching, listening sessions, or facilitated team check-ins.


Most of all, focus the organization on moving forward with grace: honoring those who’ve left, supporting those who remain, and rebuilding confidence in the future.

Empathy and Transparency Restore Team Stability

Andrew Martin
Founder & Senior Resume Writer, Crisp Resumes

As the founder of Crisp Resumes, I regularly support clients who have lived through large restructures.

In my experience, HR plays its most important role after the announcement, not during it.

Employees who remain often feel anxious, guilty, and unsure about their own future. HR can stabilise morale by being transparent about the reasons for the layoffs, the organisation’s forward plan, and what support will be offered.

Open forums, one-on-one check-ins, access to EAP, and clear communication around role security make a significant difference.

Practical career support for impacted employees, such as resume help or interview coaching, also reassures remaining staff that the company is acting responsibly and humanely.

When HR leads with empathy and clarity, teams recover faster and trust is protected.

Post-Layoff Forums Rebuild Morale Quickly

Lisa I. Perez
Founder & CEO, HBL Resources

When layoffs occur, HR’s first responsibility to remaining employees is to acknowledge the loss and not rush past it.

Provide a clear, honest explanation of the business reasons and confirm whether additional reductions are anticipated, because transparency in these moments is crucial.

Invite questions in small group meetings and equip managers with talking points so they can listen, normalize emotions, ensure consistent messaging, and reduce speculation.

Offer resources such as EAP support, job-stability FAQs, and guidance on workload changes so people do not feel abandoned, especially when layoffs may mean more work and less support.

Finally, be visibly available. As I often say, “An open door should swing out, not just in.”

Get out of your office, walk the floor, and be present where employees are working so brief check-ins and sincere appreciation can start to restore psychological safety and trust.

Visible HR Presence Rebuilds Psychological Safety

Peju Akintorin
Founder, CareerThrive.com

Effective communications: HR should share reasons for the layoffs and what could be ahead, so that employees are not left trying to figure out things on their own.

Create an environment conducive to this by hosting listening sessions, providing clear talking points to leadership and being responsive to communications from concerned employees. “Ghosting” is not an option.

Providing emotional support: Survivor’s guilt post layoffs is a real thing. It causes significant emotional distress.

Equip managers with tools to lead with empathy, check in on team morale, and help employees refocus on what they can control.

Guide them to external counseling and EAP services (where applicable).

Visibly reinforce employees’ value: Recognize contributions and give employees clear insight into how their role will function post-layoff and whether any responsibilities are changing.

Be direct about it. It’s important to create a sense of safety and direction as the organization moves forward.

Listening Sessions Ease Survivor’s Guilt

Crystal Brown-Tatum
Founder, Black Girl HR

HR can provide emotional support and encouragement to employees during a co-worker layoff.

Transparency is limited but I do feel that if the Company had to make those decisions based on financial metrics or performance, being open and honest about that can be a motivator for employees to work harder to reach goals.

I also heavily promote the EAP (employee assistance program) to provide a safe space for those who need to discuss issues such as anxiety or abandonment with a professional.

While it may seem unconventional, create an Open Door Policy or Open Office Hours and allow people to just come in and talk or vent about it. This is a great opportunity to hear what the concerns are and effectively address them.

HR can coach managers to reassure employees that heavy workloads won’t just be dumped on them without proper recognition, appreciation or even compensation.

It is critical that the remaining employees understand the business decision, what is expected from them and to buy into the organizational changes.

Open Door Hours Let Teams Vent

Ed Madison
Co-Director, SOJC Media Innovation Lab

HR can play a steadying role when employees feel shaken by layoffs.

People need honest communication, emotional support, and a sense of direction. As I often say, “Employees don’t just need to know what happened—they need help understanding how to move forward.”

One useful idea is Future Fluidity, a plain-language approach to adapting in uncertain times.

It means helping people understand changing workplace trends, adjust to new expectations, and stay emotionally grounded.

