Reflection
Automation has been central to much of my work, from HR systems to intelligent workflows. I’ve seen it save teams countless hours and redirect energy toward higher-value activities. Yet, I’ve also seen the risks. When we automate without care, we risk stripping out the very thing that makes organizations thrive—human connection. The question isn’t just can we automate this? but should we?
A Journey with Automation
Early Enthusiasm
When I first began scaling automation at Axelerant, the excitement was palpable. We automated HR processes, including onboarding checklists, performance review cycles, and recognition prompts. It was neat, clean, and efficient. The mechanics worked exactly as designed. Yet, in the back of my mind, Elton Mayo’s early research tugged at me: productivity doesn’t rise simply because things move faster; it rises when people feel noticed. That was the first crack in my enthusiasm.
The Pushback
Our next step was bold: we tried to automate broadly and quickly. Instead of focusing on a few high-value workflows, we went wide. The resistance was immediate. People felt decisions were being made to them, not with them. Culture stiffened. It became clear that automation wasn’t only a technical exercise; it was a trust exercise. Going too far, too fast, eroded confidence. I learned that automation adoption thrives best when it starts small, builds credibility, and grows through shared ownership and collaboration.
The Digital Exhaust Shift
At one point, our automation team relied on daily Slack prompts for updates. It felt efficient but quickly grew stale. People were bored, answers were repetitive, and the updates lacked credibility. It risked turning human creativity into checkbox compliance. We were, in a sense, reporting to bots.
That’s when we asked a different question: what if we stopped forcing updates and started listening to the traces of work people already left behind?
We began consolidating digital exhaust—the invisible trail of data people naturally generated in tools like Jira, Google Workspace, Kantata, Timetastic, Zoho People, and Slack. Instead of demanding more reporting, we stitched together this existing data into a clear daily recap. Team members could see their contributions visualized, with context and links, without the burden of manual updates.
The impact was profound: boredom dropped, trust grew, and meetings shifted from status recaps to meaningful conversations about blockers, collaboration, and strategy. A QA analyst even told us: “I no longer need to remember what I worked on each day—it’s all there in the recap.” That was the difference. Automation wasn’t replacing the human—it was freeing the human to do more meaningful work.
Equally important, the recap fostered fairness. It created a consistent and transparent record of contributions, thereby reducing bias in recognition. Instead of managers rewarding the loudest voice or the most visible update, everyone’s efforts surfaced equally. What began as a technical adjustment became a cultural shift toward dignity and equity.
A Personal Parallel
Outside of work, I noticed a similar pattern. I had automated reminders for family events and milestones. Birthdays, anniversaries, and even my kids’ school activities were neatly logged and notified. But what was efficient in scheduling felt hollow in practice. A reminder didn’t equal presence. I realized that automation could never carry the emotional weight of a genuine phone call, a conversation, or simply showing up. That truth applied both at home and in leadership.
Principles
From these experiences, I’ve come to ask four guiding questions:
- Does this require empathy? If yes, keep it human.
- Will automation erode trust? If so, rethink the design.
- Does efficiency rob meaning? If the struggle, pause, or ritual is part of the value, resist the shortcut.
- Does this increase fairness and visibility? If yes, automation can serve dignity and equity rather than diminish it.
Practical Options
- Automate the background, not the relationship. Use tools for logistics, but let people carry the meaning.
- Keep rituals human. Performance reviews, gratitude, recognition—efficiency should never outweigh presence.
- Leverage digital exhaust, not forced updates. Use data people already generate to provide visibility while protecting them from administrative burden.
- Protect energy for meaningful work. Automation should reduce busywork so people avoid burnout and can focus on creative, strategic, or relational contributions.
- Test and iterate. Watch for signs of disengagement. If automation breeds apathy, adjust or step back.
Encouragement
Automation is powerful, but humanity is irreplaceable. My own journey has shown me that the best automations are invisible—they remove friction quietly so that people can shine. The worst automations are the ones that silence the connection. The opportunity isn’t to automate everything, but to automate wisely, choosing efficiency where it liberates and humanity where it matters most. Automation at its best protects people’s energy, fosters fairness, and creates space for trust and empathy to flourish.
I wonder…
- How have you seen automation used in a way that felt like reporting to a bot?
- What would it look like to redesign those systems around digital exhaust, freeing people for real conversations, protecting their energy, and making their contributions more visible and fair?
Leave a comment