{
  "id": 19634002,
  "title": "Want to drive AI innovation? Talk about feelings",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/11/12/want-to-drive-ai-innovation-talk-about-feelings",
  "topic": "ai",
  "section": "AI",
  "published": "2026-11-12T09:00:00.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Fast Company",
    "slug": "fast-company",
    "url": "https://www.fastcompany.com/91638717/ai-innovation-work-talk-about-feelings"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "The 2026 midterms demonstrated that citizens are \"angry at\" artificial intelligence (AI), according to political strategist Rob Flaherty, as reported on the podcast Machine Gods. People fear that AI is being utilized to train systems that could replace their jobs, leaving them with no control over the process, which has made them extremely displeased. An NBC exit poll found that 56% of voters believed that AI and data centers were a \"critical or major factor\" in their decision to vote for Congress. It is evident that individuals are dissatisfied with data centers. However, employees also resent the implementation of AI in their workplaces. Research conducted on Blood in the Machine indicates that office worker sentiment toward AI has plummeted from 81% positive in 2019 to only 43% positive and 53% negative by 2026, with \"force-fed tools\" being a major source of discontent. A Gallup global study revealed that 74% of Americans are apprehensive about AI, influenced by widespread concerns about job obsolescence and automated layoffs. These voters are American employees who are being compelled by their employers to \"transform\" their work lives with AI. It may be tempting to assume that someone who voted against rapid AI advancements on Tuesday would be open to experimenting with AI at scale in their professional lives. However, this is not the case. We have a negative bias towards uncertainty, and our AI future is the ultimate uncertainty. No one knows what will happen. As seen in the election, voters expressed their desire to \"slow down.\" American employers must address this reality. It does not mean that voters or employees hate AI. For most of us, artificial intelligence offers numerous benefits in our daily lives that we appreciate. At the same time, we are fearful of it. We must acknowledge this dual nature. This is crucial for any manager or leader who wants their company to adopt AI on a large scale. When people are fearful and conflicted, they seek safety, which means they resist change or act against it. According to a 2026 survey of 2,400 knowledge workers across the U.S., U.K., and Europe, including 1,200 C-suite executives, conducted by Writer and Workplace Intelligence, 29% of employees admitted to actively undermining their company's AI strategy, a figure that rises to 44% among Gen Z workers. Changing behavior is challenging when people are stuck. The reason for this can be found in the \"immunity to change\" framework developed by Robert Kegan and Lisa Lahey. When individuals cannot make a change they truly desire, it is usually not a willpower issue but rather because some part of them unconsciously commits to the opposite. This psychological immune system, as Kegan calls it, has one foot on the gas and one on the brake. When change feels unsafe, our brain, nervous system, and body conspire to maintain the status quo, as their primary function is to keep us safe. Anxiety, triggered by anticipated threats, often fuels this immune response. The rapid pace of AI's development creates a threat response in humans, leading to freezing, fighting, or fleeing. Enrique Rubio, in his new book Our Existential Advantage, argues that every major technological revolution has taught the same lesson: changes occur slowly enough for society to adjust. However, AI is transforming technology almost overnight, causing many to feel despondent that AI is something happening to them, something inevitable over which they have no agency. People have various reasons for working, with money being important, but humans highly value agency at work and need meaning and purpose. AI may siphon off creativity and expertise or be perceived as encouraging sloppiness or laziness. People work for various reasons, including agency, learning, and purpose. When decisions are handed over to AI, it raises questions about core values such as self-reliance, learning, and usefulness. Three essential abilities that individuals and communities must protect from AI have been identified by Ziyaad Bhorat: work, knowledge and understanding, and decision-making. He asserts that work is worth preserving, along with the right to prevent the deterioration of skills and their substitution by machines. On Election Day, voters regained control over AI. Employers must listen and initiate a different kind of conversation about AI and work.",
  "summary": "The 2026 midterms made one thing clear: Voters are “mad at” AI , as political strategist Rob Flaherty put it . On the podcast Machine Gods, Flaherty notes that “the story people are saying to themselves is, ‘This thing is in my backyard. It is being used to train stuff that’s gonna take my job away, and I get no say over any of this, and I’m really mad about that.’” An NBC exit poll found that…",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}