HR can support this through brief workshops, open office hours, and practical skill-building resources.

In moments like these, “The most important thing HR can offer is a feeling of agency—reminding employees they still have choices and a path ahead.”

Future Fluidity Workshops Restore Agency

Amanda M. Main
Chief Innovation Officer, University of Central Florida

When layoffs strike, the real aftershock isn’t in the numbers—it’s in the narrative. People start rewriting the story of who they are and where they belong. That’s where HR becomes the storyteller-in-chief.

Don’t rush to spin optimism; invite truth. Host small, human conversations where employees can unpack what happened and rebuild meaning together.

When people find language for loss, they rediscover power. Do that well, and the company doesn’t just recover—it reawakens.

Because resilience isn’t born from comfort; it’s born from clarity, connection, and the courage to face what’s real and still believe in what’s next.

Honest Conversations Reawaken Team Resilience

The HR Spotlight team thanks these industry leaders for offering their expertise and experience and sharing these insights.

Do you wish to contribute to the next HR Spotlight article? Or is there an insight or idea you’d like to share with readers across the globe?

Individual Contributors:

Answer our latest queries and submit your unique insights:
https://bit.ly/SubmitBrandWorxInsight

Submit your article:
https://bit.ly/SubmitBrandWorxArticle

PR Representatives:

Answer the latest queries and submit insights for your client: https://bit.ly/BrandWorxInsightSubmissions

Submit an article for your client:
https://bit.ly/BrandWorxArticleSubmissions


Please direct any additional questions to: connect@brandworx.digital

Recent Posts

Discover the latest HR Tips and trends with our weekly newsletters!

The Accountability Reset: How to Rebuild Discipline Without Killing Morale

by

The Accountability Reset: How to Rebuild Discipline Without Killing Morale

In workplaces where discipline quietly erodes—through missed deadlines, inconsistent effort, or subtle disengagement—a deeper question emerges: what if the real issue isn’t defiance, but a lack of clarity, visibility, or meaningful connection? 

On HRSpotlight, seasoned HR leaders, CEOs, founders, and culture experts reveal practical, non-punitive ways to reverse the slide without leaning on fear or heavy-handed rules. 

From using the 9-box grid to tailor performance interventions, rebuilding clarity through values-driven conversations, creating visible feedback loops and real-time metrics, recognizing positive consistency, training leaders in early, compassionate coaching, and aligning rewards with individual motivators—these voices emphasize prevention over punishment. 

They show how transparency, data, empathy, and shared purpose can transform slipping standards into self-sustaining accountability. 

Their collective experience proves that when employees understand the “why,” see the impact of their actions, and feel supported rather than policed, discipline stops being enforced and starts becoming the natural byproduct of a healthy, high-trust culture.

Read on!

Sam Cook
Content Director, MentorcliQ

We interact with HR leaders daily on different strategies to boost employee engagement (a key discipline issue).

Many in our community are repurposing the 9-box grid template to identify and address the cross-section between performance and potential.

Traditionally a succession-planning tool, it can also serve as a strategic framework to help formulate their performance improvement plan.

Let’s say you have two employees with notable disciplinary issues. When applying the 9-box grid, one has high potential and low performance, while the other has low potential and low performance. These two won’t be treated the same in their PIP; you may even decide not to use a PIP for the high performer, but take a different approach altogether.
It’s a key differentiation tool for improving discipline outcomes

9-Box Grid Tailors Discipline Interventions

Beverly Beuermann-King
CSP, Workplace Mental Health

When behaviour issues begin to increase, the solution is rarely to rely on more negative, punitive discipline.

The focus should be more on clarity, consistency, and culture. HR can start by revisiting expectations through a values-driven lens.

When employees understand what is expected and why it matters, behaviour shifts.

Reinforce those expectations through ongoing conversations, not just corrective action.

Provide leaders with the skills to address issues early, using supportive but direct language that prevents problems from escalating.

