HR Talks with Professor Claire Gubbins

For our next HR Talks, we are delighted to be joined by Professor Claire Gubbins, Professor of Organisational Behaviour & HRM at Dublin City University Business School. As AI reshapes how we work, one question keeps coming up: how do we make sure organisations don’t lose what makes them human in the process? We put that question to Professor Claire Gubbins. Claire brings a fascinating perspective to the future of work, sitting at the intersection of people, technology, learning and relationships. Her research explores how we learn and share knowledge at work, how relationships and social networks influence our careers, and how these are changing as the workplace becomes increasingly hybrid, remote and AI-enabled. 

Let’s start with you and your career 

How did you find your way into academia? Was becoming a professor always something you had in mind, or was it a more unexpected career journey?

As someone who now teaches and researches career management, the phrase “do as I say, not as I do” comes to mind. My road into academia was a combination of accident, opportunity and the influence of people around me. I grew up in a generational family business, far removed from academia. I was the first in my extended family to go to university, so this wasn’t a career I was familiar with. I was fortunate to grow up being encouraged to try everything and believing I could be whatever I chose. Resilience, perseverance, making mistakes and continuously learning were deeply ingrained. “Can’t” was not accepted vocabulary.

I initially thought I would enter a profession, specifically accounting. But during my Business degree at the University of Limerick, I became fascinated by understanding people and human behaviour. Organisational Psychology, Management and HR brought everything to life, and people management became my major. A stint in HR practice followed, but then a road I didn’t know existed opened up. I never thought about academia. I saw professors but never dared to think I could be one. Although university brought me out of my shell, I was still not comfortable speaking up in class. Fortunately, my professors saw something else and encouraged me to apply for a teaching assistant role. I panicked about standing in front of a room full of people, but “can’t is not an option”, so I did it anyway. That was the beginning. I became completely engrossed in teaching and wanted my students to see how exciting the subject was. I was then encouraged to do a PhD, and that began my research career.

The skills that become more valuable

We often hear that AI will change jobs rather than simply replace them. What are the human skills likely to become more valuable as AI becomes embedded in organisations?

There are a few central skills worth calling out. First is critical and analytical thinking. If we look at AI as another source of evidence or a tool to collate evidence, it needs to be critically evaluated. What sources is it generating from? Is there bias? What evidence is it excluding? Are the claims substantiated? And, importantly, when should we not trust the AI output? Roles requiring significant critical and analytical thinking are less likely to be significantly impacted by AI. Those who retain and develop these competencies will have a competitive edge. Second is social acumen, relationship building and emotional intelligence. AI can now mirror human empathy in words, tone and facial expressions, and it works. However, research shows that when people know the empathy is coming from a human rather than AI, they trust and value it more. Those who can build relationships and trust, influence, negotiate and lead will continue to be valued. Evidence can identify the best intervention, tool or product, but human relationships and storytelling are still needed to have that evidence accepted and converted into action. Future leaders will therefore need interpersonal acumen, emotional intelligence and the ability to inspire, influence and create engagement in increasingly disconnected work arrangements.

What does a sustainable career look like?

Is the traditional idea of progressing upwards through an organisation becoming outdated, and should we be thinking much more about skills, adaptability and employability?

The meaning of career is influenced by societal perceptions and the traditional idea of progressing up the hierarchy, but to be sustainable, it needs to be defined and owned by the individual. Career success is subjective. For one person it may mean progression; for another, achieving a balance between work and life. Individuals can be proactive in shaping their careers through the choices they make, while adapting to changes in their work and personal circumstances.

A sustainable career is about simultaneously achieving happiness, health and productivity, and considering what those mean to you, what matters to you and who matters to you. A promotion might bring short-term career success, but it is only sustainable if it doesn’t come at the cost of strain, fatigue or stress at home. Sometimes we get caught up in the needs of the job or organisation and forget to stop and ask: Is this what I want? What matters? What has meaning? What makes me happy? I’ve seen senior professionals leave roles, organisations and significant salaries to set up businesses around something important to them, spend more time with family or move into completely new careers. Others have a destination in mind but need to think strategically about the skills, competencies and networks they need to get there. So perhaps now is the time to get off the hamster wheel and ask whether your career is sustainable, meaningful and providing happiness, health and productivity both now and into the future.

The importance of relationships

How important are relationships, trust and social networks to someone’s success and development at work? And what happens when those relationships are increasingly built through Teams, Zoom and digital channels?

