Automation has become a clear priority for IT and services organizations. AI is at the center of modern service desks, sales workflows, security operations and cloud environments. Executives are under pressure to act faster, reduce costs and increase production using every tool available.
Yet this rapid evolution has had an unexpected consequence: many teams are realizing that efficiency alone is not enough to build trust.
In the UK and Europe, I see organizations pushing automation to the point where the service model becomes fragile. Chatbots manage the entire support journey. AI sales agents perform outbound activities. Security alerts are triaged end-to-end by automated playbooks.
These systems can be useful, but when they replace human judgment entirely, gaps appear. Customers notice that no one understands the content of their transactions.
They notice when interactions seem generic and their problems go unrecognized. And they quickly notice when a service provider has removed the people who can actually hear and help them.
Where Service Models Start to Break Down
Most automation failures stem from the same problem: removing the “human layer” that holds a service experience together. This layer is not about constant hand holding or slow manual work. This is the part that interprets the nuances and understands why an issue is important to the customer, not just what the issue is.
In support environments, some organizations are discovering this the hard way. Tickets are resolved faster on paper, but satisfaction rates drop because no one is building a relationship with the user. In sales, AI sequences drive volume, but prospects lose interest because awareness lacks relevance.
And when it comes to cybersecurity, automated responses can misjudge severity without human oversight.
These situations occur more often when teams automate to augment their limited workforce. This is understandable, especially in times of change or when IT teams continue to modernize existing assets.
But total reliance on automation leaves systems inflexible. When an exception appears, or when a customer simply needs to speak to a real expert, the experience falls apart.
A similar scenario emerged when a customer enabled a new AI tool to facilitate Microsoft Copilot workflows. Without proper human oversight, the team inadvertently incurred a $35,000 cost due to selecting the wrong SKU, highlighting the financial and operational risks of fully automated systems without human controls.
The skills clients still rely on
Despite the number of new AI tools entering the market, basic human skills have increased in value, rather than diminished. Customers look for empathy when something breaks, context when they need guidance, and continuity when relying on a long-term partner.
They want to know that the person supporting them understands their environment, their constraints and their goals. No amount of automated efficiency can replace this peace of mind.
Even the best trained AI models struggle to achieve this. They can analyze trends, report risks, and summarize information, but they don’t build relationships. They don’t learn a customer’s preferences over years of interaction.
And they can’t recognize times when an issue might have a broader business impact that isn’t noted in the ticket.
In conversations with CIOs and IT directors, these people skills come up repeatedly as the factor that differentiates a solid service provider from a forgettable one. Organizations that combine automation and true expertise create resilience. Those who rely solely on automation create fragility.
How leaders can find the right balance
Leaders don’t need to choose between automation and human-centered service. The most effective approach is to place AI in the right parts of the workflow, then anchor it with experienced people who understand the organization. In practice, this starts with shaping pathways so that humans remain present at the most important points.
AI can handle sorting, data collection and pattern recognition, but customers feel more supported when a real expert guides the outcome and closes the loop.
Automation also works best when it elevates teams rather than replacing them. By handing over routine cloud administration, patch reminders, or Copilot integration requests to AI, technical staff can focus on higher-value conversations and proactive guidance. This creates space for human expertise to be visible and not marginalized.
Clear ownership is another factor. Automated systems drift when no one monitors their progress, especially during periods of rapid change. Keeping a named human owner for each account or operational area ensures accountability and avoids misjudged responses.
This comes with one final principle: investing in people who understand the entire technology stack. Cloud migration, Microsoft CSP environments, hybrid infrastructure, and security workflow automation all involve nuance.
Teams anchored in these areas recognize when automation actually helps the customer and when it risks creating blind spots in their experience.
The next wave of successful tech companies will be the most human
AI will continue to advance and handle more of the repetitive work that once consumed IT teams. This is positive progress. But as automation accelerates, the market differentiator will change. Trust will matter more. Personal relationships will matter more.
And organizations that combine intelligent automation with real human expertise will outperform those that pursue automation at all costs.
The future of IT services is not fully automated. It’s human-led, technology-enhanced, and built around relationships. Companies that achieve this balance will deliver the speed, security, and modernization their customers expect while retaining the qualities that matter most: empathy, continuity, and true connection.
We have presented the best RPA software.
This article was produced as part of TechRadarPro’s Expert Insights channel, where we feature the best and brightest minds in today’s technology industry. The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you would like to contribute, find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/news/submit-your-story-to-techradar-pro