Finally, align hiring, promotion, and accountability processes with your core values; people rise—or fall—to the standards you demonstrate every day.

As I often remind the leaders that I work with: “Toxicity doesn’t take root in a culture that consistently communicates expectations and follows through. Values only matter when they shape behaviour and are lived out loud.”

Values Clarity Prevents Discipline Decline

Milos Eric
Co-Founder, OysterLink

When discipline suffers in the workplace, the role of Human Resources should go beyond simply acting as a disciplinarian and look to discover the “why” of the change in behavior.

More often than not, when discipline suffers, it is a sign of burnout, a lack of clarity around expectations, or disengagement rather than being deliberately defiant.

The critical first step is to begin a conversation, conducting listening sessions or pulse surveys to determine the root cause before hurrying to corrective action.

Once HR has an understanding of what is driving the lack of discipline, they should begin to rebuild structure through clear accountability systems and a positive reinforcement approach.

Rather than operating from a place of warnings to uphold the standards, the use of recognition programs that promote professional consistency can, over time, reset acceptable standards naturally.

Managers also need to be coached to model expected behavior, as cultural behavior emanates from a top-down approach.

At its core, restoring discipline is about restoring a sense of purpose.

When employees feel seen and supported and connect to the mission of the company, structure and accountability to that structure become the norm.

Root Cause Listening Restores Purpose

Dr. Nika White
Organizational Development, Nikawhite

An Emotional Regulation Specialist and organizational culture consultant who studies how connection impacts both well-being, human-centered workplaces, and performance.

Employee discipline improves when organizations move from control to clarity.

Most behavioral issues stem from unclear expectations, inconsistent feedback, or leaders modeling the wrong tone.

HR’s role is to reset alignment—by defining behavioral standards, reinforcing accountability through coaching rather than punishment, and training managers in emotional regulation.

When leaders respond calmly and consistently, they de-escalate tension and model self-management.

Pairing this with transparent recognition systems and early, compassionate intervention restores trust and stability.

Discipline then becomes a shared commitment to the culture, not a top-down demand.

Calm Coaching Builds Shared Accountability

James Bowdler
Founder, Prime Carers

PrimeCarers is a remote-first tech-driven company that connects families with independent at-home caregivers.

I also have experience in enterprise consulting, machine learning, and open innovation.

Discipline will erode if your system stops making good behavior visible or meaningful.

Simply showing data about who follows through and who doesn’t can be helpful.

Building feedback loops within the workflow helps your people understand how their consistency affects the team as a whole as it helps reset norms faster than formal intervention.

People respond to patterns they can see.

Visible Feedback Resets Behavior Norms

Richard Dalder
Business Development Manager, Tradervue

When discipline lapses in the workplace, it can create tension and disrupt the harmony that teams need to thrive.

HR has an important task in addressing these issues with empathy and firmness.

It starts with having honest conversations about what is expected, making sure everyone understands the shared responsibility to maintain a respectful environment.

Clear guidelines that are applied fairly help employees feel secure and respected, knowing that rules exist to protect everyone equally.

Managers should be supported to address small problems before they grow larger, showing care for both the individual and the team.

Creating safe spaces for employees to share concerns without fear promotes trust and openness.

Fair Guidelines Foster Trust Early

Ryan McEachron
CEO, ISU Insurance Services

We pushed our clients at ISU Armac to implement mandatory safety training programs—not just because it reduces workers’ comp premiums (which it does, significantly), but because it creates a culture of accountability.

When employees understand that safety violations or performance lapses directly impact their coworkers’ wellbeing and the company’s ability to stay in business, behavior shifts fast.

One manufacturing client cut incident reports by 40% in six months just by adding monthly hazard identification sessions.

The other piece nobody talks about: document everything from day one. I learned this chairing the Planning Commission—vague standards get you nowhere.

HR needs written policies with specific, measurable behaviors and consequences.
Then actually use them consistently. We’ve seen employment practices liability claims skyrocket when companies let problems slide, then suddenly crack down. That inconsistency is lawsuit fuel.

