Please Stop Saying You’ll Lose Your Job to AI
by Claire Brady, EdD
“You’re not going to lose your job to AI. You’re going to lose your job to someone who uses AI.”
You’ve probably seen this quote on LinkedIn, splashed across conference slides, or dropped into keynotes for dramatic effect. And I get it—it’s catchy. But for educators, it’s not helpful. It frames AI as a threat rather than an opportunity, and fear has never been a sustainable strategy for learning or leadership.
When I hear that quote, I think of all the student affairs professionals, faculty, and campus leaders who are already stretched thin. They don’t need another reason to feel anxious about technology. They need support, clarity, and purpose. They need the space to learn, experiment, and build confidence. Telling someone they’ll be replaced if they don’t adopt AI fast enough does exactly the opposite—it shuts down curiosity.
Let’s be honest: No one loses their job to AI. They lose relevance when institutions fail to invest in the right training, guidance, and governance. They lose momentum when systems resist innovation until it becomes urgent. And they lose opportunity when leaders treat AI as a personal skill gap rather than an institutional capacity issue.
Why that quote misses the mark
The “You won’t lose your job to AI, but to someone who uses AI” line is meant to motivate, but it does so through fear. It frames AI adoption as a zero-sum competition rather than a shared opportunity to evolve. It also assumes that individuals alone are responsible for adaptation, ignoring the reality that organizations, systems, and leaders shape whether AI is used ethically, effectively, and sustainably.
In other words—it’s catchy, but not useful. It’s not a strategy.
We can do better than fear-based motivation.
Reframing changes everything. It invites us to think creatively about what parts of our work can be reimagined, improved, or elevated. It acknowledges that higher education jobs—like advising, teaching, enrollment, and student success—are evolving, not evaporating.
It also centers the human work that can’t be automated: mentoring, listening, leading with empathy, and building belonging. These are not “extra” tasks; they’re the beating heart of our profession. AI can help us do those things more effectively by freeing up time, surfacing insights, and removing friction. But only if we approach it with curiosity, not fear.
The real challenge isn’t about who uses AI. It’s about how we use it—ethically, strategically, and with integrity. It’s about developing AI fluency as a shared organizational skill, not a competitive edge for individuals racing to stay employable.
That’s the mindset our students need to see modeled, and it’s the one our teams need to feel supported in. Learning—together, across roles and disciplines—is how higher education remains not just relevant, but remarkable.
You could pivot the conversation around three key ideas:
From fear to fluency: The goal isn’t to outcompete others—it’s to understand enough about AI to use it wisely, creatively, and responsibly.
From tools to transformation: AI isn’t a magic wand or a threat; it’s part of a larger shift in how we work, think, and design systems.
From “someone who uses AI” to “someone who knows when/how to use AI and when not to.” The most effective professionals in the AI era are those who combine discernment with skill.
AI is not the enemy. It’s the next chapter in our long tradition of adapting to serve students better. And like every transformation before it, this one won’t be led by fear—it’ll be led by educators who stay curious, collaborative, and human-centered.
