By James Holden (24-25)

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming workplaces at an astonishing pace. Tools like ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, and automated decision-making systems are reshaping how we recruit, communicate, and measure performance. For some employees, these tools feel exciting and liberating. For others, they spark anxiety, confusion, or fear of being replaced.

As organisations race to adopt AI, an important question arises:  what does the introduction or increasing use of AI mean for the wellbeing of employees?

This research explored this question by looking at flourishing, a broad measure of workplace wellbeing. Flourishing is more than the absence of stress; it is about employees feeling good and functioning well: being engaged, connected to others, finding meaning in what they do and being able to grow and contribute at work. In today’s competitive landscape, flourishing employees are more innovative, more productive, collaborate more and are more likely to stay. In short, flourishing isn’t a “nice to have”, it’s vital for organisational success.

But flourishing is under pressure in the age of AI. The very tools designed to make work easier can create new kinds of stress, often called  technostress. This research examined how AI-related technostress affects workplace flourishing, and whether personality plays a role in how employees cope with it.

The stress side of AI

When we think of ‘stress at work’, we might imagine long hours or difficult bosses. But technology itself can be a major stressor. AI brings some unique challenges:

• Techno-complexity  – when systems feel confusing, constantly changing, or difficult to master.
• Techno-insecurity  – when people fear that AI could replace their job or devalue their skills.
• Techno-overload  – when technology speeds up the pace of work and volume of information, creating pressure to do more in less time.

Most of us have felt at least one of these recently. Learning a new system that seems baffling. Wondering if AI will make your role redundant. Or feeling pressured to be ‘always on’ because technology never rests.

This study set out to see whether these stressors predict lower flourishing at work, and whether some people are more vulnerable than others.

Personality matters

Psychologists often point out that stress is not just about what happens to us, but how we interpret and react to it, thus this study looked at  neuroticism, one of the “Big Five” personality traits. People high in neuroticism tend to experience negative emotions more strongly and worry more about potential threats.

What the research covered

Almost 200 working adults in the UK from a broad range of industries  were surveyed and asked three simple things:

1. how much they were  flourishing at work  (feeling good and functioning well),
2. how much  AI-related pressure  they felt in three areas—complexity  (hard to learn),  insecurity  (fear of being replaced), and  overload  (AI pushing the pace), and
3. their  personality, focusing on  neuroticism  (tendency toward worry/negative emotion).

Everyday background factors like  age, education, income comfort, industry, and  risk tolerance  (how comfortable people feel taking risks) were also recorded. Then standard statistical models were run to see what actually predicts flourishing, and whether neuroticism  changes  the impact of those AI pressures. 

What were the results

• No direct AI-pressure hit to flourishing. When the background factors, were accounted for, none of the three AI-related stressors (techno-complexity, techno-insecurity, or techno-overload) directly predicted lower flourishing.

• Personality mattered. People higher in neuroticism reported lower flourishing overall. Meanwhile, people with higher risk tolerance  reported  higher flourishing. These were  direct  links with flourishing (i.e. how people felt and functioned at work); they weren’t tied to higher or lower AI stress per se.

• No “amplifier” effect.  When it was tested whether neuroticism  amplified  the impact of different AI-related technostressors, it didn’t. The interaction terms were not significant.  

In short: in this mixed UK sample, current AI pressures didn’t knock flourishing down, but who you are (especially lower neuroticism and higher risk tolerance) did relate to how well you felt you were thriving at work.  

Why this matters for organisations

A common assumption is that “AI stress will undermine wellbeing.” These data suggest: not necessarily—at least not for flourishing. Flourishing reflects resources such as support, meaning, growth, and connection. Removing stressors is helpful, but it is often  not sufficient; flourishing grows where resources are deliberately built.

• If your goal is to protect flourishing, don’t focus only on “removing stressors.” Instead, build resources around people and teams (e.g. clarity, support, autonomy, learning, recognition). These are the soil flourishing grows in.  

• Neuroticism  is a reliable risk flag for lower flourishing. That doesn’t mean “the person is the problem”; it means they’ll benefit more from  predictability, reassurance, and quick access to support. 

• Risk tolerance  looks like a quiet  asset. People comfortable with uncertainty tend to  flourish more  during change. Harness that, without glorifying unnecessary risk.  

Practical steps leaders can take (now)

1. Resource first, tech second.
   Pair AI rollouts with  short, targeted training, easy help channels, and  manager check-ins. Don’t just deploy tools, deploy  support. 

2. Tune your comms to different people.
   • For employees higher in worry/uncertainty: give  clear roadmaps, timelines, and “what this means for your role” briefings; signpost  emotion-regulation/mindset micro-skills  (10–15 minutes is enough).
   • For higher risk-tolerance staff: involve them in  early pilots  as  AI champions  and co-designers.  

3. Protect boundaries.
   AI can speed everything up. Set norms for  notification management, response times, and  right-to-disconnect practices so pace doesn’t quietly become overload.  

4. Make flourishing visible.
   Track simple, actionable indicators (e.g.,  learning progress,  team belonging,  manager support). Celebrate  human strengths (e.g. judgement, empathy, creativity), so people feel valued alongside AI.  

Final thought

AI is here to stay, but its people impact is not fixed. In this study,  AI didn’t automatically erode flourishing. What mattered more was the  human side: stable dispositions like neuroticism and risk tolerance, and the  resources  organisations provide. If leaders invest in clarity, capability, and care, employees can keep flourishing, even as AI evolves. That’s not just good for people; it’s good strategy.