This article was written by Anjali Malik, Associate, and Alannah Smyth, Paralegal, at Bellevue Law.
Discussion about the effects of AI on the workplace and society ranges from optimism about a more efficient future to anxiety about job displacement and wider disruption. Against an already difficult job market, it is understandable that many workers feel uncertain about what comes next. When viewed through a gender lens, the picture can appear even more complex.
For example, public-facing AI products are often marketed through female-presenting assistants that appear constantly available, accommodating, and free from many of the realities associated with human workers. Given the historical challenges women have faced in establishing and maintaining their place in the workforce, these developments may understandably raise concerns. This article explores the potential impact of AI on workplace culture and what those changes could mean for women.
The impact of artificial intelligence is often viewed primarily as a technological revolution, but it may also drive a cultural transformation. As AI reshapes the workplace, it is also reshaping what employers value in people at work, and which skills are treated as genuinely career-enhancing.
Recent research suggests that demand for so-called “soft skills”, social and emotional skills relating to communication, adaptability, empathy and leadership, is rising alongside technical expertise. These capabilities, long dismissed as “soft skills,” are becoming increasingly critical to organisational performance. Unlike repetitive cognitive tasks, which can often be automated, skills such as empathy, creativity, collaboration and emotional intelligence remain distinctly human and difficult to replicate.
The “Soft Skills” Rebrand and Why It Matters
The term “soft skills” has long carried a subtle hierarchy. It places communication, empathy, collaboration, and emotional intelligence into a secondary category, with these skills often being harder to define, measure and reward.
By labelling capabilities such as empathy, communication and emotional intelligence as “soft”, the term reflects a tradition of associating these traits with femininity and, in doing so, positioning them as less important than technical or traditionally masculine competencies.
A recent Forbes article argues that “soft skills” should be renamed to better reflect their importance. However, this repositioning may reveal a deeper issue. Many of these skills have historically been devalued because they are associated with femininity. The shift risks suggesting that these capabilities must first be detached from their feminine association before they can be taken seriously.
This is not just semantic; it is structural. Performance reviews rarely measure empathy or collaboration rigorously, promotions often reward measurable output over relational leadership, and leadership archetypes remain tied to traditionally masculine traits.
Skills associated with masculinity, such as technical knowledge, physical strength and financial acumen, are more readily treated as measurable and promotable currency. By contrast, when men demonstrate soft skills, they are often praised as strong leaders or managers, whereas in women the same skills are more likely to be viewed as natural personality traits or a given, rather than something to be rewarded in the workplace.
AI, however, could be shifting this position. AI can still struggle with context, emotional intelligence and human judgement. As a result, skills that have historically been dismissed as “feminine” are becoming increasingly economically valuable, particularly where human trust, nuance and decision-making remain central to the role.
Women and Leadership
Despite this shift, women remain underrepresented in leadership. Women hold just 30% of leadership positions globally, despite making up more than 40% of the workforce. Women also remain significantly underrepresented among Fortune 500 CEOs.
This matters because leadership determines not only which AI tools are adopted, but whose needs, risks and working patterns are considered when those tools are introduced.
There is some optimism that AI could reduce bias in hiring and promotion. Some research suggests AI systems can be designed to highlight overlooked talent and create fairer progression pathways, particularly in sectors such as finance. However, that potential depends on whether existing biases are recognised and corrected.
AI systems are often trained on historical hiring data, which can reflect and reinforce patterns that have traditionally favoured men. As a result, AI cannot be assumed to be neutral. Studies show algorithmic hiring tools can produce discriminatory outcomes, even when demographic data is removed.
So, while AI may appear objective, it can quietly reinforce existing inequalities unless carefully designed and audited.
Job Risk vs Skill Advantage
AI’s impact on women is uneven. Areas of the workforce dominated by women are often more exposed to automation, particularly clerical and administrative roles, which are highly automatable and disproportionately occupied by women.
At the same time, research shows women often have a comparative advantage in social skills and are more likely to move into roles requiring them. This creates a paradox: women may be more vulnerable to displacement in some roles while also being well positioned for the skills that may define more resilient and human-centred work.