Safety Training Creates Real Accountability

Matthew Marshall
Co-Owner, Wright Home Services

I’ve scaled two home services companies, and here’s what most people miss: declining discipline is almost always a measurement problem, not an attitude problem.

At Wright Home Services, we turned this around by making performance visible in real-time through our CRM system.

We tied individual tech metrics—completion times, customer satisfaction scores, callback rates—to monthly team dashboards that everyone could see.

When one of our HVAC techs saw his first-call resolution rate was 12% below the team average, he self-corrected without a single HR conversation.

The transparency created accountability without the confrontation.

The other piece nobody talks about: reward systems break before discipline does.

We launched a referral program that paid out within 48 hours of a completed job, and suddenly our top performers had a tangible reason to maintain standards.

Poor performers became obvious by contrast, not by complaint.

HR’s real job here is making sure managers have data to point to instead of feelings to argue about.

Once you can show someone their numbers versus team numbers, discipline conversations become collaborative problem-solving, not adversarial.

The few who still don’t respond just fire themselves through their own metrics.

Real-Time Metrics Drive Self-Correction

Katherine King
Co-Founder & CEO, Dazychain

Money is the obvious reward, but if not available here are a few measures HR can implement in order to address and improve employee discipline:

– Make sure the goals and the deadlines are crystal clear. Often employees can’t articulate their job description because there is a disconnect between what they are hired and compensated for and what they are being asked to do.

– Identify what is important to individuals and teams and focus on incorporating those reward systems into milestones and goals.

A good reward is defined differently across cultures, so get leadership involved and ask individuals and teams “What does success look like this quarter/year” The answers pave the roadway to effective reward systems and ultimately behavioral change.

Personalized Rewards Shape Desired Behavior

The HR Spotlight team thanks these industry leaders for offering their expertise and experience and sharing these insights.

Do you wish to contribute to the next HR Spotlight article? Or is there an insight or idea you’d like to share with readers across the globe?

Individual Contributors:

Answer our latest queries and submit your unique insights:
https://bit.ly/SubmitBrandWorxInsight

Submit your article:
https://bit.ly/SubmitBrandWorxArticle

PR Representatives:

Answer the latest queries and submit insights for your client: https://bit.ly/BrandWorxInsightSubmissions

Submit an article for your client:
https://bit.ly/BrandWorxArticleSubmissions


Please direct any additional questions to: connect@brandworx.digital

Recent Posts

Discover the latest HR Tips and trends with our weekly newsletters!

Why Workplace AI Adoption is Quietly Becoming a Retention Risk

by

February 26, 2026

Why Workplace AI Adoption is Quietly Becoming a Retention Risk

By Stephanie Davis Neill, COO of Click Boarding

The rapid adoption of AI has many employees, and organizations for that matter, feeling like everything is spinning. We are witnessing a pivotal moment in the evolution of the modern workplace. We have just released some new research at Click Boarding, which has found that mandated AI adoption is quietly emerging as a retention risk for employers.

AI processes being implemented across workplaces seem to currently be driving disengagement instead of delivering productivity gains. U.S. employee engagement has fallen to its lowest level in 10 years, while job-seeking activity is at a decade high. This month is especially high risk for employers, with the most resignations happening in March last year.

  • The leadership disconnect

A disconnect is apparent as only 4% of employers report employee resistance as a barrier to AI adoption. However, nearly a quarter of workers (22%) say that they would consider leaving a job because of this. This suggests many leaders are unaware of this growing resentment from employees. Analyzing social media posts, we found that employees are quitting over mandatory AI tools that reduce their autonomy, create extra processes and make their work feel less meaningful.

Search data also shows a 10% year over year increase in U.S. searches for “quitting my job.” More tellingly, we are seeing the emergence of specific queries like “made to use AI at work,” which now garners 1,000 monthly searches. This disengagement stems from the challenges of managing change, with AI adding another layer of uncertainty for employees and HR alike. When tools are mandated across a workforce without proper integration, it can create a friction that workers are increasingly unwilling to tolerate.

