GenAI, Trust & Engagement: Why Employee Connection Matters More Than Ever
- Trust and ROI: A Complex Relationship
- Employee Engagement: Now Infrastructure, Not a Perk
- Silence Isn’t Support: The Risks of Misreading Disengagement
- Sensing the Emotional Climate: A Case for HR Infrastructure
- Can We Scale GenAI Without Trust?
The Hidden Barrier to AI Adoption: Trust and Emotional Engagement
Trust in generative AI is declining. But not for the reasons we think.
According to Deloitte’s State of Generative AI in the Nordics report (Q4 2023), organizational trust in GenAI dropped sharply from 53% to 40% within a single year. This decline comes despite high experimentation rates: over 70% of large companies in the Nordics are testing GenAI use cases. The paradox is clear—while the appetite for AI grows, trust is quietly eroding.
Behind this trend lies a critical, often overlooked factor: the emotional landscape of the workforce. In a region known for high digital maturity and progressive work cultures, the success of GenAI initiatives depends not just on technical implementation but on psychological safety, employee voice, and human connection.
1. Trust and ROI: A Complex Relationship
Deloitte’s data shows that nearly 65% of organizations expect significant ROI from GenAI within three years. However, many are now facing an early plateau in adoption—not because of inadequate tech, but due to internal resistance.
| Metric | 2022 | 2023 |
|---|---|---|
| Organizational Trust in GenAI | 53% | 40% |
| Reported GenAI Pilots | 48% | 72% |
| Expected ROI within 3 years | 59% | 65% |
The issue? While leaders talk about transformation, employees often experience confusion, exclusion, and concern. GenAI challenges not only job roles but also identity, contribution, and autonomy. These are emotional fault lines.
2. Employee Engagement: Now Infrastructure, Not a Perk
Historically, engagement has been treated as a “soft” benefit—important, but not core to strategy. That model no longer fits.
McKinsey’s State of Organizations (2023) asserts that “organizations with high levels of trust and inclusion are 1.6x more likely to succeed in digital transformations.” Emotional engagement is now infrastructure for change. It shapes whether people adopt tools, speak up about failures, or help iterate use cases.
Yet many companies rely on outdated tools: eNPS, annual reviews, and quarterly pulse checks. These are lagging indicators. By the time disengagement shows up in a survey, it’s already institutionalized in behavior.
3. Silence Isn’t Support: The Risks of Misreading Disengagement
MIT Sloan Management Review highlights a growing problem: “Silence is often interpreted as buy-in. It rarely is.”
In GenAI implementation, silence can mean:
- Fear of job loss or being replaced by automation
- Doubt in leadership’s vision or fairness
- Lack of understanding or skill
But none of these are flagged by standard HR metrics. The absence of resistance is not evidence of alignment. Leaders need better sensors.
4. Sensing the Emotional Climate: A Case for HR Infrastructure
Progressive companies are investing in daily visibility tools—not to control, but to connect.
Take AlbiCoins, a new-generation HR infrastructure used by Nordic and UK companies to track emotional signals in distributed teams. Rather than rely on top-down feedback loops, AlbiCoins works as a passive emotional barometer. It captures patterns in participation, peer recognition, and contribution—flagging early signs of withdrawal or overextension.
Unlike gamified rewards, its purpose is not stimulation, but visibility. When promotion isn’t available, AlbiCoins supports engagement through other levers: recognition, belonging, and shared progress. In a hybrid context, this allows leaders to detect where trust is breaking down long before it becomes public resistance.
5. Can We Scale GenAI Without Trust?
The promise of GenAI is real—but so is the human friction.
As Josh Bersin notes, “Human-centered tech is not just user-friendly. It’s emotionally literate.”
Organizations that treat engagement as a strategic lever, not an HR checkbox, will unlock faster adoption, richer experimentation, and higher returns. But this starts with a simple, often uncomfortable question:
Do our people feel seen, safe, and part of the change?
Until the answer is yes, GenAI will remain a powerful tool that fails to reach its full potential.
References
- Deloitte (2023). State of Generative AI in the Nordics.
- McKinsey & Company (2023). The State of Organizations
- MIT Sloan Management Review (2023). Why Silent Teams Fail
- Josh Bersin Company (2023). Human-Centered Tech: Strategy for 2025
