This post was originally published on this site.
IS YOUR JOB AT RISK?
A Singaporean in his early 30s working at a regional tech firm, who wanted to be identified by the pseudonym Thomas, said that he has recently become more worried about his role being replaced by AI.
He declined to be identified because he is relatively new in the company and did not get his employer’s approval to speak to the media.
“It was made known a couple of months ago that the company has started to develop a comprehensive AI system capable of optimising desired outcomes more robustly compared to employee-made decisions,” the data analyst said. He has been working at the company for about a year.
“The possibility of retrenchment or irrelevancy is definitely creating some anxiety.”
Indeed, anxiety seems to be a pervasive concern among many employees, as highlighted by recent surveys.
Recruitment agency Reeracoen’s survey of 400 professionals in Singapore last year found that 53.5 per cent of them had concerns about AI taking over their jobs.
More recently in February, a Pew Research Center survey of more than 5,000 workers in the United States found that 52 per cent were worried about the future impact of AI use in the workplace, while 32 per cent felt that it would lead to fewer job opportunities for them in the long run.
To be sure, the WEF Future of Jobs report in January noted that all sectors worldwide will see a decline in tasks solely performed by humans.
However, Mr Blasco of Randstad said that it is more practical to look at how AI is causing disruptions to certain skills, rather than whole sectors.
Assoc Prof Theseira offered the “task substitution versus task complementarity” framework to explain the AI disruption in simpler terms: Jobs that comprise mainly tasks that can be performed by AI would face a higher likelihood of being substituted.
On the other hand, jobs that involve some routine tasks AI can perform, but also have significant components that the technology cannot yet handle, are likely to see AI tools augmenting or complementing the role, rather than replacing it entirely.
How can workers then better protect themselves in the face of AI disruption?
One possible approach is to avoid industries or specific roles already known to be vulnerable to AI displacement, Dr Seah of NUS said.
Instead, look perhaps at jobs that “require the human touch – social skills, empathy, social interactions and the ability to read human emotions accurately”.
“Jobs that require human interactions are likely to be less susceptible to displacements by AI at this point,” he predicted.
Still, it is inevitable that disruption will become more common as AI continues to advance.
“The unfortunate reality is that we, as individuals, will need to continually upskill to protect ourselves from the threat of becoming redundant. So, upskilling cannot be seen as a one-off affair, but an ongoing process,” Dr Seah added.
Mr Bedi of EY said that the key question a worker should ask themselves is: “What am I upskilling for?”
“Rather than focusing solely on immediate skill gaps, it is more strategic to prepare for roles that are two to three levels ahead. With AI continuing to disrupt industries, proactive planning is essential,” he continued.
A career transition may also help.
“Another key strategy is to explore lateral skill sets, career moves – even outside an individual’s current industry – and upskill accordingly,” Mr Bedi added. “This approach not only builds resilience but also creates a multiskilled workforce.”