AI is creating new possibilities for people management, alongside important questions about jobs, fairness and professional responsibility. In EAPM’s recent webinar with the International Labour Organization (ILO), researchers explored what the evidence means for HR professionals.
On 12 October 2026, EAPM welcomed ILO researchers Pawel Gmyrek and Janine Berg for a discussion on AI’s potential impact on employment and its use in HR. Organised through collaboration between EAPM’s AI and New Technologies and Events working groups, the webinar connected labour market research with the decisions HR professionals face in their organisations.
Opening the session, Raffaele Credidio, Lead of EAPM’s AI and New Technologies Working Group, highlighted findings from EAPM’s survey of 327 HR professionals across 30 countries. Its central message was that AI adoption is moving faster than governance, reinforcing the need to consider accountability as organisations introduce new tools.
Understanding how AI could change work
Pawel Gmyrek explained why assessing AI’s impact requires looking at the individual tasks that make up a job. A role may include activities that generative AI can support or automate, alongside responsibilities that continue to require human expertise and presence.
The ILO’s research estimates that around one quarter of jobs globally have some exposure to generative AI. Crucially, exposure describes the potential for tasks to be affected; it is not a prediction that those jobs will disappear.
What happens in practice depends on factors including implementation costs, access to technology and organisational choices. The effects also vary across countries and occupations. Women face greater exposure, particularly in high-income economies, reflecting their concentration in clerical roles.
For HR, this points to the value of examining how work could change within specific roles and where employees may need support to develop new skills or move into different opportunities.
Protecting the route into professional expertise
One particularly relevant question concerned entry-level work. If AI takes over tasks traditionally performed by junior colleagues, how will future professionals gain the experience needed to become experts?
Gmyrek highlighted the importance of considering this when redesigning jobs. Removing routine tasks may create more space for specialist work, but organisations also need to preserve opportunities for people to learn and progress.
The discussion also explored how AI’s productivity gains could be shared. Higher economic output does not automatically translate into better outcomes for workers. Consultation and support through employment transitions remain important parts of managing technological change.
Asking better questions about HR technology
Janine Berg examined AI applications in recruitment, compensation and performance management. Drawing on research co-authored with Hannah Johnston, she encouraged HR professionals to scrutinise three elements: the objective a system is pursuing, the data it uses and the way it produces its results.
An apparently straightforward objective, such as hiring the best candidate, can be difficult to translate into an automated assessment. Berg described a recruitment system that assessed a candidate’s “growth mindset” by counting particular words used during an interview. The example illustrated how a complex human quality can become reduced to a narrow measure.
Similar concerns arise in performance management. Screen activity and email volumes may be easy to collect, but their value depends on whether they meaningfully reflect someone’s contribution. Poorly chosen measures can encourage digital presenteeism.
Addressing these problems requires examining the whole system, including whether its measures are appropriate for the decisions being made.
Involving the people who will use the system
Berg highlighted examples where HR professionals and workers helped shape technology through an iterative design process. Their involvement made it possible to question results, refine objectives and develop tools that supported their work.
For HR teams, this means taking an active role in evaluating and introducing systems, with sufficient time to understand their capabilities and limitations. Employee consultation and training can also help organisations build confidence and identify practical concerns.
Keeping the human element in HR
The closing discussion, facilitated by Aco Momčilović and EAPM Head of Secretariat Rebecca Normand, considered the skills HR professionals will need.
Berg emphasised greater understanding of data analytics and AI systems, alongside the continuing importance of human contact in the employment relationship. HR professionals need the knowledge to question technology and the judgement to recognise circumstances that a system may overlook.
The webinar offered a clear direction for the profession: take an informed role in shaping AI adoption, involve employees and assess whether new tools improve both organisational outcomes and people’s experience of work.