# The problem with AI becoming our easiest colleague to talk to > Source: > Published: 2026-07-23 19:32:00+00:00 When I speak with leaders across all industries about [AI](https://www.fastcompany.com/section/artificial-intelligence), there is always talk about efficiency—how much time we save and how [productive](https://www.fastcompany.com/section/productivity) we are. Workday’s new [Human Connection Workplace Index](https://www.workday.com/content/dam/web/en-us/documents/reports/human-connection-workplace-index.pdf) confirms that AI is making employees feel more productive, more confident, and less burned out. But we wanted to dig deeper: *What happens to our company culture when AI becomes the easiest “colleague” to talk to?* Our data revealed how AI is transforming how we brainstorm or seek feedback, and these early signals show leaders how critical preserving trust is. Will we use AI to automate our way into frictionless solo work, or to build workplaces that are relationally resilient? In this first Index, we expected to see strong signals about efficiency—and we saw them. What surprised me, however, were the illuminated gaps in connection. Employees are turning to AI for advice, mentorship, and even companionship. Many tell us they rarely have personal conversations with colleagues anymore, and have even taken time off work due to loneliness. This could be pointing to workflows that leave little room for relationship-building, and cultures where people aren’t sure it’s safe to admit that they don’t know the answers. From an employee’s point of view, AI is always available, never impatient, and doesn’t carry power dynamics or office politics. It responds quickly and politely, and doesn’t judge. Faced with a choice between potential friction and guaranteed convenience, many choose the AI tool. The concern is that without intentional design, AI partnership could quickly become the default place where the most formative parts of work happen—quietly and alone. Every major technology wave reshapes which skills matter most, and AI is no exception. If an algorithm drafts the tricky email, scripts the difficult conversation, and serves as a non‑judgmental sounding board, when do we practice respectful disagreement with a colleague? When do we build the social courage to say, “I don’t understand,” and sit with the discomfort that follows? These are not soft skills. They are core muscles of collaboration, leadership, reciprocity, and innovation. Like any muscle, they weaken without use. Our early research suggests some employees already feel that strain, reporting more difficulty reading emotional tone and non‑verbal cues, more anxiety about spontaneous conversations, and a sense that their ability to resolve conflict without digital mediation is slipping. If we migrate entirely into solitary exchanges with AI tools, we could find ourselves running organizations that are extraordinarily efficient yet emotionally underdeveloped—places where people execute flawlessly until they need to have a truly difficult conversation. Nowhere is this tension clearer than with Gen Z. Leading the way in daily AI use, they were more likely to report loneliness and difficulty forming deep work relationships in our Index. It is tempting to treat this as a “Gen Z problem,” but I see Gen Z as a leading indicator of where workplace social ties may be headed for all of us. They are building careers in a version of work that will soon be universal: AI woven into everyday workflows, fewer unplanned hallway chats, fewer brainstorms, and fewer opportunities to overhear how a tough conversation is handled. If future leaders lose chances to observe how trust gets built, that is a design challenge for organizations. In my Workday Foundation role, I spend a lot of time thinking about social impact at scale. One pattern is clear: Investing in human connection is a form of risk management. Inside organizations, strong networks and trusted relationships make it more likely that someone raises a concern before it becomes a crisis, that a struggling employee asks for help instead of quietly disengaging, and that teams adapt quickly when strategy, leadership, or organizational structures change. Viewed this way, the Index is an early warning system for operational risk. If employees are increasingly turning to AI instead of each other, leaders should be asking how they can create intentional opportunities for teams to build authentic interpersonal relationships and trust. So what should leaders do? One shift is to protect connection time. For years, we have been optimizing calendars for efficiency: fewer meetings, more deep work, leaner agendas. In an AI‑rich environment, high‑quality “together time” is also key. In-person performance conversations, honest two‑way career discussions, and thoughtful project debriefs should be non-negotiable, and not the first things we cut when schedules are tight. Another shift is to see mentorship and sponsorship as infrastructure. AI can help someone craft a sharper proposal, but it cannot tell them whose informal support they need for that proposal to succeed. Those lessons exist in relationships. Despite the potential emerging challenges our research revealed, I am deeply optimistic. When implemented thoughtfully, AI can reduce burnout and remove drudgery. These tools can free up time for the most human parts of work. These are the creativity, empathy, and shared problem‑solving that no algorithm can replace. But that outcome depends on what leaders choose to do with the capacity AI creates. I hope we can treat this moment as an invitation to redesign work so that every gain in speed is matched by an investment in connection. It’s an invitation to make social resilience as central to our growth strategies as technical resilience. And we can use it to build workplaces where no one is forced to choose between a future powered by AI and a future rich in human relationships. *Carrie Varoquiers is chief impact officer of Workday*.