Companies across sectors are beginning to include employees' adoption and effective use of artificial intelligence tools as a factor when assessing candidates for promotion. Proponents argue this reflects the changing nature of work and rewards employees who boost productivity by using new technologies. However, critics say basing career progression on AI use raises practical and ethical concerns about fairness, measurement and access.
Why employers are doing it
Business leaders see AI literacy as a competitive capability. Managers say employees who learn to integrate generative AI, automation and other tools into their workflows can deliver results more quickly and handle higher-value tasks. Including AI use in promotion criteria can also be framed as an incentive for workforce reskilling, signalling that the organisation values digital agility as part of career development.
Concerns about equity and relevance
Opponents counter that such policies risk penalising workers whose roles do not lend themselves to AI augmentation, those with limited access to tools, older employees or those with disabilities that affect how they interact with technology. Measuring "AI use" can be ambiguous: does it mean frequency, quality of outputs, time saved, or the impact on business outcomes? Without clear and role-sensitive metrics, promotion decisions could appear arbitrary or discriminatory.
Operational and legal challenges
Implementing AI-based promotion criteria also raises practical issues around monitoring and privacy. Employers must decide how to assess AI use without intrusive oversight, and how to validate that AI-driven outputs are accurate and compliant with regulations. There is also the risk that reliance on AI could obscure human judgment in performance reviews, making it harder to appeal or understand decisions.
Steps for a fairer approach
Experts and advocates suggest measures to reduce harm: transparent criteria that link AI use specifically to job-relevant outcomes, equal access to training and tools, accommodations for workers with different needs, and safeguards around data collection and evaluation. Performance frameworks that prioritise results rather than raw tool usage may help ensure promotions reward contribution rather than mere adoption.
A developing workplace debate
As organisations experiment with incorporating AI into performance systems, the debate highlights broader tensions about technology’s role in careers. Employers aiming to harness AI’s benefits will need clear policies, careful measurement and attention to equity if they are to avoid unintended consequences for employees’ career prospects.