  • The burden of training your own replacement

A primary driver of employee frustration is the lack of inclusion in AI-related discussions with leadership. Our analysis found workers to have expressed discomfort with developing AI tools and reporting on their performance, something which is rooted in fears that the systems they train could eventually replace their own roles. Without transparency, employees may feel they are being asked to build the very tools that will lead to their job roles becoming obsolete.

In sectors like information, technology, and professional services, AI adoption and labor demand for AI skills are rising sharply. Stanford’s AI Index notes an 80% year over year increase in AI skill demand for the information sector alone. Yet, despite this demand, Glassdoor reviews for leading IT companies in the U.S. show that workers feel sidelined and want to be involved in AI-related discussions.

  • Quality concerns and the “AI Big Brother” effect

We also found that many employees still prefer to spend longer doing something without AI due to creativity and quality issues. In some cases, the pressure is so high that people are lying about their AI use to meet mandatory usage requirements. There are frustrations around poor AI performance blamed on “bad prompts”, and that management has too high expectations of AI to replace job responsibilities it is not yet capable of.

The implementation of these tools is sometimes also perceived as a new form of surveillance. One Glassdoor review described their organization’s AI tools as “AI Big Brother,” negatively mentioning having daily screen time tracked down to the minute. Another suggested that those who do not engage with, or believe in, AI, faced worsened career prospects. This creates a culture of performative adoption rather than genuine, productive integration.

  • Rethinking change management for the AI era

Even before AI, change management has always been one of the most challenging things to get right in business. HR is often looked at to lead these efforts, but HRs are navigating the same uncertainty as the rest of the staff. We must remember that just as AI must learn and iterate, so do the employees working alongside it. It is a gradual process of adaptation and not a binary event that happens overnight.

To mitigate AI-related retention risks, I recommend that employers update compliance-driven policies to include AI guidelines and share key AI process information early in onboarding. It is essential to ensure that employees acknowledge these too. This sets a foundation of transparency for the entire tenure of the employee, and sharing this information early helps set the right expectations from day one.

  • The power of proactive feedback loops

Internal feedback mechanisms, especially anonymous ones, often provide a place for disengaged employees to communicate some of the frustration that can build up. This is especially vital when regular conversations are not happening with a direct leader. Providing regular and open feedback channels will allow organizations to address concerns proactively. By listening to their staff, organizations can pivot their AI strategies to be more supportive.

Ultimately, the goal is to keep employees engaged and empowered as AI adoption continues to evolve. You can learn more about the retention risk of getting AI adoption wrong to ensure your organization is on the right side of this transition.

Stephanie David Neill

About the Author

As COO, Stephanie Davis Neill leads efforts to retain and grow Click Boarding’s customer base while optimizing operations for scalable growth. With over 25 years of experience in operations across startups, private-equity-backed firms, and Fortune-ranked companies, she is a proven change leader, most recently serving as VP of Customer Success & Direct Sales at Aaron’s.

Passionate about building efficient processes, she applies Lean/Six Sigma methodologies to drive strategic problem-solving and cross-functional collaboration. Her expertise spans B2B account management, customer experience, and service management. A Georgia Tech graduate, Stephanie enjoys traveling and volunteering when not at home in Marietta, Georgia, with her family and rescue dog, Peanut.

Do you wish to contribute to the next HR Spotlight article? Or is there an insight or idea you’d like to share with readers across the globe?

Individual Contributors:

Answer our latest queries and submit your unique insights: https://bit.ly/SubmitBrandWorxInsight

Submit your article: https://bit.ly/SubmitBrandWorxArticle

PR Representatives:

Answer the latest queries and submit insights for your client: https://bit.ly/BrandWorxInsightSubmissions

Submit an article for your client: https://bit.ly/BrandWorxArticleSubmissions


Please direct any additional questions to: connect@brandworx.digital