AI will primarily amplify pre-existing talents, provided it is used thoughtfully and responsibly.
1. Technological progress reinforces the centrality of human relationships
Historically, the introduction of new technologies has always intensified—not diminished—the need for human connection. This is even more true in the post-AI professional environment. In support and advisory professions, content alone is never sufficient. One may produce a well-structured report and yet observe no meaningful change, because the transformation of a client system occurs primarily through the relationship itself: through micro-interactions, trust-building processes, and coaching moments over time.
Consulting, in its broadest sense, is fundamentally a relationship of trust that enables change within a relational system. It requires more than technical knowledge; it demands high levels of social, emotional, and contextual intelligence, particularly in complex organizational environments.
2. AI must not create the illusion of expertise
AI should not be used as a means for consultants to appear competent in all domains. One of the major risks is that AI encourages professionals to follow every emerging trend without depth. European markets, however, primarily require deep, well-anchored expertise that generates genuine added value.
A consultant may be a multi-specialist across several clearly defined niches, but not a generalist. AI should never serve to simulate expertise, but rather to relieve professionals of low-value or repetitive tasks, allowing them to invest even more deeply in their core expertise.
Clients will increasingly need to identify “pseudo-experts”, whose authority is artificially constructed through AI tools. Developing real consulting expertise is a long-term process. It requires experience, doubt, error, and exposure to diverse organizational situations, through which a distinctive professional value is progressively integrated.
3. Expertise implies focus, choice, and renunciation
Building expertise also means renouncing certain forms of knowledge in order to deepen others. Consultants must therefore clearly identify the specific expertise they wish to cultivate. AI is not a strategy—it is a tool. Each professional must determine their “natural” markets and areas of legitimacy.
At a minimum, three fundamental questions should be addressed:
What are the real needs of the market? (the complex problems you are genuinely able to help resolve)
What are your distinctive competencies? (what gives you a level of mastery that exceeds market standards)
What are your deep motivations? (what sustains your energy, given that consulting requires long-term commitment and personal engagement)
True expertise is also a signal of trust. When a medical article is published, it is reviewed and signed by a physician—not by AI. The expert remains accountable and in command, and this principle will continue to structure professional legitimacy for the foreseeable future.
4. Ethical responsibility, dependency, and digital sovereignty
AI raises a series of complex ethical issues that European professionals cannot ignore. The first concerns the degree of dependency consultants may develop toward AI tools:
How many applications are being used?
Is the professional still able to practice without them?
Where are the data stored—both the consultant’s and the client’s?
To what extent does this dependency rely on infrastructures outside one’s own country or jurisdiction?
Professional dependency on AI is likely to become a critical issue, requiring preventive thinking and crisis-management strategies, particularly with regard to digital sovereignty and data protection, which are central concerns in Europe.
A second key issue relates to transparency in the use of AI as a support tool. AI risks shifting spaces of psychological safety—such as confidential coaching or supervisory relationships—into the commercialized environments of digital platforms. How can we preserve these “protected spaces” from excessive intrusion or instrumentalization?
Ethical guidelines will emerge progressively through practice, but it will be essential for consultants and organizational psychologists to maintain ongoing ethical reflection, particularly within supervision, peer exchange, and professional reflexivity frameworks.
Matthieu Poirot
Psychologist and PhD in Management
Expert in Organizational Psychology
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire