Leap Trends · Leadership · Middle management
Also touches on the condition Technology · How we choose the condition
Briefing
The manager's role in how employees use AI
- AI and the manager
- Leading by example
- Manager skills
Whether employees use AI and experience it as an improvement depends mainly on whether their own manager visibly supports it. At the same time, half of HR directors doubt their managers can do this, and training alone does little as long as those managers are overloaded.
This briefing has not been updated for more than three months. Check the figures against the source before you use them.
Compiled with AI from public sources, with the source for every figure. Key figures labelled Checked have been compared with the source by a person. How that works
Key figures
- 79%of US employees use AI frequently when their manager actively supports it; without that support, 46%.GallupNot yet checked
- 50%of HR directors at Fortune 500 companies have little or no confidence that their managers can guide employees on AI.GallupNot yet checked
- 8%of HR leaders thought in 2025 that their managers could use AI effectively.GartnerNot yet checked
What the sources say
In organisations introducing AI, 79 per cent of employees use it regularly when their manager actively supports it, against 46 per cent when that support is missing. That is Gallup’s global finding. Employees with such a manager are much more likely to say AI has changed their work and that they now do more of what they are good at. Yet fewer than a third of US employees experience that support; in Germany it is one in five.
Senior leaders know the manager is the key, yet they do not trust managers to turn it. In a survey of HR directors at Fortune 500 companies, half have little or no confidence that their managers can guide employees on AI. A year earlier, only 8 per cent of HR leaders told Gartner that their managers could use AI effectively. The answer everywhere is the same: training. Gallup drily adds that training alone is unlikely to be enough.
Part of the explanation is in the briefing Engagement and workload of managers and their teams: the same managers already have wider teams and more tasks. Wharton researchers write in HBR that AI initiatives founder on the gap in perception between the boardroom and the middle manager who has to make it work day to day. Their advice to executives: take an honest look at how ready you are, involve managers in the plan and first take something off their plate.
Two pieces from the leadership literature locate the bottleneck in the same place. Herminia Ibarra and Florence Wilkinson of London Business School wrote in April 2026 that the brake is the organisation’s ability to learn and change, rather than the technology. They call middle managers the link between strategy and execution, and point to employees who, worried about their role and their job, keep what they learn to themselves. In HBR in February 2026, Amy Edmondson and Jayshree Seth describe teams whose performance falls despite the expected gains from AI tools, because people start to doubt their own judgement and mutual trust quietly erodes.
How solid is this? Six publications in just over twelve months point the same way. The evidence is mainly American and shows correlation; causation has not been demonstrated.
For the leadership team
The AI budget goes on licences and training, yet the effect is decided by something that is not in the budget: whether the team leader joins in. The question for the leadership team is whether managers have the time and the mandate for that, or whether it lands on them as yet another task.
Sources
- Gallup · Morgan Meinen and Megan MulherinAI's Effect on Workplace Culture
These investments acknowledge managers' role in AI adoption, but training alone is unlikely to be enough.
- London Business School · Herminia Ibarra and Florence WilkinsonWhy AI is a leadership challenge – not a technology one
the real constraint is an organisation’s ability to adapt, learn and transform
- GallupState of the Global Workplace 2026
- Harvard Business Review · Jeremy Korst, Stefano Puntoni and Prasanna TambeManagers and Executives Disagree on AI—and It's Costing Companies
- Harvard Business Review · Amy C. Edmondson and Jayshree SethHow to Foster Psychological Safety When AI Erodes Trust on Your Team
- GartnerGartner Research Finds Only 8% of HR Leaders Believe Their Managers Have the Skills to Effectively Use AI
We summarise in our own words and quote no more than one sentence per source. Read the original: there is more in it. How we use sources.
Academic research
- DePaul University · Irwin and HwangLeadership as a boundary condition on trust in AI: Transformational leadership, leader-member exchange, and employee intentions to use generative AI
- University of Lapland · PulkkinenSociotechnical and normative support for civil servants’ generative AI use in Finnish municipal technical services
- University of Florida · He et al.Role of Leadership Communication in Organizations’ AI Adoption: The Impact of CEO Transformational Leadership and Supervisors’ Use of Direction-giving and Empat
- East Carolina University · Rodríguez et al.Do experience and upper management support matter? An exploration of GenAI technology usage in a business-to-business setting
Academic articles on the same phenomenon, no more than a year old at the last search, from universities in Europe and North America, found through the open database OpenAlex. These articles count towards the publications per month; the text and key figures above are based on the sources. How we choose the articles.
How this briefing has been updated
Title now describes the topics; previously “AI only lands if the manager joins in” (AI)
Added 4 articles from universities in Europe and North America (via OpenAlex). (AI)
First draft based on Gallup, Gartner and HBR. (AI)