As I've been analyzing global survey data for our Future of People Management research program (stay tuned for the full report coming soon), I can’t stop thinking about one particular finding. When asked what worried them most about working in a future where AI is their manager, employees' top concerns were¹:

1. Losing human connection
2. AI's lack of empathy
3. AI not understanding their unique situation

At first glance, this makes complete sense. Human beings are relational by nature. We want to feel seen, understood, and valued. As AI becomes more integrated into our workplaces, it’s natural to worry about losing those qualities in our working lives. But the findings also highlight the assumption that human managers are responsible for fulfilling these needs in the first place. This raises an uncomfortable question: Is the manager-employee relationship the right place to seek this level of connection to begin with?

The pressure we place on managers

There’s no denying we’re in a loneliness crisis that shows up in troubling ways at work. The risk, however, is that we increasingly place responsibility for remedying this crisis on managers.

Over the past decade, the manager role and associated expectations have steadily expanded. Managers are accountable for providing performance feedback, coaching careers, supporting wellbeing, shepherding their workers through organizational change, fostering team culture, resolving interpersonal conflict, building employee trust, and maintaining their engagement with and commitment to the company all at the same time. On top of this already full roster of responsibilities, they are now being asked to help their teams adopt AI while simultaneously allaying their fears about potential job loss.

In our forthcoming research, managers identified their most important future skill needs as²:

1. AI skills
2. Critical thinking
3. Leading through change and uncertainty

Interestingly, skills such as empathy and team cohesion were ranked at the bottom of the list by managers. This doesn't mean managers don't care about their teams. Rather, it reflects the reality that many managers see themselves operating in an environment of constant complexity and competing demands. Adding “be the primary source of connection for my team” to an already overloaded role may be unrealistic.

The need to re-contract the manager-employee relationship

Part of the challenge may come from how we commonly think about manager-employee relationships. One lens to view these relationships through is the classic psychological perspective of social exchange theory, where manager-employee relationships are professional dyadic exchange of resources and effort based on reciprocity norms. This perspective might be appealing, as it appears very boundaried and is inherently reciprocal. However, the reality of these relational dynamics may be more complex, muddying expectations on both sides. Research on workplace attachment styles suggests employees may relate to their manager in ways that mirror familial relationships. But managers are not family, nor should they be.

Manager-employee relationships are also inherently unequal, imbued with unwritten rules and weighty power dynamics. They are shaped by organizational objectives and the health (or toxicity) of the broader working environment. And even in the healthiest workplaces, difficult decisions around pay, promotions, role changes, and performance management remain part of the relationship. When organizations unintentionally position managers as the solution to employee connection, both managers and employees can end up disappointed.

Managers are rethinking their role too

Another finding from the forthcoming study highlights how managers themselves currently view their role: only 10% of managers said they would feel negatively about moving into a role without direct reports, and 50% said they would feel positively about such a move³. The role of people manager has become associated with increasing pressure and diminishing sustainability, reflected in recent polling showing sharp drops in manager engagement. Managers used to report substantially higher engagement than employees, but that gap has closed. What was once a coveted role is starting to lose the shine.

The saying “everyone wants a village, but no one wants to be a villager,” comes to mind. Let’s examine systemic reasons why managers might be struggling to be a villager right now, even if they ideally would love to be one. Managers may genuinely want to support their teams. But they are also navigating their own workloads, wellbeing challenges, professional identify crises brought on by AI automation, and ongoing delayering efforts. Expecting them to fully fulfil the social and emotional needs of their employees is a stretch.

A healthier approach to connection at work

If managers shouldn't be responsible for meeting employees' connection needs, what should they do instead?

For employees, it may mean broadening where they look for belonging. Relationships with teammates, mentors (informal and formal) and colleagues that sit across the business can offer connection without the complexity of authority and power dynamics. Perhaps even more important is investing in rich relationships outside of work.

For managers, the goal may be less about becoming everything to direct reports and more about being clear about the role they can realistically play. Managers can still coach, develop, and support employees without being expected to function as counsellors, best friends, or primary sources of emotional fulfilment. Clarity is kindness—setting realistic expectations and boundaries directly with team members may ultimately create healthier relationships on both sides.

Adding AI to the relational picture

AI introduces another layer of complexity to this connection conversation. Some uses of AI may strengthen human relationships, like using AI coaching tools to learn how to improve your human relationships. Other applications of AI may feel more problematic, like using AI as a substitute for meaningful human relationships, which raises troubling questions about reciprocity and authenticity. The boundary between helpful assistance and harmful replacement will continue to evolve as AI capabilities advance and societal expectations change.

What is clear, however, is that human connection matters and many humans are not getting those needs met in current organizational structures. The challenge for organizations is ensuring those needs are met in the right places and in the right ways. Rather than expecting managers to carry the full weight of connection in all its various forms, HR leaders have an opportunity to build workplaces where employees can access emotional and social support through a broader ecosystem of peers, communities, leaders, and technology.