This is part 5 of a six-part series exploring AI, professional identity and the changing value of human expertise.
This article was originally written in English. If your browser is set to Dutch, it may be translated automatically. Please note that automated translations may contain grammatical errors or inaccuracies.
Making space for belonging in the age of AI
AI is changing how we work. It can help us explore ideas, develop new capabilities and approach familiar tasks differently.
For many professionals, these possibilities are exciting. For others, they raise important questions about their roles, their skills and their place within the organisation.
Both responses deserve attention.
Because when technology changes the way people contribute, it can also influence how they understand their professional identity. And that makes AI adoption as much a question of leadership and culture as it is of technology.
Work is part of who we are
Work provides more than income. For many people, it is an important part of how they understand themselves.
“I am a writer.”
“I am an analyst.”
“I am the person who understands this process.”
“I am the colleague people turn to when they need help.”
Professional identity develops through expertise, relationships, recognition and membership of a community. Social identity research shows that people derive part of their sense of self from the groups and organisations to which they belong (Ashforth & Mael, 1989).
When AI changes activities closely associated with a profession, people may naturally begin to reconsider their contribution.
They will start asking questions like:
Will my skills still matter?
How might my role develop?
What opportunities will I have to learn?
How can I continue contributing meaningfully?
These are important questions for individuals and organisations alike.
Creating the conditions to thrive
During my learning with Kotter’s Leading Change in the Era of AI programme, one distinction particularly resonated with me: Survive and Thrive.
When people experience change as a threat, their attention can narrow towards protecting what they know. When they experience greater agency and opportunity, they may be more willing to explore, learn and experiment (Kotter, 2026).
This provides a useful perspective on AI adoption. Leaders can focus exclusively on productivity targets, new systems and implementation timelines. Or they can also create the conditions that help people understand what the change means for them.
That includes explaining why AI is being introduced, involving employees in decisions and discussing how roles and capabilities might evolve. People are more likely to engage constructively when they can see a meaningful place for themselves in the future being created.
Taking concerns seriously
A constructive approach does not mean assuming that every AI initiative is beneficial.
Employees may have legitimate questions about confidentiality, fairness, bias, environmental impact, reliability and the consequences of automation. They may also wonder how performance and contribution will be recognised. Will thoughtful work still be valued alongside speed? How will organisations recognise the experience behind a good decision? Will employees have opportunities to develop new skills? Who will be involved in determining how AI is used?
These questions deserve substantive answers. Addressing them openly can strengthen trust and help organisations make better decisions. It also demonstrates that responsible AI adoption is something people can help shape.
From reassurance to participation
When people express uncertainty, leaders sometimes respond with reassurance and say, “AI will not replace you.”
Although well-intentioned, such promises may be difficult to guarantee. A more constructive approach is to give people meaningful opportunities to participate. Invite employees to identify tasks where AI could be useful. Ask which parts of their work require particular care, experience or human interaction. Involve them in developing appropriate boundaries. Provide opportunities to experiment, learn and share experiences.
Discuss how roles might evolve and what support people will need. Participation helps turn an abstract technological change into something people can understand and influence. It also creates opportunities for employees to contribute their knowledge of how work actually happens.
Belonging through change
Psychological safety is important during these periods of uncertainty. People are more willing to ask questions, share concerns and learn when they believe they can speak openly without humiliation or punishment (Edmondson, 1999).
Belonging adds an even deeper dimension. It is about feeling recognised, valued and able to contribute meaningfully. As AI changes work, organisations have an opportunity to strengthen that sense of belonging. They can recognise existing expertise while encouraging new learning. They can make space for different levels of confidence and experience. They can involve people in shaping the future rather than simply communicating decisions that have already been made. And they can demonstrate that technological progress and human development belong in the same conversation.
Ultimately, successful AI adoption should be measured not only by the capabilities organisations introduce, but also by the opportunities they create for people. The question is not simply how people will adapt to AI. It is how organisations can help people grow alongside it.
And for leaders, that begins with a deeply human question:
How can we help everyone see a meaningful place for themselves in the future of work?#
Sources
- Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20–39.
- Edmondson, A. C. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behaviour in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383.
- Kotter. (2026). Leading Change in the Era of AI. Course materials.
