- Survey of 3,005 managers.
- 15% would replace an employee for as little as a 5% cost cut.
- Infographic included.
With AI creeping into nearly every corner of the workplace, the looming fear among workers is obvious: Will I be replaced by a machine? But the real power doesn’t rest with the algorithms – it rests with the managers.
Managers are the ones who weigh the spreadsheets, balance the budgets, and ultimately decide whether a role stays human or gets handed over to an algorithm. So how do managers themselves feel about trading flesh and blood for silicon and code? To find out, Trio.dev, specialists in global software team building, surveyed 3,005 managers across the U.S. The results paint a revealing – and at times unsettling – picture of managerial morality.
On average, 21% of managers admitted they’d feel no guilt at all about replacing their staff with AI. That figure spikes dramatically in some states:
1. Maine – 67%
2. California – 53%
3. Colorado – 47%
4. Hawaii – 43%
5. Maryland – 38%
At the other end of the spectrum sits Idaho, where just 8% of managers said they’d put AI above human employees. In the Prairie State, 19% of managers say they would swap staff with AI without giving it a second thought – although this was below the national average.
What Tips the Scales?
When asked which factor most influenced their thinking, the results reveal where loyalties really lie:
- Pressure from upper management/shareholders – 36%
- Productivity gains – 31%
- Cost savings – 27%
- Industry trends/competitors – 6%
In other words, it’s less about futuristic efficiency and more about who’s breathing down their neck in the boardroom.
The Ethics of Automation
Not all jobs are viewed the same way. While most managers still see an ethical line, that line shifts depending on the role. Technical positions such as coding and design top the list, with one in three managers saying it’s fair game to replace them. Customer service comes next (25%), followed by clerical staff (16%). Interestingly, creative roles – the kind many assume to be “uniquely human” – were still considered replaceable by 15% of respondents. Sales roles, however, were the least likely to be seen as ethically swappable, at just 11%. Apparently, charisma still has its value.
How Much Is a Human Job Worth?
Here’s where the math comes in. For some managers, even small savings are enough to pull the trigger: 15% said they’d replace an employee for as little as a 5% cost cut. At the other end of the spectrum, half of the respondents said they’d only make the switch at a 50% saving. In between sit those who would make the call at 10% (9%) or 20% (26%).
Which Is Harder to Justify?
Interestingly, managers feel more uneasy about replacing workers with AI than with cheaper overseas employees:
- Replacing with AI – 57%
- Replacing with overseas employees – 43%
The irony? The human element may make outsourcing sting less than automation, even though the outcome is largely the same for the employee being replaced.
Transparency or Evasion?
Finally, honesty doesn’t come naturally in this conversation. Just under half of managers (46%) said they would tell staff upfront if AI replacements were coming. But the majority (54%) admitted they’d keep it under wraps until the change was unavoidable. That suggests workers may not know what’s happening until the pink slip is already printed.
Infographic showing the % of managers in each state eager to replace human workers with AI
“AI is often framed as an unstoppable force, but what we’re seeing is that the real gatekeepers are managers and executives. The striking part isn’t only how many say they’re willing to replace workers — it’s how quickly financial reasoning outweighs ethical hesitation,” said Alex Kugell, Co-founder & CTO of Trio.dev. “For employees, this is a reminder that the AI conversation isn’t only about technology. It’s about trust, transparency, and the human decisions shaping the future of work.”
Click Here To Submit A News Tip Or Story