The Adoption Gap
One of the most important factors in the future of work will be the ability to adopt and adapt to AI as a tool. Multiple studies show that women use AI less frequently at work than men, with adoption rates reported as between 10% and 40% lower.
So why is this happening?
Research suggests that women often have greater ethical concerns about the use of AI and are more cautious about the risks of relying on it in the workplace. They are also more likely to worry that using AI will be viewed as cheating or as evidence that they are less competent.
Organisational factors may further reinforce this divide. Women report receiving less encouragement from managers to experiment with AI and are less likely to be recognised for using it, which can limit opportunities to develop confidence and proficiency with emerging technologies.
If workplaces reward visible experimentation with AI without addressing these differences in confidence, perception and risk tolerance, the technology that could empower women may instead widen existing inequalities.
From an employment law perspective, uneven AI adoption may create new forms of workplace inequality. If AI skills become increasingly important for productivity, promotion and career progression, women who are less likely to use AI, whether due to ethical concerns, fear of negative judgement or reduced managerial support, may be placed at a disadvantage.
This could contribute to disparities in performance evaluations, promotion opportunities and career advancement, potentially giving rise to claims of indirect discrimination.
If AI competence becomes an informal requirement for progression, employers will need to consider whether all employees have had a fair opportunity to build those skills. That includes access to training, time to experiment and managerial encouragement, rather than assuming employees will adopt new tools at the same pace or with the same level of confidence.
Employers should also consider carrying out equality impact assessments before deploying AI tools in people-management decisions and should keep a clear audit trail of how those tools are used. Human oversight will be important, not only to check outcomes, but to ensure employees can understand and challenge decisions that affect their careers.
That makes adoption a cultural issue as much as a technical one. Employers may need to make AI training accessible, normalise responsible use and ensure that experimentation with new tools is not treated as a marker of confidence or ambition only when certain groups demonstrate it.
A Cultural Shift?
As AI reshapes the workplace and increases the pressure to stand out, there is likely to be a growing emphasis on emotional intelligence and strong interpersonal communication. That could push more workers to develop these abilities intentionally, not just as a personal choice but as a professional necessity. The result could be a workforce that is more emotionally aware overall.
But the shift is not straightforward. There is also a risk that, as workplaces rely more heavily on AI, they unintentionally weaken some of the human skills they are trying to elevate. Communication may become more automated, interactions may feel less personal and genuine connection may become easier to overlook.
Another tension is how these skills are recognised. When men demonstrate emotional intelligence, it is often reframed as “strong leadership” or “relationship-building” rather than labelled as soft skills at all.
That raises a deeper question: whether these qualities are only truly valued once they are detached from femininity, and whether this shift will actually change perceptions or simply repackage them.
So, Will AI Benefit Women?
The answer depends on three critical factors.
First, access to AI tools and training is essential. If women are not equally encouraged and supported to use these technologies, existing gaps are likely to widen rather than close.
Second, work and evaluation systems need to change so that human skills are measured and rewarded rather than treated as assumed traits.
Finally, bias mitigation in AI systems is crucial because, without deliberate intervention, those systems may simply reflect existing inequalities rather than help solve them.
AI will not automatically make work fairer, nor will it inevitably make it worse. Its impact will depend on the choices employers make now: who gets access, whose skills are valued, and whether human capabilities are treated as strategic strengths rather than informal extras.
If those choices are made deliberately, AI could help elevate skills that have long been overlooked. If they are not, the future of work may simply reproduce old inequalities in a new technological form.
A version of this article has also been published by the New Law Journal. The online article is behind a paywall, but non-subscribers can access it here: https://www.newlawjournal.co.uk/content/ai-soft-skills-the-gender-paradox?UID=a8b39956-d577-4225-bf91-6f68e2da2109
The authors have also contributed to a related article published in AI Journal, which explores how employers can prepare employees to work alongside AI: The Human Skills Challenge: Preparing Employees to Work Alongside AI | The AI Journal
