Your boss is too busy for your meeting, so she sends a bot instead. The bot sounds like her, mimics her communication style, and knows her decision-making patterns. But would you accept that substitute?
A research team from Carnegie Mellon University and Emory University is about to find out. They've just completed a study examining whether artificial intelligence clones of corporate leaders could work in practice. The results suggest the technology faces a credibility crisis from the very people it's supposed to help.
The researchers conducted six design fiction workshops with 23 managers and workers, in which participants co-created speculative scenarios and discussed how manager clone agents might transform collaborative work. The findings, which will be presented at a major computing conference in Barcelona next month, reveal deep discomfort on both sides of the organisational hierarchy.
Participants initially envisioned supportive roles for AI clones, such as acting as proxy presences in meetings, conveying information across organisational layers, automating routine tasks, and amplifying managerial guidance. In theory, it sounds efficient. Why shouldn't executives on private jets send their digital doubles to the break room coffee discussion?
The reality, though, is far messier. Workers and managers worried that interpersonal relations might suffer due to lack of trust and authenticity; some fretted that efficiency gains might flatten corporate hierarchies and weaken organisational ties; and workers expressed suspicion that AI bossware might just be an excuse to surveil them.
Managers, interestingly, didn't embrace the technology either. One manager stated that "I probably don't want to authorize him because if my own work could be done by my agent, then what is this job position for me to do?" The existential concern is real: if your digital twin can handle your responsibilities, why do they need you at all?
The trend isn't merely theoretical. LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, Zoom CEO Eric Yuan, and others have created AI replicas of themselves. Klarna's CEO has sent an AI double to speak during a recent financial update, and Zoom's CEO used an AI avatar to deliver initial comments in the company's Q1 earnings webinar in May.
According to the researchers, AI manager clones could handle tedious or impersonal tasks in the workplace so human leaders can focus on mentorship, strategy and connecting with their employees. When speaking with managers and workers, the team found that management is also deeply interpersonal. Workers trust their managers not just because of their decision-making abilities, but also because of the stories and experiences they share, suggesting that what is likely to emerge is not the manager disappearing, but their roles shifting.
The key may be positioning these tools correctly. The key to making AI clones workable appears to be framing their role as an assistant rather than a substitute.
Fascinatingly, not all workers rejected the idea. One worker stated: 'If the inclusion of AI can diminish, or even overturn power structures like leader-worker dynamics, then as a worker I'm willing to support anything that can facilitate this transformation.' In such visions, the absence of managers is not a loss but a condition for greater happiness, with more room for individuals to exercise agency.
The research raises thornier questions about power, authenticity, and whether organisations are ready for this shift. Study participants emphasised that managers should designate certain tasks as 'human-only zones,' including onboarding, conflict navigation and performance feedback. Workers also envisioned using agents to protect themselves, secure clarity or ensure commitments are honoured.
For now, the technology sits in an uncomfortable space. It works well enough to intrigue executives seeking productivity gains but not well enough to resolve fundamental concerns about trust and authenticity. Whether organisations will embrace AI boss clones or keep them in meetings where no real human wants to attend remains an open question.