Co-founder of AI solutions startup Tomoro, Ed Broussard has created quite a stir within the business sector and media. His controversial prediction is that AI will cut the working week to a mere 3 days in the next 5 years thanks to the integration of synthetic employees. This has left many business owners and members of the public wondering how his bold statement will be followed up by the company’s actions after it recently launched in the UK on the 20th of November.
So far, the firm has signed a partnership with its first client, PremFina, a premium insurance provider aiming to upscale its tech solutions. “We need someone with the hands-on expertise and knowledge to drive us to the next level,” says Tony Livesey, PremFina CTO, “Tomoro is truly at the coalface of innovation, so we knew they were the right choice for us”.
Today’s solution vs. Tomoro’s
PremFina currently utilizes White Label SaaS to automate many of its operations and provide online services for customers. This is a widely-used, scalable AI platform that businesses can brand as their own. Tomoro offers an upgrade on this with the integration of synthetic employees into the business, which is expected to increase productivity by 8 times the current rate.
In form, synthetic employees will be similar to current digital agents such as ChatGPT and will enable the automation of complex, judgment-based tasks, such as making a decision using intent-based guidelines. This is a step up from current White Label software, which automates only basic, transparent, and repetitive tasks that are guided by explicit rules.
Tomoro’s synthetic agents will also have more advanced linguistic comprehension, thanks to the company’s cutting-edge LLMs, and retrieval and knowledge modelling tools. This enables higher accuracy in the processing of implicit meaning and nuanced language, which facilitates more effective collaboration with humans.
Collaboration between humans and AI is at the heart of Tomoro’s tech-solutions, based on their belief that ‘collaborative solutions significantly outperform humans, or AI, working alone’. Broussard emphasizes that its synthetic agents should not be seen as replacements for human employees, but rather as a technology that will “enhance the capabilities of their current workforce”.
Tomoro is not alone in this sentiment, and most businesses now recognise AI as a tool to optimise the productivity of current employees, rather than as a new form of labour that can deliver meaningful value by itself; human input is needed for effective creation and direction.
What’s so new about a 3-day working week?
On first impression, Broussard’s prediction is a radical and controversial claim. However, from a broader and historical perspective, the prospect of a 3-day working week is neither new nor radical. Working hours have been on the decrease ever since the Industrial Revolution, when labour-reducing technology and the formation of trade unions made it possible for the working class to demand better conditions.
In 1926, the now customary 5-day, 40-hour working week was introduced by successful motorcar business owner Henry Ford, as an experimental measure to increase his employees’ performance at work. With successful results, it soon became standard practice within the US and the rest of the world. This was a significant change from previous conditions; back at the beginning of the 19th century, the typical working week was between 60-90 hours.
AI is not significantly different here; it too is a form of labour-reducing technology and that will enable a reduction in standard working hours. What is different about AI, however, is that it is driving this change at an unprecedented speed.
This is evident when we examine the rate of change.
At the beginning of the 19th century, employees were working an average of 75 hours per week in the manufacturing industry. A decrease to 40 hours a week in 1926 is a reduction rate of approximately 45% over a whole century. In stark contrast, AI will cause a reduction rate of 40% in a mere 5 years, according to Broussard’s prediction.
AI’s reinvention of the workplace: a gift of leisure or the loss of livelihoods?
AI’s potential to increase business production levels by up to 8 times current rates could have incredible benefits for employees, employers, and society as a whole. Nevertheless, it comes with possible risks and downsides in terms of the impact it could have on workplace culture and the employment industry.
One issue is that there is not yet sufficient legislation to protect employees and their livelihoods as businesses take advantage of AI’s automation of an increasing number of workplace tasks. The main fear that has arisen in response to this takeover is that it will lead to high levels of redundancy.
However, as Hasan Baskshi points out, the fear of losing jobs to new technologies has been around almost as long as the technology itself, and history has proved time and time again that with the introduction of new technology comes the invention of new jobs to replace lost ones.
If anything, AI is expected to increase employment, at least in STEM sectors, by increasing their accessibility to a wider range of candidates. Overall, despite initial fears about AI takeover of jobs, statistics indicate overall positivity about the integration of AI into the workplace, with 76% of workers excited about this change.
The real problem is that AI may heighten the division that already exists between skilled and unskilled workers by increasing the demand for skilled tech workers while cutting lower-skilled jobs such as admin and data entry. This could have a particularly negative effect on younger workers who often gain access to an industry by starting out in these lower-paying, entry-level jobs.
Some firms, such as Amazon have already taken the initiative to provide re-skilling opportunities for employees whose jobs fall into this category. However, for unskilled applicants wishing to gain access to a sector, industry-wide automation of low-skilled entry level jobs may still prove to be a significant obstacle.
Another aspect of AI’s integration into the workplace that merits careful consideration is the impact reduced working hours would have on people’s work-life balance. The prospect of a weekend that is longer than the working week seems like the ultimate dream to many. However, it will be more beneficial to some people than others, depending on factors such as age, experience, and diversity of interests. For example, younger, entry-level workers may prefer increased hours so as to gain confidence and expertise in an industry, while for those with a family, reduced working hours are likely to be preferable.
The first step of the move to a 3-day working week has already been taken, with 4-day weeks having been trialed in New Zealand, Iceland, Japan, America, Ireland, and the UK. While most results have been encouraging, with positive reports from employees on their work-life balance, a survey by Gallus in June 2022 found that employees with a 4-day working week had a lower level of engagement, did not have higher thriving wellbeing, and even reported higher levels of burnout, than employees working a 5-day week.
This suggests that while a reduced working week may be great for many people’s work-life balance, it might be negatively impacting employee commitment and job satisfaction. To maximise AI’s potential, and ensure long-term success, businesses will benefit from careful consideration of both the pros and cons of reduced working hours, prioritizing employee needs, and the holistic health of the corporate culture.
