Core Article Concept
This article explores the future of organizational culture in the age of AI through a personal reflection. Rather than focusing solely on technology, productivity, and efficiency, it examines what employees remember after they leave an organization and why trust, psychological safety, and culture may be the true determinants of successful AI adoption. ]
Opening Story: The Memory
This past week I have been laid up in bed recovering from knee surgery. This forced me to slow down and I found myself spending more time reflecting than I normally would. One afternoon, Facebook surfaced a memory from June 2018, a handwritten card from an employee who handed it to me during her exit interview. It read:
“Dear Amanda,
Thanks so much for all your hard work in facilitating a positive work
environment here at Irvine Scientific. It’s been a pleasure working with you.”
Of all the things she could have thanked me for, she didn’t mention policies, benefits, systems, or processes. Instead, she thanked me for helping create a positive work environment. That simple note stopped me in my tracks.
Eight years later, I wasn’t thinking about the systems we used or the initiatives we launched or the policies we implemented. I was thinking about culture. And it raised a question that I have been contemplating ever since: As organizations race to adopt AI, what will employees remember about this moment in the future of work?
What Employees Remember
The employee who wrote that note wasn’t thanking me for a policy, a process, or a system. She was thanking me for the environment she experienced while she worked there.
That memory caused me to reflect on the work environments I have experienced over the years. Some were healthy. Some were not. Some were transformational. Some were toxic.
I remembered the leaders who influenced my growth and development. They trusted me. They believed in me. They sought my perspective. They allowed me to ask questions and make mistakes. They didn’t micromanage. They communicated clearly. They didn’t manage through fear. They led through influence. They recognized contributions without needing credit and created environments where people felt valued, supported, and safe enough to learn.
And then I remembered a leader who changed the trajectory of my professional life in a very different way. I do not remember his metrics, his accomplishments, or the goals he achieved. I remember how he made people feel.
I remember feeling anxious, fearful, constantly on edge, stressed and questioning my competence. I didn’t feel valued. I remembered the employees who came forward with concerns about his aggressive behavior and treatment of others. I will never forget one employee describing how he used her manager as a “punching bag.” I remember feeling helpless as concerns were raised and quietly swept aside.
Looking back, I realize that experience changed more than my career trajectory. It changed the questions I began asking about work, leadership, and culture. It ultimately led me down the path of studying trauma-informed workplaces and understanding how psychological safety, trust & transparency, peer support, collaboration, and empowerment shape not only employee well-being, but organizational performance itself.
Years later, I do not remember every policy, process, or initiative from those workplaces. But I remember how they felt.
And perhaps that is the point.
Culture is not a mission statement or a poster on the wall. Culture is the experience employees have while they are at work. It is often what they remember long after they leave.
Technology changes. Human experiences remain.
At the end of the day, employees will remember:
Whether they trusted leadership.
Whether they felt safe learning new skills.
Whether mistakes were treated as opportunities to learn.
Whether AI created opportunity or fear.
Whether they felt valued as human beings.
Because culture shapes how work feels.
And how work feels ultimately influences trust, engagement, retention, innovation, adaptability, and psychological safety.
Ironically, those are the very conditions organizations need to adapt, innovate and successfully navigate the age of AI.
Recovery has a way of forcing us to slow down and pay attention to what matters the most. As I reflected on that employee’s note, I realized there was another lesson hidden in my recovery. Knee surgery forced me to slow down. In a world that constantly rewards speed and productivity, slowing down wasn’t a choice. It was a requirement.
I couldn’t help but wonder whether organizations need a similar pause. In the rush to adopt AI, are we spending enough time reflecting on what employees are actually experiencing?
The Rush Toward AI
Organizations are racing to implement AI to stay competitive and ahead of the game. Leaders are facing pressure from boards, investors, competitors, and market expectations. Many are focused on AI productivity gains such as faster work, higher output and greater efficiency. However, few conversations focus on what employees are experiencing during the transformation.
As I reflected on my own experiences, I couldn’t help but wonder how employees are experiencing this moment. Many are being asked to learn new skills, adapt to unfamiliar technologies, and redefine the way they work, all while trying to keep up with the demands of their day-to-day responsibilities. For some, it may feel like change is happening to them rather than with them. For leaders, the pace of transformation itself may feel difficult to keep up with.
Which raised another question for me.
What will employees remember about this moment ten years from now?
Will they remember the AI platform?
Or how leadership made them feel during one of the most significant workplace transformations of our generation?
Research Suggests Culture Drives Adoption
The conversation around AI often assumes that technology drives transformation. Yet, research suggests the opposite may be true. Organizational culture often determines whether AI becomes a source of empowerment or anxiety, innovation or resistance, engagement or disengagement. The technology itself is only part of the equation. The environment into which it is introduced shapes how employees interpret, experience, and ultimately adopt it.
As I began exploring this question further, I came across a study by Faroq et al. (2025) examining the role of artificial intelligence in shaping employee experience and organizational culture. Their findings suggest that culture is not simply background context. It is the lens through which AI is experienced and adopted.
Organizations with cultures that foster learning, innovation, trust, and adaptability were more likely to embrace AI successfully. In contrast, organizations characterized by fear, uncertainty, and resistance often struggled to realize the full benefits of their AI investments. Their research calls for a shift from technology-centered adoption to “human centered AI frameworks where employees are not passive recipients but active co-creators of AI-enabled culture.”
The study reinforced what many leaders overlook: technology alone does not determine whether employees experience AI as an opportunity or a threat. The culture surrounding the technology does.
AI does not enter a vacuum. It enters an existing culture. A culture where employees have already formed opinions about leadership, trust, communication, change, and their future within the organization.
AI does not create culture. It reveals and amplifies the culture that already exists.
While the research highlights how culture influences adoption, it also raises a deeper question of what happens when culture is treated as afterthought?
The Concept of Cultural Debt
As I continued exploring the relationship between AI and culture, I came across Deloitte’s concept of cultural debt, defined as the “negative consequences organizations accumulate when they neglect culture, much like financial debt accrues interest over time.”
The idea made me wonder whether AI is creating cultural debt, or simply exposing debt that already existed.
Perhaps AI isn’t creating mistrust, fear, disengagement, or change fatigue. Perhaps it is revealing organizational conditions that have been quietly accumulating for years.
Either way, the risk is real.
And the debt eventually comes due.
Closing
Years from now, employees may not remember the AI platforms their organizations implemented. They may not remember the prompts, dashboards, or productivity metrics. But they will remember how leaders made them feel as their workplace transformed around them.
The technology will change. The tools will change. The skills required for work will change.
Human experiences remain.
I remembered that card because it represented something much bigger than a process or a policy. It represented the impact I had on an individual and the workplace experience I helped create.
Eight years later, I still have that card tucked away in a keepsake box.
Perhaps that is what culture really is.
Not the things organizations say they value.
But the experiences people carry with them long after they leave.
CTA:
As organizations race to adopt AI the better question is not simply what tools are we implementing, but what experiences are we creating. What will your employees remember about this moment?
References
Flynn, J., Harrington, S., Reichheld, A., & Van Durme, Y. (2026) Dealing with AI’s Cultural Debt. Deloitte. https://www.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/topics/talent/human-capital-trends/2026/ai-cultural-debt.html
Faroq, B., Sabale, A., Agarwal, R., Shedthi, A., Malik, V., & Bhosale, Y. (2025) Navigating the Future of Work: Exploring the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Enhancing Employee Experience and Organizational Culture. Advances in Consumer Research, 4, 4502-4509. https://acr-journal.com/article/navigating-the-future-of-work-exploring-the-role-of-artificial-intelligence-in-enhancing-employee-experience-and-organizational-culture-1553/