A new survey shows many workers are turning to AI for workplace advice: What does that mean for culture, mentorship and the RTO?
When I’m at the office, I can easily turn to a colleague for advice: What do you think of this story idea? Why is this new tech glitching for me? Do you have any suggestions on a good contact?
But that common practice, which has existed for hundreds of years, may be fading now that AI has roared into the workplace: A recent survey out of Australia found that one in seven employees now turn to AI for work advice before asking a manager or colleague.
Why? Employees cite speed (57%), convenience (44%) and better-quality answers (44%) as their main reasons.
It should be noted, however, that 44% of employees say their choice between AI and a human depends on the task, and 42% still default to a manager or colleague first, finds ELMO Software, based on a survey of 1,068 Australian employees between January and June 2026.
I guess these preferences are not entirely surprising, given that AI is proving very popular for personal concerns, whether it’s relationship advice or health questions. A recent study I discussed out of Boston University and the University of Canterbury found that 74 per cent of employees were using AI for at least one form of personal or social support.
But with people leaning towards a tool on their laptop instead of a nearby colleague, what does that mean for workplace trust and culture, for collegiality and early career development?
Or are there some real advantages here that should not be overlooked, such as speedy responses and helpful insights?
Chipping away at workplace culture
If employees are being encouraged if not mandated to return to the office, but end up consulting their laptop for much-needed advice, what’s the point of the RTO mandate? With fewer conversations among co-workers, I’m sure there’d be a negative impact on workplace culture and camaraderie, along with teamwork and brainstorming.
Then there are mentoring programs, which are crucial to succession planning efforts. If people prefer to log on to ChatGPT or Claude for career guidance, the demand for valuable mentors may falter — with HR not knowing what kind of advice is being given out by the tech. That could create some real risks around career paths and employee expectations.
In addition, seeking advice when you’re a 25-year-old can be much different than when you’re a 45-year-old. A person’s ambitions, concerns, career goals and aspirations could be vastly different, and AI would need to know that to give a relevant response.
And then there’s the issue of accuracy: Will AI give the right advice? Will AI understand the context and nuances of a person’s situation? Will AI know about an employer’s policies or processes to properly show the way?
Pluses to consulting AI
On the other hand, the survey found that not wanting to bother a colleague was another popular reason for using AI, according to 28% of the Australian employees. That suggests there could be real gains in typing in a quick question about work so a genAI platform can display an insightful response within seconds.
And AI can be valuable even as a starting point. People often use the likes of ChatGPT for pointers before they visit an expert like their doctor or car dealership, so they know the right questions to ask. Why not consult Claude at work before consulting a colleague?
Plus, senior leaders are already on board, according to the survey, which found trust in AI nearly doubles among leadership. That confidence shows this tech is being embraced by employers and should be accepted as an everyday tool, at all levels.
A new voice in the room
We’re well past the point of asking whether we should allow these tools in the workplace. They’re here and people are going to use them. So, if we know employees will be querying ChatGPT for work advice, what’s to be done to curb any risks?
For one, boost the in-person element of the office. With the RTO mandates, there has been plenty of coverage about the importance of team-building events, social activities and lunchtime bonding — the ELMO survey results suggest those efforts should not subside.
Secondly, continue to allocate resources to mentoring efforts. If you’ve been meaning to, or you’re already rolling out programs, be sure to strengthen those efforts — which could even mean taking advantage of AI tools as part of the mentorship. The experience and insights from real leaders — including managers — in the workplace will never be authentically and effectively replaced by AI.
On that note, consider more training for managers so they’re accessible, approachable and not just seen as task masters.
Third, set some clear guidance on when AI isn’t appropriate for advice, such as internal policies or employment law concerns. Remind staff the tech is there for advice, not judgment.
Finally, take a look at the kind of advice employees are looking for. There could some valuable data there about people’s concerns, motivations and hesitations. If they’re routinely asking about a particular policy or process, maybe it’s time to take a hard look at what’s causing the uncertainty.
The helpfulness of AI at work continues to expand and amaze. But the most effective workplaces will be those that treat it as one voice in the room — not the only one.
