The company cut inventory sharply and encouraged some employees to establish independent supplier businesses that could serve Semco and other customers.⁸
Semler treated workers as adults capable of understanding the business they worked in. That is the deeper connection to AI. The technology may be new, but the temptation is old: when a company sees labor primarily as a cost, every machine looks like a reason to remove people. When it sees workers as a source of judgment, memory, relationships and local knowledge, automation becomes a way to move them toward more valuable work.
AI will eliminate tasks. It will probably eliminate some jobs. Any honest discussion has to admit that. But the companies most likely to thrive will not be the ones that celebrate every call a bot answers as another employee they can eliminate. The stronger companies will study what the bot cannot do, then train people to do more of it.
The IKEA version asks: Now that the routine question is gone, what higher-value service can this person provide?
The Klarna version asks: How much headcount can we remove before the customer notices?
Customers do notice. Employees notice first.
A company that uses AI only to cut labor may get a quick earnings bump and a flattering slide for investors. It may also hollow out the human capacity that made customers trust it in the first place.
The better playbook is not sentimental. It is practical. Before eliminating a job, separate the tasks the machine can perform from the value the employee creates. Study the questions the bot cannot answer; they may reveal the next service customers will pay for. Train people before the automation arrives, not after the layoff list is finished. And measure new revenue, retained customers and trust, not merely minutes and payroll.
A customer-service worker converted into a design adviser may create a sale that never would have existed. A human being who solves a messy billing problem may preserve a relationship worth far more than the minutes saved by automation.
The question is not whether companies should use AI. Of course they should. The question is whether they will use it like a machete or a lever.
A machete cuts. A lever lifts.
The smartest companies will use AI to lift the work their people can do. They will remove drudgery, expose unmet customer needs and move workers into roles where human judgment matters more, not less. The laziest companies will count the calls, count the bodies and call it transformation.
Ask what jobs AI can cut, and you may save money this quarter. Ask what your people can build with AI beside them, and you may still have a company customers want to deal with next year.
Bibliography
1. • Ingka Group. “AI and Remote Selling Bring IKEA Design Expertise to the Many.” June 29, 2023. Ingka reported Billie’s resolution rate, interaction volume and estimated savings, as well as the training provided to 8,500 customer-service employees.
2. • Ringstrom, Anna. “IKEA Bets on Remote Interior Design as AI Changes Sales Strategy.” Reuters , June 13, 2023. Reuters reported Ingka’s remote-sales figures, its 2028 goal and Ulrika Biesèrt’s comments about reskilling and employment.
3. • Ringstrom, Anna. “Top IKEA Retailer to Cut 800 Office Jobs.” Reuters , March 19, 2026.
4. • Klarna. “Klarna AI Assistant Handles Two-Thirds of Customer Service Chats in Its First Month.” February 27, 2024. The company reported the number of conversations, agent-equivalent workload, resolution time, projected financial effect and language capabilities of the assistant.
5. • “Klarna Changes Its AI Tune and Again Recruits Humans for Customer Service.” CX Dive , May 9, 2025. The article reported Klarna’s decision to ensure access to human assistance and quoted spokesperson Clare Nordstrom on the respective strengths of AI and human employees.
6. • “Klarna CEO Dials Down AI Ambitions With Human Hiring Push.” Sifted , May 9, 2025. Reporting based on remarks by Sebastian Siemiatkowski at Klarna’s Stockholm headquarters.