Algorithmic management: how algorithms are reshaping the roles of managers and employees

Algorithms as the new managers

Imagine starting your workday by receiving tasks assigned by a system. Throughout the day, it monitors performance indicators, identifies delays, compares results, and suggests next steps. By the end of the day, it might even generate an evaluation of an employee’s performance.

This scenario isn’t a futuristic fantasy. The practice is already widespread across various sectors and is linked to the advancement of algorithmic management, a concept that describes software capable of automating or supporting tasks traditionally performed by managers.

An algorithm doesn’t need a face or a voice to act as a boss. It only needs to participate in decisions such as task allocation, monitoring, evaluation, or priority setting.

What is algorithmic management?

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) defines algorithmic management as the use of software that automates or supports management tasks, which may include instructing, monitoring, and evaluating employees.

Artificial intelligence may be present in these systems, but it’s not mandatory. An algorithm based on fixed rules can also define the sequence of activities or detect when an indicator deviates from expectations.

In practice, this means that some functions previously exclusive to managers can now be partially transferred to digital systems.

Adoption in companies

An OECD survey published in 2025, based on over six thousand companies in France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain, and the United States, found widespread adoption of algorithmic management tools in the countries studied.

In the United States, 90% of managers surveyed said their companies had adopted at least one tool to instruct, monitor, or evaluate employees. The average was 79% in the four European countries surveyed and 40% in Japan.

This doesn’t mean companies have replaced their leaders with artificial intelligence. In many cases, the algorithm serves as a support layer for management, while the final decision remains in the hands of a person.

A 2026 study on traditional organizations also found an expansion of algorithmic management among directly hired employees, an area previously more associated with digital platforms.

Impact on professionals

The main change may be less about the existence of a “robot boss” and more about the number of work-related decisions that become mediated by systems.

For example, an employee may receive a task because a system identified that a particular activity has priority. Similarly, a manager may receive an alert indicating that an employee has shown a decline in a specific indicator.

This creates a new dynamic: employees begin to interact with decisions produced or influenced by algorithms, even when there is still a human manager responsible for the team.

An OECD survey shows that managers perceive improvements in decision quality with these tools, but also report difficulties in understanding the systems’ logic, doubts about who is responsible for decisions, and concerns about employees’ health.

The future of the human manager

The available studies do not indicate a widespread replacement of managers by algorithms. What is observed is a transformation of management functions.

A 2026 survey of managers and employees from organizations not linked to digital platforms revealed differences in how the two groups view algorithmic management.

Another study, conducted in Spanish companies, suggests that managers may take on a new role: interpreting the results generated by systems and translating them into everyday work. In this model, the manager does not cease to exist but may act as an intermediary between the algorithm and the team.

For professionals, this increases the importance of understanding how artificial intelligence tools measure productivity, organize tasks, and support decisions.

The question, therefore, is not just whether an algorithm will be able to take the place of the manager. In many environments, it is already assuming part of the manager’s functions. The next step is to define which decisions can be automated, which require human supervision, and how these choices affect those on the other side of the system.

Challenges and recommendations

The OECD and the International Labour Organization emphasize the need for transparency, governance, and employee participation in the implementation of these technologies.