Europe’s Workers Are Ready for AI—Are Their Organizations?

Sara Murray: Welcome to C-Suite Perspectives, a signature series by The Conference Board. I'm Sara Murray, Managing Director, International at The Conference Board, and guest host of today's episode. Today, we're looking at a question behind many of the decisions organizations are making about AI and the future of work. 

Workers are already adapting to rapid change and adopting new technologies, but are organizations building the capability needed to support them? Joining me is Robin Maillard, researcher in the Human Capital Center Europe at The Conference Board, and author of The Reimagined Workplace 2026: Europe report. Robin, welcome.  

Robin Maillard: Thank you for having me.  

Sara Murray: So Robin, let's begin with the research itself. What is The Reimagined Workplace, and what business problem does this first European edition help address?  

Robin Maillard: The Reimagined Workplace is an annual barometer of how work is changing and what those changes mean for businesses and workers. It began in the US in 2020 during the COVID pandemic. As the pandemic was reshaping work, especially remote work, the workplace and businesses were quite concerned about productivity and the well-being of their workers. So at the time, we, The Conference Board, tried to survey workers and professionals and make sure that we can provide some insights to help leaders during this difficult time. 

The scope of that research has evolved over time in order to capture the changes of the environment and of businesses. For instance, we included things about the shortage of talents or the cost pressure due to a difficult economic environment and now AI adoption. 

This is the first European edition. That's the first time we surveyed workers in Europe. So we surveyed 475 workers in France, Germany, Italy, and the UK, and we also surveyed our human capital leaders, all members of The Conference Board in Europe-- we surveyed 83 senior executives. The practical value, it's pretty simple. I would say it's just taking the pulse of the workplace before deciding what it needs next, basically.  

Sara Murray: So the research is about moving the conversation beyond whether people are capable of adapting to AI?  

Robin Maillard: Yes. This year, it's the central tension. So these days, companies are adopting AI very fast and it's quite a change for the workplace and all workers. 

And what we noticed in our research, not only this one, but also the previous ones, is that workers may be moving faster than their organization. In that research, we noticed that 78% of workers say their organization managed their ability to adapt to recent major change. So their company helped them recently, but only 54% are confident that their organization can effectively manage future change that may affect them. 

That's a 24 percentage point gap. That's quite high, and it means, if I have to summarize, that past positive experience isn't translating into confidence in the future. And in a context of economic uncertainty and huge transformation in the business, mainly due to the adoption of AI, that's rather alarming, I would say. 

So the question is not whether workers can adapt. We see that they can adapt. They are confident that they can adapt. But whether organizations can create the conditions that allows them to effectively face those changes and be confident that their organization will continue to support them to change. 

Sara Murray: Okay, I get it. So the report's looking at both the workers' lived experience, the organizational perspective. What you're saying is-- and what comes through in the data-- employees are adapting, but the systems around them, like training, career development, and even the way AI capability is recognized aren't moving at the same speed, so there's a risk of a two-speed workforce. 

Robin Maillard: Exactly. So I'm just gonna use some key figures here. But in a recent research, we noticed that 48% of European workers, so almost half, are already using generative AI at work daily or weekly. However, only 35%, so just above a third, have used the training provided by their organization, and 21%, so only one-fifth, said that their organization does not provide AI training. 

In our current surveys, Reimagining Workplace in July, we captured quite a related gap. So 81% of our human capital leaders are rather confident that their organization will provide the skilling workers need to use AI effectively. If we ask the same questions to workers, only 40% of workers think the same, so are quite confident they will receive the correct upskilling and reskilling needed. 

We also noticed a similar gap between individual contributors who are way more skeptical than are managers on the same matter. So there is really, as you said, a risk of a two-speed AI transition, and, in my opinion, it must be taken very seriously by leaders today. 

To summarize, the main risk isn't that the organizations are waiting for AI adoption to begin. It's already happening, but it's happening without them being entirely ready, and the adoption is already happening before the infrastructure around it is fully complete and ready for that.  

Sara Murray: So those numbers are quite striking because clearly adoption's running ahead of enablement. Also in the report, workers say their organization helps them to adapt well to recent changes. So why are they less confident about what comes next?  

Robin Maillard: Yeah. That's one of the most interesting findings in that research, I think. We try to understand that gap. So just to remind you, 78% said that their organization managed their ability to adapt to major changes. But if we look, if we deep dive into the details of what that means-- so all the visible practices and the repeatable practices such as leadership support, a clear communication, explanation about the rationale behind the change, resources and trainings, all these aspects-- workers tend to rate them less positively, between 62% and 67%. 

So consistently, at least 10 percentage point below. There is what I call an outcome practice gap. So by that, I mean that workers recognize a positive individual adaptation outcome. They are positive about themselves, but they don't see equally strong evidence of a reputable organizational capability. 

So they are not sure that it's the organization is ready to help them again and again. So my interpretation is that workers' own adaptability helps compensate for weaknesses or inconsistencies of their organization in change processes. So in conclusion, getting workers through one change does not automatically translate in confidence that the organization can manage next ones. 

 And that's pretty important to understand that because there is a lack of confidence, and if we have to repeat that again and again, I'm not sure it will work that way.  

Sara Murray: Interesting. We're going to take a short break, but we'll be back shortly with more insights from Robin. Welcome back to C-Suite Perspectives. 

I'm your host, Sara Murray, Managing Director International at The Conference Board. I'm joined by Robin Maillard, researcher in the Human Capital Center Europe at The Conference Board and author of The Reimagined Workplace 2026: Europe. So if leaders are looking for a practical starting point, where should they begin? Is the direct manager part of the solution?  

