We’re thrilled to sit down with Ling-Yi Tsai, a renowned HRTech expert with decades of experience helping organizations navigate change through innovative technology. With a deep focus on HR analytics and the seamless integration of tech in recruitment, onboarding, and talent management, Ling-Yi offers invaluable insights into the pressing challenges of employee engagement and workplace well-being. In this conversation, we explore the alarming decline in employee happiness, the impact of AI on job security and stress, the struggles of managers, and broader societal factors affecting morale. We also dive into actionable strategies for creating a more fulfilling and dynamic work environment.
Can you walk us through the current state of employee engagement? What does it signify that only a small fraction of workers are fully invested in their roles?
The numbers are pretty stark. Recent data shows that only about 21% of employees are fully engaged, which means the vast majority are either just going through the motions or actively disengaged. This is a huge red flag for organizations because low engagement directly impacts productivity, innovation, and retention. When so few people feel connected to their work, it often points to deeper issues like lack of purpose, poor communication, or unmet needs for growth and support. It’s not just a number—it’s a signal that the workplace isn’t resonating with most of the workforce.
What do you see as the primary drivers behind the significant drop in engagement over the past year?
I think several factors are at play. Economic uncertainty and rapid technological changes, especially with AI, have created a lot of instability. Employees are worried about their roles being automated or redefined overnight. On top of that, many organizations pulled back on remote work flexibility just as people adapted to it, which has caused frustration. Add to that a broader societal decline in trust and community—people feel isolated, and that spills into the workplace. These combined pressures have eroded the sense of security and connection that engagement thrives on.
Managers seem to be particularly affected, with engagement levels dropping significantly. What’s behind their growing dissatisfaction?
Managers are caught in a tough spot. Only about 27% are engaged, and that’s down sharply from last year. They’re often squeezed between executive expectations to cut costs or boost output and the need to support their teams emotionally and professionally. Many lack adequate training to handle these dual pressures, especially younger managers. Plus, their spans of control have widened, meaning they’re overseeing more people with less time to connect or mentor. It’s a recipe for burnout and disengagement when you’re stretched that thin.
Speaking of younger managers, why do you think they’re struggling the most, especially given how little training they often receive?
Younger managers are in a particularly vulnerable position. Many are stepping into leadership roles without the experience or tools to navigate complex team dynamics or organizational demands. Data suggests only a third of them get any formal training, which is shocking. They’re often thrown into the deep end, managing larger teams while dealing with their own career uncertainties. Without guidance, they struggle to build trust or handle conflict, which amplifies their stress and leaves them feeling unsupported.
How does the increasing span of control for managers impact their stress and overall well-being?
When managers are responsible for more direct reports, their workload and emotional burden skyrocket. They have less time to provide meaningful feedback or build relationships, which are critical for team morale and their own sense of accomplishment. This constant juggling act leads to higher stress levels, as they’re always firefighting rather than strategizing or supporting. Over time, this erodes their well-being, making them feel like they’re failing both their teams and themselves.
There’s a lot of talk about AI adding pressure on managers. Can you explain how it’s pushing them to reduce staff while increasing output?
AI is a double-edged sword for managers. On one hand, it promises efficiency gains, but on the other, it creates intense pressure to do more with less. Many organizations are adopting AI tools with the expectation that they’ll replace certain roles or tasks, so managers are tasked with identifying redundancies—essentially cutting their own teams. At the same time, they’re expected to use AI to drive higher productivity from remaining staff. This creates a stressful dynamic where managers feel like they’re betraying their people while struggling to meet unrealistic targets.
Let’s touch on the widespread fear in workplaces. Why are so many employees feeling anxious on a regular basis, and what are their main concerns?
Fear is pervasive right now, with a staggering 86% of workers experiencing it regularly. The primary drivers are job insecurity and the rapid pace of change. Many are worried about AI automating their roles or being left behind if they can’t adapt quickly. There’s also a fear of speaking up—about 34% feel they can’t voice concerns without repercussions. This stems from a broader culture of uncertainty, fueled by layoffs and economic instability, where employees feel their livelihoods are constantly at risk.
With AI being a top concern for job stability, how real is this threat, and what can organizations do to address these fears?
The concern is real—about 40% of employees worry about job stability due to AI, and it’s not entirely unfounded. Some roles, especially repetitive or data-driven ones, are already being automated. However, AI also creates new opportunities for upskilling and role evolution. Companies can ease fears by being transparent about AI’s role in their strategy, investing in reskilling programs, and involving employees in the transition process. It’s about showing that AI is a tool to enhance, not replace, human value in the workplace.
The US has seen a notable drop in global happiness rankings despite economic growth. What do you think is contributing to this disconnect?
It’s striking that while GDP has risen, happiness in the US has fallen to 24th globally. Money alone doesn’t buy well-being. Key factors like social support, life expectancy, and perceived freedom have declined. For instance, 19% of young people say they have no one to rely on, which speaks to a profound loneliness. Add to that political polarization and distrust in institutions, and you’ve got a society where material wealth can’t offset emotional and social deficits. This inevitably affects how people show up at work.
How does this lack of social support, especially among younger generations, influence workplace happiness and engagement?
Social support is a cornerstone of happiness, and when it’s missing, it ripples into the workplace. Younger employees who feel isolated are less likely to form meaningful connections with colleagues or trust their leaders. This loneliness can manifest as disengagement, lower motivation, and even higher turnover. Work often becomes just a paycheck, not a source of community or purpose, which is a huge missed opportunity for organizations to foster belonging and boost morale.
Broader societal issues like declining life expectancy and freedom also seem to play a role. How do these larger trends affect employees’ mindsets at work?
When people feel less control over their lives or worry about their health and future, it creates a pervasive sense of unease that doesn’t stay at home—it comes to work. Declining life expectancy signals broader health and stress concerns, while reduced freedom can make employees feel trapped or powerless, even in their careers. This can lead to cynicism or apathy, where they’re less willing to invest emotionally in their jobs because they’re preoccupied with bigger existential worries.
The sudden shift back to office work after a period of remote flexibility has been a point of contention. How has this impacted employee morale?
Pulling back remote work options just as people adapted to the flexibility has been a major blow to morale. Many employees found a better work-life balance with remote setups, and yanking that away feels like a loss of autonomy. It’s especially frustrating when the rationale for returning to the office isn’t clear or tied to measurable benefits. This breeds resentment and distrust, as employees feel their needs and preferences are being ignored, further eroding engagement.
There’s a lot of buzz around AI, even talk of ‘superintelligence.’ How is this kind of rhetoric affecting workers’ anxiety levels?
The hype around AI, especially terms like ‘superintelligence,’ is amplifying anxiety. It paints a picture of a future where humans might be obsolete, which is unsettling for workers already nervous about automation. Even if it’s speculative, this kind of language fuels a sense of helplessness and fear of being replaced by something beyond their control. It’s not just about losing a job—it’s about losing relevance, which strikes at a very personal level and heightens workplace stress.
What’s your forecast for the future of employee engagement and well-being in light of these challenges?
I think we’re at a crossroads. If organizations continue down a path of prioritizing short-term financial gains over human capital, engagement and well-being will keep declining, leading to higher turnover and burnout. However, there’s a real opportunity to turn this around by investing in people—through training, transparency, and creating cultures of trust and flexibility. AI can be a partner in this, not a threat, if used to augment rather than replace. I’m cautiously optimistic that with the right focus on human-centered leadership, we can rebuild engagement and make work a source of fulfillment rather than fear.