There is a lot to unpack because the impact depends on what we’re considering, whether that’s careers, innovation, wellbeing or organisational productivity. But there are some common threads. Innovation, creativity and access to new information and perspectives benefit from engaging with diverse networks that reach beyond our own social circles. For getting things done, strong relationships and trusted, cohesive groups tend to be more effective. When relationships become technologically mediated, communication and relationship building become more challenging. We lose much of the body language and facial expression that sit alongside words and tone. Zoom and Teams meetings also tend to be more instrumental and task-focused than in-person conversations. Research on global virtual teams shows that where a team meets in person early on, even once, they can establish stronger relationships and a more cohesive network. But it isn’t black and white. Research at DCU on hybrid working shows that the impact depends on the task. Simply counting the number of days people are in or out of the office is not particularly informative. Then there is AI. Our workplace network is no longer simply human-to-human; it is becoming human-AI-human. AI could become a valuable member of a team that asks questions, sources evidence, supports problem solving and helps us consider alternatives, while leaving critical analysis to us. But there is also a risk that we delegate our critical thinking, learning, decision making and even our social and psychological needs to technology. We need to be cautious about how AI is developed and used and consider the human benefits and pitfalls.

Are we losing how people learn?

As we become more hybrid, remote and increasingly AI-enabled, are we at risk of losing informal learning? And if so, how do organisations recreate those opportunities intentionally?

We definitely need to pay more attention to this and be more intentional. Equating learning with training is a mistake. Not all knowledge can be captured in text, presentations or digital formats. Think about the Celtic Tiger crash, when many people were made redundant and their tacit knowledge left the organisation with them. Learning is social. We learn by observing others, working with them and having conversations that help us interrogate experiences and generate new learning. It is this informal learning, learning with and from others, that needs to be protected. We cannot predict all the knowledge we will need as the workplace evolves, so we need to protect learning agility and opportunities to combine knowledge between people. AI also raises a more fundamental question. If we delegate problem solving, learning and thinking to AI, what happens to our own knowledge bank, our brain and our cognitive agility? There is a difference between knowledge access and learning. If we stop developing our own knowledge, we lose the foundation from which innovation, creativity and good decision making emerge.

The next generation of workers.

What concerns you most about the experience of younger generations entering the workplace? Are we giving people enough opportunity to develop relationships, learn informally and build the social capital they need?

My greatest concern is whether new joiners have the opportunity and skills to build relationships and learn from the tacit knowledge and experience of others. There is emerging research showing that AI can speed up the journey from novice to expert by helping new recruits learn their tasks faster. But there are concerns that relying on AI early in a career could mean missing opportunities to learn through trial, error, mistakes and experienced colleagues. The research is still emerging, but this is something we need to watch carefully.

Two pieces of advice for HR leaders.

If you were sitting in a room with a group of CHROs today and could give them just two pieces of advice about preparing their organisations for the next five years, what would they be?

My advice is grounded in the research I’ve discussed and in a piece of work I’m developing, which I’m colloquially calling “Back to the Future”. First, CHROs need to remain strategic. They were catapulted into strategic positions during COVID and need to stay there. The future is human. It needs relationships, communities and networks. CHROs are well positioned to connect organisational strategy with talent management and OD. They should be equal partners at the C-Suite table, translating people expertise into the language of business objectives. They should also bring evidence: interrogated organisational data, insights from the shop floor to the top team, external perspectives and evidence of the value and consequences of investment in talent and OD.

Second, technology does not remove humans; it redefines their roles, competencies and value. Remote and hybrid working, AI, digitally mediated learning and communication and virtual environments require a more intentional focus on people, relationships and networks. What worked before won’t necessarily work here. CHROs can work with those who bring creativity, innovation, futures thinking, imagination and transformation to reimagine the centrality of people in these new working conditions, while using the best available evidence to guide decisions.

Looking five years ahead

If we come back and have this conversation again in five years’ time, what do you think we will have got right about the future of work – and what might we look back on and realise we got completely wrong?

I’m not sure how good my crystal ball is, but perhaps we can consider two extremes. One possible future is where we use scientific and organisational evidence to understand where remote, hybrid, VR and in-person working are appropriate. We become more nuanced about when different approaches work and intentionally put people, humans and relationships at the centre. AI agents become another part of our workplace social network, helping us collaborate, problem solve and learn, but with a critical eye, like a knowledgeable co-worker. We recognise that by putting people at the centre, we can create organisations and careers that are sustainable, allowing people to balance happiness, health and productivity with family, friends and communities. The alternative is that we make decisions without evidence, underestimate what flexible work can offer and repeat mistakes from the past, assuming that knowledge can simply be captured in a system or AI agent. We could defer too much to AI, allow it to do the thinking for us and believe we have achieved better work-life balance without recognising what we have lost: our own knowledge, learning, cognitive agility and human relationships. The challenge for all of us is to ensure that as technology advances, we don’t lose sight of the human beings at the heart of work.

Claire, thank you so much for joining us. It’s been a fascinating conversation. If your organisation is thinking about how to attract and retain senior HR talent in an increasingly complex environment, get in touch with the HR Search team. For more interviews and HR insights take a look here.