Robin Maillard: Definitely. And you know what? It's pretty simple. Direct managers are part of the day-to-day experience of workers. So workers are not experiencing their business, their organizations through corporate announcements, central policies, learning platforms, all these things. But rather, you know the person who sets their priorities, explains what the change mean for their role, answers questions, respond to concerns, and follows through. 

That's where everything becomes credible and sustainable over time, and all data support that. Workers who say that their superior cares about their well-being are much more likely to be confident in their organization to manage future change. So those mentioning that their manager is quite supportive are 63% to be confident versus 32% of those mentioning that their manager doesn't care about their well-being. 

And workers with supportive managers are also more confident that their organization will equip them to use AI effectively. 47% with a supportive manager versus 25% for those mentioning that their manager doesn't care about their well-being. So direct managers are what I call core infrastructure, are part of that core infrastructure for an AI-enabled change. Managers, they really need time, AI literacy, coaching capability, clear guidance, and change leadership support to translate strategy into relevant use cases and help them help their people apply new skills.  

Sara Murray: Yeah, I think transformation might be designed at the enterprise level, but the credibility's really being tested in that day-to-day relationship with the manager. But couldn't organizations simply hire the right managers and the people with the capabilities they need to shortcut, cut the problem?  

Robin Maillard: Of course, that's always an option. But organizations nowadays, and we saw that in our survey, are quite constrained in two directions. First of all, they face difficulties to find the right talents. 

That's been a problem for a long time. 60%, 65% of our human capital leaders mentioned that. But also, 55%, and that's quite an increase based on previous data we had, mentioned that the organization restricted hiring as a cost-saving measure this year. And more than 37%, so more than a third, report both conditions at the same time. 

Under these conditions, hiring is an option, but not maybe the easiest one, or not the option you would choose. Upskilling, reskilling, internal mobility, redeployment, job redesign, manager development might be better options. And they become even necessities rather than just nice to have, I would say, for companies nowadays.  

Sara Murray: One thing I liked about the report is that it does not stop with the obvious questions about AI and skills. What was the most surprising or counterintuitive finding for you?  

Robin Maillard: I think the most counterintuitive finding I had in that research was remote work and workplace attendance. It's part of the discussion since COVID. And everybody is trying to crack the formula: does more remote days translate directly into better employee experience or better productivity or better well-being. And I tested that and there is no simple formula. 

I had to look at all the research, and they are all consistent of that matter. More remote days doesn't translate directly into more productivity, more well-being, or anything like this. However, what we noticed is that workers declaring an agency about onsite attendance, so kind of flexibility about the days they can work remotely or in the office, they declare more confidence about the future change the organization will face. 

They are more confident about the direction the organization will take. They are also more favorable about their well-being, mental health, intent to stay, productivity, belonging, engagement, and that's clear. Yeah, I mean, sure, it's statistically consistent. And I think that's one of the most interesting findings I had in that research. 

Sara Murray: Okay. So just to make sure we do not overstate that finding, you're not saying that more remote work automatically produces better outcomes. You're saying that meaningful choice appears to matter more than the number of remote days. Is that the right reading?  

Robin Maillard: That's exactly that. I'm fully conscious that not every role can offer the same level of flexibility. You cannot offer that level of flexibility to everybody. In-person presence can sometimes offer some valuable experience, such as better collaboration. It's easier to learn from others. It gives you some nice relationships with your colleagues. So it adds something. And all these aspects might help to explain the increase of level of productivity, well-being, intent to stay, et cetera. 

So the implication mostly is that the purpose and the boundaries of attendance, whether you ask people to come two to three days in the office, must be clear. And all the discretion and the flexibility must be preserved. Companies must also apply policies consistently and fairly, and make sure that all these aspects are well understood by workers in order to capture these benefits of agency and flexibility. 

Sara Murray: So let's bring all of this together. What should companies do differently as a result of this research, Robin?  

Robin Maillard: So I would say that first of all, move from informal AI experimentation to clear enablement through training, tool guidance, applied learning, carry connection. By that, the recognition of the efforts. 

You need to make sure that employees are recognized where they apply AI correctly, when they use the training in their day-to-day work. Second, direct managers are transformation infrastructure. That's not just a nice to have, that's key and crucial. That's core. They must be able to explain change, to translate the strategy, coach AI adoption, support learning, respond to concerns, redesign work locally with their teams. That's crucial. 

Third, build more capability from within. Companies nowadays must be able to upskill, reskill at scale and internal mobility, redeployment, job redesign, but also all this aspect of manager development isn't nice to have, but a necessity. 

And fourth, design attendance around meaningful agency, making sure that all these policies about being in the office, working remotely are correctly explained, understood, and that we preserve choice when possible. 

So there is common thread overall that's enablement. Workers are already adapting. They're adapting fast and well. Now, the role of the organization is to make sure that this is credible, scalable, sustainable in order to turn ambition into a credible everyday experience.  

Sara Murray: How I summarize that is the overarching message is that organizations, they don't need to teach people how to adapt. They've already demonstrated that they can, but the challenge is to build the organizational capability around them. Give people the skills, the support to use AI effectively, equip the managers to translate strategy into everyday experience, develop more talent from within, and create working environments that preserve meaningful choice. 

Robin Maillard: Exactly.  

Sara Murray: That's it for today, Robin. Thank you for joining us.  

Robin Maillard: Thank you.  

Sara Murray: Thank you for listening to C-Suite Perspectives. I'm Sara Murray, and this series has been brought to you by The Conference Board.