adminAI in HR is helping people teams analyse information faster, but it also raises questions about employee trust, fairness and the limits of automated support. Niki Head, people and development director at Stellar Entertainment Software in Guildford, explains how these tools affect managers and staff—and why human judgment remains essential.
Head works at a studio founded by former Criterion staff and developing an unnamed AAA arcade racing game. In her view, AI can reduce time spent on routine data tasks, but it cannot replace the empathy and context needed to handle sensitive workplace issues.
Image credit: Igor Omilaev
AI in HR: benefits and risks in everyday work
One growing challenge is the use of generative AI to draft grievances and complaints. Head has heard of cases in which employees submitted lengthy documents padded with irrelevant material or legal references that did not apply to their situation. This can make it harder for HR staff to identify the core concern and respond promptly.
Employees may assume that AI-generated wording is legally accurate. It is not a substitute for checking employment rules or getting appropriate advice. Anyone preparing a workplace complaint should focus on the specific events, dates and outcome they are seeking, and verify any legal claims before including them.
AI can also offer practical efficiency gains. Head’s team uses an HR platform with tools that summarise employee review responses, identify recurring strengths and development areas, and help managers spot themes across a large number of reports. The summaries are useful as an overview, but managers still need to read the full reviews and discuss the findings with employees.
Use predictive indicators as prompts, not proof
Some HR tools flag factors that could be associated with an employee leaving, such as time in the same role, management responsibilities or absence records. These indicators may help start a conversation, but they do not explain an individual’s circumstances. Time away from work can have many causes, and an employee may be content in a role they have held for several years.
For this reason, predictive scores should be treated as signposts rather than conclusions. A manager can use them to ask thoughtful questions, not to assume someone is disengaged or planning to leave.
Employee concerns about AI and creative work
Reactions to AI vary across teams. Head says engineers may welcome tools they see as improving efficiency, while some artists are more concerned that AI could reduce creative opportunities or threaten jobs. She says those concerns should be heard rather than dismissed.
When a company considers introducing a tool, HR can help identify the source of resistance. If employees fear being replaced, leaders should explain the intended use clearly and address the concern directly. Giving staff a chance to test a tool and share feedback can also make the discussion more constructive. If a tool is ultimately required, explaining the reasons and providing support is preferable to simply issuing a directive.
Why human judgment still matters in HR
HR works between employees and management, advising on legal and ethical considerations while supporting a positive employee experience. Automated systems can answer straightforward policy questions, such as how to claim expenses, but sensitive matters need clear escalation routes.
A grievance, conflict or distressed employee may require careful listening and a response shaped by context. A chatbot can provide information based on rules set by an organisation, but it cannot offer genuine empathy or reliably interpret every personal situation. If a concern is missed early, it may grow into a more difficult dispute.
Head also cautions against treating predictions as certainty. Workplace behaviour is complex, and software cannot anticipate every reaction or replace a manager’s ability to communicate, respond with empathy and seek help from HR when needed.
Making AI in HR work for people
For Head, the overall value of AI is the time it can return to people-focused work. Tasks involving large volumes of data that once took a week can sometimes be condensed into a couple of days. That time can then be spent talking with employees and supporting managers.
The practical approach is to use AI for appropriate administrative and analytical tasks, check its outputs, protect space for human review and be transparent with employees about how tools are used. AI in HR can make some processes more efficient, but sensitive decisions still depend on context, accountability and human judgment.
The interview has been edited for length and clarity. Head’s experiences of having a chair thrown at her and being followed to a train station occurred at previous jobs, before she joined Stellar Entertainment.
