Why Your Workforce Will Accept AI Agents But Only on Their Terms

Much of 2025 saw the word “digital employees” entering our vocabulary, especially as the noise surrounding Agentic AI got louder. Some view them as replacements, while many vendors see them as augmenting agents. 

“We view AI agents as ‘digital employees’ that extend the capabilities of human workers by autonomously executing defined business processes,” defines Jess O’Reilly, General Manager for ASEAN at Workday.

The issue, however, is not the definition. Rather, it is whether treating digital employees is the same as treating them as equals to human employees. And the difference is creating a paradox in Singapore’s corporate towers — one that should concern every C-suite executive planning their AI strategy.

So, while 82% of organizations are rapidly expanding their use of AI agents in a recent Workday study, employees have drawn a remarkably clear red line in the digital sand: 75% are comfortable working alongside AI agents, but only 30% are comfortable being managed by them.

The agent sprawl headache

The enthusiasm for AI agents is creating a new operational headache that O’Reilly calls “agent sprawl”. It is when organizations deploy large numbers of AI agents without clear roles or oversight, creating risks around security, compliance, and cost management. It's the SaaS sprawl problem all over again, except this time the tools can make autonomous decisions.

In Singapore specifically, the barriers are uniquely complex. According to Workday’s study, 41% of respondents view ethics and governance issues as the top barrier to AI agent adoption, while a further 33% cite compliance with changing regulations and data security/privacy vulnerabilities as leading concerns in finance functions. These figures reflect Singapore's stringent regulatory environment and the city-state’s position as a regional financial hub where data governance isn’t optional.

“Singapore organizations need a centralized way to manage and govern their AI agents, so they can harness their potential while maintaining control,” O’Reilly explains. This is where the emerging concept of an “Agent System of Record” becomes critical, which is essentially an HR system for your digital workforce.

The trust gradient

The data also highlights something interesting: Trust in AI agents isn’t binary but contextual and highly specific. Workday’s research reveals a clear trust gradient: users were most comfortable with AI agents recommending skill development but least comfortable with AI agents making financial decisions or managing them directly.

The pattern is revealing. Workers trust AI with IT infrastructure and technology provisioning, where speed and data accuracy matter most. They’re most comfortable with AI agents recommending skill development. Still, when decisions involve people, money, or legal compliance, trust shifts decisively toward humans; only 41% are comfortable with AI making financial decisions.

“AI is never meant to replace human decisions, but rather, augment them,” O’Reilly emphasizes, describing Workday’s “human-in-the-loop approach,” which ensures human oversight at key decision points. A strong majority in Workday’s latest Agentic AI study also supports regulating AI agent autonomy through ethical guidelines set by developers (57%) and strict human oversight (48%).

The operational transformation

The implications for organizational structure are profound. When you introduce AI agents into an HR environment, O’Reilly notes, “it does create an opportunity for greater collaboration between different departments, placing greater responsibility on HR teams to lead the conversation around workforce tools.”

This creates a fundamental shift in decision-making authority. Traditionally, the chief operating officer and the IT head shared decisions on workforce tooling. Now, HR must take ownership of the data and processes that AI agents rely on, establishing what O’Reilly calls “a single source of truth through a centralized repository of employee data.”

Think of it as the emergence of the “chief work officer”, a role that transcends traditional HR boundaries to encompass designing how work gets done. It optimizes performance across human-AI teams and provides employee support as AI becomes integral to the workforce.

The Singapore context

For Singapore-based organizations, the challenge is compounded by workforce skills readiness. Only 30% of Singapore leaders feel confident about their workforce’s skills readiness, according to Workday’s research. AI-powered skills intelligence tools can help close this gap, but only if organizations invest in the required change management.

“Beyond technology implementation, leaders must help employees unlearn old practices and adopt new systems,” O’Reilly observes. “Cultivating a positive culture is critical in supporting employees through this transition.”

Rather than just training on new tools, this cultivation needs to be about fundamental organizational change. For example, the report notes that in finance functions, 72% believe AI agents could help address the CPA and finance professional shortage — but only if their organizations establish and maintain trust.

The new future of work

The most successful implementations will be those that respect the boundaries employees are setting. Use AI agents for what they excel at: data analysis, process automation, pattern recognition. But maintain human judgment for decisions involving empathy, nuanced understanding, and ethical deliberation. A large majority of business leaders and employees (89%) in Workday’s latest Agentic AI study agree that AI agents will increase productivity.

“AI agents will serve as collaborative tools that support and enhance human decision-making, especially in sensitive or high-stakes business functions,” O’Reilly says. This means designing systems where AI recommendations can be overridden, where regular independent audits detect bias, and where employee feedback loops catch unintended outcomes early.

JLL, for instance, deployed HiredScore AI for recruiting to improve its hiring processes. It reduced average time-to-fill from 52 days to 48 days and increased quarterly hiring by 64% after implementing AI for recruiting, says O’Reilly. But they also repositioned its talent acquisition team from a largely reactive function into a more strategic role, rather than simply eliminating positions.

The future of work is less about human vs. machines and more about establishing the right division of labor between them. Organizations that get this balance right will gain a competitive advantage. Those that don’t will find themselves managing not just agent sprawl, but employee resistance, trust erosion, and ultimately, failed AI investments.

The choice, as always, is with the organization. But employees have already made their position clear: they’ll work with AI agents, but only on their terms.

Image credit: iStockphoto/Panya7